Girls team played against a boy transitioning to girl

Discussion in 'Youth & HS Soccer' started by ppierce34, Oct 10, 2017.

  1. mwulf67

    mwulf67 Member+

    Sep 24, 2014
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Where they belong…interesting word choice given your position…

    You seem to keep bouncing back and forth from how things are to how you want things to be…and I am never really sure where you are at any given moment…

    I get that you think U-little training should be gender neutral…in a perfect world, I might even agree….

    But that’s not how things are…how they are, right now, is that we separate by sex, and as such, regardless of talent levels, the boys belong with the boys…and girls belong with the girls…

    We are a long way from 40 years ago…whereas there is no reason we couldn’t train together, there is equally no reason we can’t train separately without one side being short changed…the Mia Hamm’s of tomorrow, don’t need to play with the boys to reach their full potential…

    I have never said a girl playing with the boys harms those boys in the moment…

    My issue is I feel you are promoting and encouraging girls to try out for boys teams, as if they were gender neutral, which they are not…in that case, those girls are, in fact, taking away spots would typically and systemically go to boys…and if done wholesale, it would harm the development of the boys side/player pool in the long run…
     
  2. mwulf67

    mwulf67 Member+

    Sep 24, 2014
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Without getting into or caring whether the story is true or not, I have to say I am struggling to understand why that would be hard to believe….leagues, associations, whatnot, all require documentation of or age and sex already…i.e. the birth certificate…

    Mostly, we focus on the age part, but the birth certificate does also state the biologically sex of the child at birth…

    If a kid or parent comes along and states that that information on that birth certificate is essentially incorrect, why would providing supporting documentation be so inappropriate?
     
  3. P.W.

    P.W. Member

    Sep 29, 2014
    Please see the following:
    http://www.nclrights.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/TransgenderStudentAthleteReport.pdf

    While "a note" from a health care provider may certainly be part of a policy, it is unlikely that this would be the entirety of the policy.

    Like I said - this is a huge, emerging issue within the law today and if you are going to go out of your way to create a policy (especially for a soccer league that covers prepubescent and postpubescent players), you aren't going to have a one sentence policy - note from a doctor and you're in! I almost think it would be more reasonable to have an inclusive policy that says nothing about healthcare providers but rather focuses solely on the child's affirmed gender.

    Policies for things like this are very carefully crafted with appeals processes, etc.
     
  4. mwulf67

    mwulf67 Member+

    Sep 24, 2014
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Its Youth Soccer, nothing is very carefully crafted….

    Why are you assuming anyone went out of their way…maybe a push button, hot topic in The Law today, but how often does this issue come up for most people?

    I can easily see a league confronted by this issue quickly, and perhaps for the first time, coming up with a policy which seems to appeases everyone involved…which this policy seems to have done…once again, I don’t see anything practically unreasonable about providing “a note” from a healthcare provider….but then again, perhaps the league/policy hasn’t had to deal with a so easily offended parent….I would agree, probably just a matter of time…
     
  5. The Stig

    The Stig Member

    Jun 28, 2016
    No, I am asking why can't development at Ulittle to U10/11 be gender neutral? What would that real world composition look like?

    My guess is the top teams would remain 80-90%. I'm looking at skill and skill only. If a girl is better than 10 of the other boys than she should be on the team. As long as the girls are of the same caliber or better what is your argument against? You still have not stated any reason other than because we separate by gender.

    A sports team should be a meritocracy.
     
  6. mwulf67

    mwulf67 Member+

    Sep 24, 2014
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    #81 mwulf67, Oct 23, 2017
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2017
    As I’ve said, there is no physical or skills reason why U-littles can’t train/play together….just that I personally think it’s an unworkable, impractical system, especially when applied to completive club level teams; Its “fixing” a problem that doesn’t really exist…

    However, if I am understanding you correctly, I find it very interesting that despite any physical differences between U-little boys and girls, you STILL think the boys would dominate the gender neutral teams 80/20…

    Even in arguing for gender neutral training, it would seem your own gender bias is well at work….by your own words, you just proposed cutting top tier training, and everything else that goes with it, included expectation, to girls by 80%...

    It is already too easy for young kids to fall through the cracks, get overlooked or become discouraged because some adult thinks they know what talent or potential talent looks like a 8 or 9.…making things “gender neutral” would just make things even worse….

    I just don’t see any system wide benefit to gender neutral U-little teams, while adding or increasing some negative aspects; it might benefit a handful of talented young girls, but even that is questionable…and only if you think girls training in this country is somehow lacking…which I see no evidence of...

    edit: As soon as you create an objective test that accurately measures soccer skill and merit at 9 or 10, I will fully support your idea...
     
  7. keeper dad

    keeper dad Member

    Jun 24, 2011
    #82 keeper dad, Oct 23, 2017
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2017
    I don't want to speak for Mwulf but I think the disconnect is talking "team" and development at the same time. I seem to recall in the beginning this discussion centered around what happens to the team when the girls ultimately spin off back to the girls side and the boys team is left with not enough players. The key is if you are going to have mixed gender groups in the beginning ages you have to get away from the team aspect and not expect that the same group of kids (boys or girls) are going to play together from age 8 to 18. This is a big problem with club soccer, once you are "on the team" you are there for life in many clubs.

    If we went to group training at the younger ages and less formalized teams then at age 12 (or whatever age) split into actual teams you have the best of both worlds. This is how development should be handled but until parents and clubs truly embrace development instead of paying it lip service you are going to run into "who do the boys play with" when they get to 11 v 11.

    Sorry Mwulf we must have been typing at the same time.
     
    mwulf67 repped this.
  8. The Stig

    The Stig Member

    Jun 28, 2016
    I don't think you are speaking for Mwulf here as much as you are for me.

    This articulates much of what I mean.

    In regards to PP by Mwulf thinking he has me in a "Gotcha" of reasoning regarding my 80/20 split that is factoring bias. Many things factor into that, among them are bias as well as simple player personalities.

    Frankly, there are girls that simply don't want to play with/against boys and due to society are conditioned to believe boys are better. If you got to a B or C level I believe the ratio would be 50:50.
     
  9. mwulf67

    mwulf67 Member+

    Sep 24, 2014
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    First, I don’t think it does articulate much of what you are saying if you are still talking on about A, B, C, etc teams….

    Just clarify, I am not a huge fan of A, B, C etc teams at that age in the first place…and as I’ve said already, trying to force a gender-neutral component on top of that, is just making it worse…

    If you go gender neutral AND threw out the traditional team concept, I would be far more in favor of it…focus solely on development, train as a group, create ad hoc, temporary “teams” and forget it who is better then who, which is pretty meaningless at such a young age anyway…

    But quite frankly, you really seem into who is better then who; it’s like you think the “girls” have something to prove and can only prove it by being measured against the boys…
     
  10. mwulf67

    mwulf67 Member+

    Sep 24, 2014
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    There seems to be three models or concepts being thrown about…

    Traditional Team Concept (system what we typically currently have)

    Boys A Team
    Boys #1-12

    Boys B Team
    Boys #13-24

    Girls A Team
    Girls #1-12

    Girls B Team
    Girls #13-24

    24 Boys and 24 Girls in development que…as said, this is very much what you find in many club settings today. It may not be perfect, but it gets the job done.

    Gender neutral Developmental Concept (Along the lines of what Keeper Dad was talking about)

    Training Group
    Boys #1-24 and Girls #1-24

    Same 24 boys and 24 girls train and play together. All “teams” are informally created as and when needed. I think this is workable, and believe it even does exist, in some capacity, at some clubs. I think you might even get a better overall development, top to bottom, following this model.

    Gender Neutral Team Concept (what Stig seem to be proposing)

    A Team
    Boys #1-9
    Girls #1-3

    B Team
    Boys #10-17
    Girls #4-7

    C Team
    Boys #18-24
    Girls #8-13

    D Team
    Boys #25-30
    Girls #14-19

    I am trying to be very honest with what you are saying; I am not trying to play ‘Gotcha’…I am using your 80/20 spilt for A team, with things evening up you progress downward. I am really trying to understand and dissect what you are proposing. However, I see some real problems with this Gender Neutral Team Concept….

    First, good, bad or indifferent, I think you have a real hard time selling this concept to a lot of parents…maybe not so much to parents of A, or maybe B, team players, but once you get down to C and D, pretty tough sell. Once again, right or wrong, there is a stigma associated with anything lower than playing on the “A” team….the B team can be bad enough, but start adding C, D, etc…and people get turned off quickly and many see it as nothing but a money grab….

    Second, and even more importantly, you are losing girls (or maybe boys, or both). Given the 80/20 split to begin with, you go from 24 girls in the development que to only 19. Of course, this is all theoretical…I have no idea what these lower teams would look like, even if they could pull the numbers to exist…they could conceivably be all girls, since I can easily see the boys moving on to other more traditional all-boys teams as opposed to playing with the girls on low level, crappy teams…(how they would see it anyway)..which, in any case, would hurt the boys development que…

    This system may be very good for a select handful of girls who play on the A team, and for whatever reason, that seems to be your only focus However, once you start looking downstream, this system has some serious potential issues..
     
  11. The Stig

    The Stig Member

    Jun 28, 2016
    #86 The Stig, Oct 24, 2017
    Last edited: Oct 24, 2017
    I am not stating teams. Several posts back I even mentioned this as the technical phase NOT the formation phase. The formation phase is a more formal team development process. U8-U11 is not a formation phase. You group kids together based on ability in order to learn the foundations of soccer. While of course you have "teams" in order to teach team play but really it is just a pool of kids who are placed in groups based on skill.

    So you may call them teams if you wish, and I have too, but in reality a pool of players needs more fluidity (see what I did there) than a strict A, B, C team structure allows.

    Frankly, my kid is in a program run by a European club and this is exactly how they run their academy. Skill paired with skill and no formalized teams until U12-U13. So it is done, it doesn't cause chaos and it does work.

    If you remove the idea of "Teams" at these ages the concept will work better. The problem here is we want teams regardless of if they are good for development or not. Our kids don't keep the exact same class through school either. Some classes are based on skill and the generalized needs of a group of common students. Remember, that we are supposed to be "Teaching" soccer, not competing at these young ages. Having teams at such young ages is actually detrimental to good development. This is a bit of a different topic but the fact that you can't separate the team aspect from the important learning aspect shines a bright light on one of our biggest problems as a soccer nation.
     
  12. mwulf67

    mwulf67 Member+

    Sep 24, 2014
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    If no formalized teams, as I’ve said, I got no problem with that….however, that’s not what I’ve been hearing you say this whole time, despite your claims to contrary…had you made that clear from the start, I would have readily agreed with you (which I alluded to several times), and we wouldn’t have had this back and forth for the last two pages…
     
  13. The Stig

    The Stig Member

    Jun 28, 2016
    No, sadly, that is what you wanted to hear. I discussed Technical phase and formation phase several times. Yes "teams" exist to a point but at these ages the teams are not the end game, only grouping players with similarly skilled players.

    You may call them what you wish, and in a practical sense they are teams, but competition is not their primary purpose even though they would compete.
     
  14. mwulf67

    mwulf67 Member+

    Sep 24, 2014
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    #89 mwulf67, Oct 24, 2017
    Last edited: Oct 24, 2017
    Do you really want me to go back and count the number of times you used the term “team” in reference to what you were proposing? You flat out talked about creating a “co-ed blended A teams” and "top teams" along with blended, gender neutral lower level teams(B, C, D)….

    There was no indication that you wanted to do away with the traditional, hierarchical, ranked team structure, since you made references to them multiple times…it appeared to me that you merely wanted to remove the segregation by sex, and nothing more…
     
  15. The Stig

    The Stig Member

    Jun 28, 2016
    Formation Phase is the team building phase and begins around U12. I'll leave it at that. The Technical Phase, which is U7-U11 roughly. I acknowledge that we have "teams" at these ages and for all intents and purposes that is what they are, but it is not their purpose.

    I never discussed teams in the formal sense in this model because it is not the phase of development. It was you who placed value upon the significance of what those teams mean. Most leagues do not keep scores until U11 and only tournaments are kept via Gotsoccer for seeding purposes.

    So, one needs "rosters" that are "official" but I'll be damned if I can name the kids I played T-ball with in 3rd grade now. So the point being, I will acknowledge "teams" but i will not attribute any significance or importance to them at the Technical Phase of development beyond similarly skilled players should play and train together at this age regardless of gender. The leagues and the tournaments are for the parents and clubs and not the kids.
     
  16. mwulf67

    mwulf67 Member+

    Sep 24, 2014
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    You can’t use team and not expect people to think and understand team, especially when talking about A teams, top teams and lower teams…I am not placing significance on what team means, our society does; our sports culture/current system does…

    If you are or having been proposing a gender-less, team-less developmental system, all along, you have done a shit job of explaining it…
     
  17. The Stig

    The Stig Member

    Jun 28, 2016
    So if girls train and play with 8-10 other boys as part of a larger pool you are ok with it.

    But if we call that group of boys a team and give them a name like “Red” then you have a problem with it?

    It isn’t my shit way of explaining it that is the problem. It is your shit way of believing U9-U11 mean anything “team wise”.
     
  18. mwulf67

    mwulf67 Member+

    Sep 24, 2014
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    You can’t propose something “new” and “different” without acknowledging the current status quo…

    And under current status quo, in much of the competitive club world, U9-U11 are placed on teams…traditional, ranked, limited rostered, individual teams…they are at first separated by gender, and then by talent level…

    What I understood you be arguing for is the removal of the gender division, and simply create these same teams by talent level (you keep using the word “merit”) independent of gender…you wanted to simply remove the gender component, without changing anything else to system…

    It was only after Keeper Dad's post, where he brought up gender-neutral GROUP training, that you acted like that was what you were saying along…maybe that was what you thought you were saying, maybe in hindsight that is what you wish you were saying, but that wasn’t what you were saying…don’t twist your inability to explain yourself clearly as a comprehension problem on me….

    But no, as I have now said a couple of times by now, I have no problem with gender-neutral group training for U-littles, where there is little to no individual team identity…no A team, no B team, no Red team, no Blue team…
     
  19. The Stig

    The Stig Member

    Jun 28, 2016
    What the hell is "team" training other than group training? There is no difference. In terms of "merit", yes, that does not mean anything other than placing a player with a group of equal skill regardless of gender.

    I really don't know what you are arguing beyond semantics or order of preference. You seem to want to establish a roster then train and id rather train to establish a roster. Game day is whatever but it seems to be the most important thing to you.
     
  20. mwulf67

    mwulf67 Member+

    Sep 24, 2014
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Team training vs group (academy format) training is completely different….I thought you said your DD was in a Euro club run academy with no formalized teams…how do you not understand the difference???

    Separating kids at the start of the season into “teams” and training only as that team for the whole year, with the same coach, is team-based training…that is what a lot of teams/clubs do currently….it is formal, ridged and usually comes with rankings and labels, A, B, C etc…the A team players only train with other A team players….

    In Group or Academy training, all players are pooled and train together by multiple coaches/trainers….any separation of these kids, whether into training groups or “teams,” is done ad hoc and temporarily ….it is more informal, less ridged, and nobody is hard-coded as an A player or a B player…

    Besides having you DD recognized as one of the best players at your club, regardless of gender, I don’t think you have any idea what want or are talking about…
     
  21. The Stig

    The Stig Member

    Jun 28, 2016
    #96 The Stig, Oct 25, 2017
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2017
    If you have a pool of players WTF does it matter? Jesus, put the best 12 9 year old players together and work your way down. Why 12? Because it is a good ratio and a good size for competing in leagues. Any club can do this as long as there are no league rules prohibiting girls playing on boys teams.

    If you want to call them a team to satisfy marketing and parental expectations at NINE freaking years old have at it. But most serious clubs simply do not care about the makeup of a team in regards to positional needs and tactical training until a FORMATION phase at U12. Their focus should be on kids acquiring the fundamental skills of manipulating the ball and general gameplay and competition.

    Again, so that you can follow along.
    Technical Phase - U8-U11. This phase is designed to teach kids the technical motor skills and basic team play aspects of soccer. 2/3s of the training should be technical/skill based training. There is not a single aspect of this phase that requires gender separation.

    Formation Phase U12-U14:
    This phase is when teams are formed and tactical training takes up 2/3s of practice time. Players are also focusing on learning specific positional requirements. From this point forward is when gender separation matters.

    Competition Phase U15-U19
    This is when merit and playing time are earned. Kids are primarily focused on individual and team performance and outcomes. This is when wins matter and players are learning how to train for the outcome and less to learn the game.

    http://grassroots.fifa.com/en/for-c...mixed-sex-participation-in-football.html#c982
     
  22. mwulf67

    mwulf67 Member+

    Sep 24, 2014
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    First, why are you still talking about girls playing on boys teams? I thought we were long passed that….

    Second, it matters down the road…IF you are going to have gender separated Teams in the Formations Phase and IF you are replicating same Team based structure during Technical Phase, even though it’s not really necessary, but IF you are going do so, it makes better sense to me to start with the same gender based team structure you are ultimately going to end with…

    I agree it there is no reason U8-U11 boys and girls can’t train/play together…however, if it is important to field quality, well-rounded and compete U12+ teams, teams which will be gender-based, you (the club) needs to understand and manage (assuming they have a commitment to developing talent internally) their player pools…they need to make sure they have adequate, and hopefully well-trained, numbers, on both the boys and girls sides, when the time comes…

    The best ways to do so, given their ultimate goal, is either have gender-based U-little teams OR have gender-neutral group/academy style training….

    A gender-neutral team based system is just too messy, unnecessary, too hard to track the numbers, and only really benefits a very small percentage of players…

    Just because there is no reason not to do something is no reason to do something…see the recent calendar age group change as a perfect example…clearly another solution to a problem that didn’t really exist…
     
  23. The Stig

    The Stig Member

    Jun 28, 2016
    #98 The Stig, Oct 26, 2017
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2017
    You simply do not get it. You are making it out to be more complicated than it is and I honestly believe i would get further along talking to cat at this point. A club can make the change but that doesn't change leagues or the fact that they have boys and girls teams. If that doesn't change then yes, Girls have to play on a "Boys Team". You can't be that obtuse to understand that there is a difference between a total systematic change or simply a club that wants to do things differently.

    But just so we understand each other otherwise:

    TEAMS DONT MATTER AT U8 - U11!!!!

    I don't care WTF you want to call them, they are simply a loosely formed group of kids that train together and play league structured scrimmages. You can call them games if you want and you can put all the importance into your little "Red" team that you wish but it doesn't change the fact that churn by U12 happens and the effing TEAM that you felt so important to form at 9 years old is likely 50% different 2-3 years later. So who the hell cares what the composition was gender or player wise as long as the kids were training with the most closely paired skilled players as possible.

    You really need to let go of what it means to be on a "team" at 9 years old and focus more on why those 12 kids train together in the first place.

    Gym is Co-ed through elementary school too and starts to separate at when? You guessed it 12. It doesn't confuse anyone and works out just fine.
     
  24. mwulf67

    mwulf67 Member+

    Sep 24, 2014
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    In what world do you think a “team” at the completive club level, even at the U-littles, is simply a “loosely formed group of kids” with no other significance….Unfortunately, it’s a little more complicated than that…

    This isn’t about what I think, care about or need to let go, it’s about the reality on the ground…

    Now you are free to disagree with me, but imho, there is big problem with youth soccer in rushing to ID, rank, separate, categorize, and group young players based on SKILL…all done under the guise of, you guessed it, creating “teams”…

    The problem is SKILL when come to most U-littles is highly subjective, extremely capricious, and a poor predictor of future talent levels…but that doesn’t stop adults from thinking/believing otherwise….

    When you take 24 9 year ago old kids, and separate them into “teams” based on skill, with one being the “good” team, and the other being the “not-so good” team, you start to create expectations, self-fulfilling prophecies, you start allocating more and better resources towards the “good” group vs. the other groups….as a result, we starting driving these not-so good kids out of soccer, way too early, and for no good reason…. but quite frankly, many adults/parents don’t care because it simply means less competition for their early bloomer kids for those limited and coveted roster spots later down the road…a 50% attrition rate is great, as long as your kid ain’t one of them…

    Like I say, it’s bad enough when just dealing with the A Team vs B Team situation while maintaining a gender separation…

    But taking an already flawed system and simply removing the gender separation just makes things unnecessarily worse and more complicated…

    I get why you think your DD being on a gender-neutral A-team would help her individually, and I guess it would give you the validation are looking for (this “good for a girl” nonsense you keep bring up)…But what about the 20th skilled girl….how does this help her?

    This 20th skilled girl who would have played on the girls B-team, is now, under your system, playing on the 4th tier co-ed team…perception is reality, and you’re basically telling her she isn’t very good…perhaps soccer isn’t for her, maybe she would like softball better…

    Call these groups or team whatever you like, but in the real world, everyone knows who’s on top and who’s on the bottom…parents like you make damn sure of it…

    High School Gym class is not competitive, nor is it pay to play, with HS team roster spots or college scholarships potentially on the line….
     
  25. The Stig

    The Stig Member

    Jun 28, 2016
    #100 The Stig, Oct 26, 2017
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2017
    Now you are free to disagree with me, but imho, there is big problem with youth soccer in rushing to ID, rank, separate, categorize, and group young players based on SKILL…all done under the guise of, you guessed it, creating “teams”…

    In what other way do you stratify kids in a athletic endeavor? Kids play up because they are more skilled than their peers. The problem is, at the younger ages we attribute to much permanence, energy and emotion into the group where a kid is placed at 9 years old.

    The problem is SKILL when come to most U-littles is highly subjective, extremely capricious, and a poor predictor of future talent levels…but that doesn’t stop adults from thinking/believing otherwise….

    How does this matter? Nothing about group formation or player stratification is based on what they will be when they are 9 years old. That is a part of my whole point when I say TEAMS DON"T MATTER at U9. All we know at this age is where the kids are now.

    Like I say, it’s bad enough when just dealing with the A Team vs B Team situation while maintaining a gender separation…

    That is a problem of parents and clubs not to properly communicate the purpose of player selection at the technical phase.

    I get why you think your DD being on a gender-neutral A-team would help her individually, and I guess it would give you the validation are looking for (this “good for a girl” nonsense you keep bring up)…But what about the 20th skilled girl….how does this help her?

    Who said my DD is even on the A Team? She is not, she is placed where her skill and gameplay are evenly matched. And that is the point.

    If a girl is the 20th girl in a pool of 20, she is the 20th girl. But in a pool of 40 she might be 28. The only reason kids don't find a spot is due to a lack of resources to support the pool. But that 20th kid is still playing soccer with similar skilled players. The pools can all still train together, learning the exact same things but the pace may be different, that is all. If you are looking at only 20 boys the difference in skill from player 5-10 is likely to be noticeable. The gap between kid 5 and 20 is likely very wide. So if you include 20 girls into this pool the gap between player 5-10 will be much tighter. You are improving each stratified layer simply because the pool is deeper. how hard is that to understand?
     

Share This Page