Every winter, I take a break from refereeing adult games, and officiate as many high school games as possible. Unlike many of you, I believe that the high school game will probably be the major vehicle for the sport to become as popular here in the US as baseball, basketball, and football. Many kids are playing select soccer in order to hone their skills in the hopes that they will be good enough to start for their high school squad. That’s the number one reason that I think the NFHS should adopt the LOTG and play FIFA sanctioned games, but that’s a whole other topic. This being said, I’m amazed at the lack of knowledge that the kids and some of the coaches seem to have regarding our sport. This seems especially prevalent in the girl’s game. I’m not just talking about technique, but tactics as well. For example; In a game that I did on Tuesday, not only did many of the girls not have a clue as to how to execute a legal throw-in or put two decent passes together, but they were repeated thwarted when they had a 2v1 on the last defender. I got the impression that all that they knew about the game, was that the object was to put the ball in the goal without using their hands. I couldn’t help but wonder if these girls have ever been exposed to any discussion about the rules and tactics of the game, which brings me to my question. How can the NFHS say that the high school soccer field is to be viewed as an extension of the classrom and the game an extention of the school curriculum, in order to justify the disparity between their game and FIFA sanctioned games, and yet not have these kids sit down and actually learn the game? Shouldn’t there be some classroom instruction involved? Again, though I think the problem is much worse in the girl’s game, I’m often disappointed by the ignorance displayed in the boy’s games as well.
It sounds like you are in the early stages of high school soccer. In central Iowa, we started high school soccer 17 years ago, and the level of play and knowledge has significantly increased in that time. Some of the smaller country schools without established club programs are struggling, but they're constantly improving. I do like some of the NFHS rules: like cautioned players must come off the field, and more liberal substitution policy than our club rules (corner kicks and when the opponent is subbing on throw-ins).
You're kind of all over the map here, so I'll attempt to answer as clearly as possible. First, the NFHS (and NISOA) vs. FIFA/USSF debate is a long-standing one. My personal opinion is that the high school federation is needlessly complicating things so they can justify their existence; i.e. they get to say "look what we've done to make things safer/easier/unique on the HS level". There is also a financial factor involved, as many school systems cannot afford to pay a three-man crew for all games and so stick with a two-man system. At the end of the day, though, it corrupts the simplicity of the game. As for the level of play in your local HS games, I'd say that's pretty much a factor of the level of talent and/or coaching in your area. Additionally, some of the better players in your area may see HS games as a joke and simply stick with club teams.
Maybe a topic better suited to the Youth Soccer forum. Not wanting to paint with too broad a brush, allow me to offer my apologies in advance to those HS coaches that have gone out and obtained coaching licenses appropriate to the HS level (NSCAA National Diploma or USSF "C"). Anything less than that is insufficient, IMHO. A major part of the problem is that the typical high school soccer coach does not know much about soccer. They are social studies teachers looking to pick up a few extra buck$. This is why the typical HS soccer practice looks more like a track practice - lots of running because the "coach" knows that you have to run around for 80 minutes.
Having recently accepted a leadership position with out local youth soccer association I am also finding that AYSO and other "alternatives" to USSF league also further water down the experience our kids get and hinder the advancement of soccer.
Purists! I'm always amazed at how those who "only" do FIFA soccer, look down their noses at high school (and college) soccer, and sometimes other forms of soccer. This puritanical viewpoint is very narrow. IMO, high school and college has advanced the game, by modifying the "laws" to "rules" that make more sense, appreciate more fairness, ,and make the game easier to officiate. Oh, I agree, they go too far sometimes, but the pluses far out way the negatives. Each state's high school season varies. In Colorado, boys play in the fall, girls in the spring. There is no club soccer for this age group while high school is going on, not because of any law, but because the kids want to play high school. Lets admit it, all professional careers here, go through high school and college. The purists will claim high school and college "degrades" soccer, because they only know FIFA soccer. But the two sports are really identical. You don't see players struggling to adjust between the sports each season. High school will either be ahead of the slow progression of USSF/FIFA or lead it. The three whistle system is just one example. I didn't realize in some states high school is an option to playing club ball. I find high school is much more competitive than club ball. Kids are playing for their school and community. The games are attended by friends, community and fans. . . not just parents. Often coaches are teachers and school employees, not doing it for career and $$. You ref a club game, out in some remote park, and a player or parent or coach verbally or physically abuses you, the liklihood of holding these people accountable is remote. . . it's up to the club or the league. In high school the state steps in. Last red card I gave for "abusive," I got two letters for apology from the two players; AD even called me and apologized. It's not all black & white, but there are some differences that put high school out there ahead of club ball. Oh, the common allegation that club ball is superior in quality and development, is "probably" true, because it's "elitist." Only the creme de la creme play on the top teams, the rest get the crumbs. But I find high school soccer much more competitive and exciting then club ball. The emotions and spirit are so much higher. And as some mentioned some of the rule modifications are benefits to game management. The mandatory substitution for a card can be a great management tool. So is the possession restart (IFK) for injury and other stoppages, not to mention the great "soft red." Eventually USSF will figure out these are fair and equitable means of running a game. Don't be so quick to put high school soccer down. It's here to stay and it will play a major role in the development of our national players, as well as our top referees.
In addition to Keith's comments, I like to add that in central Iowa, you must be a USSF ref to ref high school. This is because the local association has contracted with the High schools to assign games. To be on the list you have to have both the USSF and NFHS certifications, attend training, and sign up with the boys and/or girls high school athletic association. Crew chiefs work with all the refs to ensure that qualified refs handle all games.
IN MY AREA...I know it may be different in other places The AYSO reffs are unpaid and usually untrained with a few exceptions so when the kids come to our USSF venues to play we have to deal with LOTG ignorance issues because the reffs arent controling games and teaching these kids how to act in AYSO. at the very young ages U12 and below, michigan is going to a 8v8 format and, of course, AYSO is not doing the same thing(some 9v9 etc etc) the kids never know whether it is quarters, halfs, free subs, only at quarters, kickins, etc.......I played 11v11 at the age of 5 and I think we should let these kids play SOCCER and not think to much about all of this......
Re: Purists! You have to admit that this is an etremely diffirent topic based upon where you live....The role of NFHS differs signifigantly from area to area. I too like a few of the changes NFHS has made but some of the outside of the line rules about coaching off season do nothing but slow down our growth.
Until kids are U-11 they should all play small sided games. Basicaklly 5 vs 5 and when they reach U-8 7vs 7 to maximize touches on the ball. Everybody plays and kids have fun. That's the philosophy behind AYSO. Also, in terms of it's training, AYSO has very comparable programs to the USSF for grade 8, 7, 6 and 5 refereeing licenses. Both the USSF and AYSO screw each other on the reciprocal licensing agreement even though the courses are very similar. The same also happens in the coaching licenses. Kids play soccer, only the coaches and parents worry about halves or quarters. I found AYSO's philosophy to be more in the spirit of creating a positive play environment that USYSA.
Greyhound, I usually very much respect your opinions on this forum, however, I feel you are way off on the AYSO front. As someone who was raised through AYSO as a player from age 7 on, and as a referee from age 14 on, I can honestly say that AYSO's programs are some of the best in the country. They foster a sense of fair play and understanding. Every coach and referee must go through training courses comparable, and in some cases better than the USSF courses (I say this as a grade 5 ref, National 2 AYSO ref, a U-12 AYSO coach, Grade 2 AYSO Assessor (comparable to USSF Ref assessor), and a grade 4 AYSO referee instructor (comparable to USSF Ref Instructor)). As you fully know, there are some USSF instructors who are lacking just as there are some AYSO instructors who have deficits. It happense, and it does filter down somewhat. However, the only changes to the game that AYSO makes are quarters and substition, fostering an "Everyone Plays" motif instead of a you two sucky kids on the bench sit except for 5 minutes and my stars stay in the entire game. You must remember that AYSO is for the most part recreational soccer and thus compared to a travel team will have deficits of learning and skill. And YES EVERYONE IS A VOLUNTEER, which tends to lead to a great sense of pride for those of us who do do those games. It means they are out there because they want to help, not because they want cash. Every AYSO volunteer ref must take a standardized referee course equivalent to the grade 9 course, and those that wish to upgrade to higher levels can do so. An area ref is equal to a grade 8, Section ref is somewhere between 8-7, national 2 is a 7, and National 1 would be a 6, so it just depends on how much these volunteers want to apply themselves. And please, don't tell me that there aren't any incompetent USSF refs or coaches, because there are. I don't mean this as a personal attack towards you Greyhound, but I am sick and tired of hearing oh, AYSO is inferior or AYSO doesn't know what it's doing, etc...In fact, FIFA has commended AYSO on its referee program, and the USSF has pulled stuff from it for their courses. Esse and Julie actually went to the AYSO national support and training center and examined all of the referee programs to implement things in USSF training! The kids are not always the most talented, but they try and they have fun on the field, which is really what it's all about. Oh, and just as a reminder, Brian Hall started out as an AYSO ref.
I would also like to add that in Southern California AYSO cards players and is the elite organization.
Okay relax guys.........all I can go by is what I see up here in my area. In Northern virginia I had zero dealings with AYSO and here in northern michigan I am only telling you what I see for THIS area. The reffs are second rate and the players are clueless about the actual rules of the game. and brian hall may have started as AYSO........but he eventually grew up!!
Aother Failure of the NFHS I have to say that reading a post alleging that club players play on their teams so that they can make the HS team had me ROTFL. If that is true somewhere it means that the club teams (not the rec league teams or the city league teams) must have pretty bad coaching. HS soccer has some real values for the kids which club coaches often overlook. There is peer recognition, wearing the letter jacket to school, traveling with the team in the bus, making close school friends, etc. But how many college coaches are present at the HS state finals (except in Calif maybe) as opposed to the club state finals? In my experience to find HS coaches with a USSF license is rare - for premier club teams it is pretty much a requirement. As for the original topic - I agree with everyone. I like a few of the Federation changes - sub when a yellow, IFKs to restart, etc. but a few are just to mark the hedges as well. None of them worth a great debate over IMHO. Jim
jacathcart, The original topic had nothing to do with rule differences. I was simply asking if there shouldn't be some classroom time for HS soccer players in order to teach them the game and it's laws. Every other HS sport has some time going over X's and O's, why not soccer. More and more of the schools in and around Austin are beginning to hire qualified coaches, and the level of play is generally quite good at the varsity level. It's the JV coaches and players that are completely clueless, and they should have some kind of instruction before they begin their first season. I disagree with your suggestion that young select players don't look forward to playing on their HS squad. 80% of these kids aren't concerned with scholarships, and are just happy to be playing soccer at a high level. On most boys teams, it's only those select one or two players on each team that have a shot anyway due to title 9. Don't get me started on the false promises of full scholarships by select teams for recruiting purposes.
Re: Aother Failure of the NFHS Jim, here in the eastern half of PA you will find players, coaches and club teams of the highest caliber. They successfully compete at the national level. However, it is commonplace for many of these teams to go idle during the high school season so the players can focus on their school teams if they choose to participate. Some do, some don't. That's why we end up doing "snowflake" league games for these club teams over the winter months to allow these teams to qualify for state cup play in the spring. There is great pride in high school sports in this area, and some of the best club players would choose their high school teams over their club teams if the clubs didn't make this accomodation. The players do this even though the level of play in their high school leagues may be far inferior. 42net, your original question was legitimate. As good as the club level of play can be in this area, the same cannot be said for many of the high school teams. There are lots of factors involved, but you're right that the "extension of the classroom environment" would seem to suggest that the coaches should spend more time than they do on developing their teams' collective understanding of the game. My observation has been that in general, high school soccer coaches in this area do not spend the same amount of "chalkboard" time with their teams as do their counterparts in other sports. I suppose this is due, in part, to the fact that we still have many high school coaches for whom soccer is a sport that they did not play in their youth. They just don't know the mental aspects of the game because it is a second or third sport for them.
Ilinois High School Soccer My eldest daughter plays both high school soccer and premier club soccer in the Chicago area of Northern Illinois. The high school soccer in this part of the state is, with some exceptions, pitiful especially on the girls side. The HS coaching is generally poor but all the blame is not theirs. Too many of the kids come up in programs that stress winning over development. The teams get big fast kids who can kick the ball far then chase it up the field. The kids never learn the basics of the game then come to HS and cannot control the ball, connect passes, use their weaker foot, make a decent run, etc. The HS coach has this lack of talent then, because many of them never played nor studied the game, they continue developing the players along the same path of kick and run.
I didn't say that they didn't look forward to playing HS. if you look closely I said that I thought that the kids got a lot from HS soccer - just not much in the way of good coaching or quality competition. What I said was I didn't believe that kids were playing club ball to get good enough to play HS. My daughter's HS team fielded a starting 11 that all played Premier - 1 soccer - almost all of them for the same club. They were not as good as the club team however because the HS coach was not nearly at the level the girls were. As for classroom time - time seems to be in short supply for HS kids these days. I'm glad I was a kid in the 50's when there was nothing more than Babe Ruth baseball in the summer and the rest of the time we swam, fished, and hiked. Jim
For the good of the game AYSO, USYSA, NHFS, etc., frankly, if it portrays the sport of soccer in a reasonable facsimile of the, world recognized, LotG I'm for it. Personally, I hate the time control issues of HS, and college, soccer, but I like some of the other aspects of their interpretations (i.e.; soft-reds, taunting, etc.). Most HS coaches really don't get a chance to work with the players for any real length of time. Eight to 12 weeks a year at most. (Colorado) The clubs work with them (12-16 weeks or more each season) twice a year from the time they enter soccer (pre-teen) up to the time the enter HS. Then they (the clubs) will generally spend time with them on the opposite season (i.e.; boys/spring, girls/fall) and throughout the summer and sometimes winter. I'm talking Classic and Premier level teams. Most Challenge level coaches won't/don't spend as much time. Regarding the premise that they, the kids, look forward to playing for their school, who really knows. In Colorado, CHSSA (CO HS Sports Assoc.) won't give that opportunity to rear it's head. I believe (but I may be mistaken) that CHSSA has rules in place that prevent the clubs from fielding U-teenager teams (competitive) during the HS season (boys/fall, girls/spring). That's why we have the Metro league (recreational) that consists of mixed aged 8v8 games for the kids that don't make the HS try-outs. Some of the higher level coaches (club affiliated) field an "adult team" consisting of their "club team" and play in the adult leagues to keep a hand in the soccer players' development during the HS season. CHSSA takes a dim view of this but are powerless to prevent it. Cheers
Claymore mentioned the financial part of equation. That is a bunch of bull. Pay the center one half of the fee and the ARS split the other half. Here in Louisiana that is $35/$17.50/$17.50 . The real problem here is there are not enough refs to cover the games. I am amazed by the lack of skill exhibited by the HS players. After having worked quite a few select and rec club games, I find the difference in play astounding. I guess that the kids play to the collective level of competence (my apologies to the Peter Principle). I also believe that there is a direct correlation to the quality of refereing to the quality of play. It seems bad begets bad in this case. The assignors assign the "better" refs to the "better" teams and leave the less talented team poorer refs. Another factor is too many HS certified refs believe that you can run a dual with minimal movement. These are the folks who never move past mid field or stay with the second to last defender, no matter how close to the keeper they are.
This is a great debate, and one day, the USSF, NCAA, MSL and A-League will all have this same debate and decide the course of American soccer, but in the here and now... HS soccer is a different breed from club. It's much more hit and miss. Anywhere select club soccer exists, it will be of a fairly high level for one of two reasons: a) if it's in a soccer hotbed, teams can be selective, or b) if it's in an area where soccer isn't that popular, it will only attract people who really love the game. Too many times you see the classic example of some coach taking over a HS soccer team and treating it like a football team. The reasoning likely that since the football team is the best/most popular team at the school, soccer should be run the same way. The truth is much the opposite. Soccer demands a different type of approach. As a side note, I'm trying to break a very bad habit of hoping a skilled or fast team with an insightful coach will beat a bigger team with a dictator, and it affects how I ref the game. Don't denounce interscholastic soccer. In certain places, it can be very good. Case in point, I went to the Troy Athens/Troy High (MI) girls soccer game at THS. At that time it was a national top 25 match-up with Athens ranked #1 overall. Probably the coolest amateur soccer game I've ever seen. Athen's coach would go on to win national Coach of the Year. I'm not dropping names, or just saying how good my sister's varsity team is. Go watch a game in an area with good HS soccer. I though college soccer was useless until I came to Indiana University, saw the legend Jerry Yeagley coach, and watch 3 seniors get drafted in the MLS Superdraft. There is a great future in HS/college soccer.