Is it okay for a coach to make his U 13 team run 5 laps after a tournament final because they lost the game? This is after they have played 2 games on Saturday and 2 on Sunday in hot sun. Same coach makes 12 year old boys run 4.5 miles because they missed a practice (they missed practice because they were ill or on vacation). This seems excessive to me, but I don't know what other teams/coaches do. What is the right amount of running without the ball for 11 and 12 year olds? Thanks.
Teams should never be "punished" immediately after a game. Some do believe it is a good idea for teams to do a very light jog up and back as a bit of a cool down right after a game. I actually heard one coach say he does it as team building exercise -- you warm up together, you cool down together.
No, not appropiate. Find a new coach, he's one of these guys who thinks it's all about him and not the players. After 4 games in a weekend, absolutely no need to run. And if this coach is running 12 year olds 4.5 miles at practice, he's out of his mind. Kids that age should be spending all their time at practice on the ball, they can't touch the ball enough.
Different coaches have different styles. I don't think anything this coach did was wrong. That's just his style, take it or leave it. 5 miles is very feasible for a kid that age, especially if the team is a top team. And five laps after a game isn't that big of a deal. I wouldn't get too worried about this. If you think your kid would benefit from a different coach, take him to another team.
I wouldn't be so quick to judge this coach. What if the team is actually out of shape? I wouldn't run kids after a tournament but perhaps in this case, making them run five laps is sending them a needed message. You didn't see the game they played. Five laps for a kid is nothing. I agree that the kids should be on the ball, but like skill, running is a huge part of soccer and if the kids are not in shape, they should run.
For the most part, whatever coach says or does goes, but as a parent, this would be one thing that I would question. You can't be the only one who feels this way. Strength in numbers. I always like the slow run across the width of the field after a game. Gives us proud parents a chance to applaud the entire team, win or lose, and gives them a bit of a cool down. Making a kid run 4.5 miles because he missed a practice due to illness is a bit much and may not be great for his health if the illness occurred close to the time of return to practice. Their immune system is not at it's best and still recovering. Taxing it with additional stress will only prolong healing or getting well. While on vacation though the kid should set time aside to do ball touches, crunches, push-ups, stretching, and running. My son has done this for years. He comes back almost as good as when he left and no extra anything was required. For those serious players, soccer truely is a 24/7/365 commitment all the way around. Remember, I'm a parent not a coach.
Yes, after all, we've all seen professionals running laps around the stadium after a loss right? Quick biology class: Children have growing bodies...their bones and muscles are developing...and more importantly, their joints have yet to fully form. Thrashing the bejesus out of them after a match is pure lunacy. it is obsessive and it is destructive. Clue in...there is a HIGH probability that your child will never play soccer beyond youth club level. Don't lose the plot, even if your kid's coach has.
punishment as a supposed motivational tool does not work for 12-13 yr olds- this is what leads kids to quit. my u13 boy's new coach just cam from 8 years in the MLS and his first words were- "I want to make it FUN for these boys so they want to learn and challenge themselves and keep playing" this is a Premier 1 level team. If they need fitness, they should do it with the ball= fitness plus ball work together. that much straight running???? what are they track kids or soccer?
Thanks everyone for feedback. I do think it is a good idea to warm down and stretch after any game. To be frank, too few teams do this. It also seems sensible to make kids run if they are unfit. And in moderation (along with push ups etc) as punishment if the kids are misbehaving. However, I do have a problem with punishing kids after a long tournament because they lost. They played their best in 4 games over 2 days in hot sun. Why rub their faces in it? As for making a kid who has just come back from flu run 4.5 miles that is just crazy. I believe that first and foremost coaches should look after the health and safety of their players. All the best, Dorset
While I agree you can't make an absolute judgement because there may have been other factors. Maybe the reason the coach had them run was not because they lost the game, but because he found half the team up in the game room 3 hours after he told them they should be in bed. However when you read that the same coach makes kids spend the better part of an hour running because they missed practice you get a pretty strong idea that the coach doesn't know what he's doing. Odds are very slim that my children would ever get on a team for someone like this, but if I would have missed this in my due diligence, I would be looking for a new team the minute he had my kid running 4.5 miles or needlessly running laps after they probably already did more running than was good for their health. Over use injuries are a big problem at this age and there is no need to subject a child to someone that likely has no clue about the damage he may be doing.
No to both. Do the punishing at the beginning of the next practice, away from parents and peers on other teams. Are they being punished for losing, or the way they lost? U13's running 4.5 miles is way excessive, regardless of the reason. BTW, I always found sprints and ladder runs to be more effective than distance runs for training and for 'punishment'. I have been a nuthead coach in my past but saw the light 4-5 years ago. I'd recommend you either talk to the DOC of your club (if there is one). Better still, don't look back and get the heck out of there and find a coach interested in development over wins/losses/punishments.
Let me know how long this attitude lasts. I'm giving the over/under at 2 years. Who's betting? Everybody has this happy go lucky attitude when they first start coaching. That is until their kids get thrashed. Then they realize the real fun is in playing well, competing and winning the ones you should win and some you shouldn't.
Less than a single season. Plus their competitive juices get riled. Hard to have an 8-year professional career without also having the desire to kick your opponents' teeth in. This guy will blow a gasket soon enough. Either that or he'll be nice, the mediocre, stupid, and/or selfish kids will take over the team, and the good ones will leave. Or -- the most unlikely combination -- he'll somehow maintain an atmosphere that promotes excellence, rapid improvement, and a pure meritocracy, yet he'll be sweet and the kids will have fun. If that occurs, let me know where you live and I'll send my U13 boy to boarding school in your neighborhood.
Why do you assume that the only good coach is a mean coach? Just because the kids are having fun doesn't mean they are VERY well coached. It takes a good coach to balance the fun with the learning and training, but it is the best way by far, if the coach can pull it off.
"Is it okay for a coach to make his U 13 team run 5 laps after a tournament final because they lost the game? This is after they have played 2 games on Saturday and 2 on Sunday in hot sun." This is sick on so many levels. a) A coach, esp. at the youth level, should not punish his team for losing. Making them run because they lost isn't coaching, it's irrationally punitive. And it's not "cool down," as one respondent said, if it's done BECAUSE THEY LOST. b) My personal philosophy is that I don't analyze the game with my players right after the game. They're tired. They've been listening to me yap for an hour and a half. I limit my comments to 'good game,' 'good effort' or 'tough game' and save the analysis for practice the next day. Give the kids mental time to relax. c) If you're making kids run a lot after they've already played four games in two days in the hot sun, I'd consider that putting their health at risk. Maybe one light jog and some stretching is a reasonable cool down. d) It's a bad idea because it makes the kids associate fitness with punishment. "Same coach makes 12 year old boys run 4.5 miles because they missed a practice (they missed practice because they were ill or on vacation)." Not a big fan of this approach, esp. for them being ill. Ditto the whole 'fitness = punishment' comment. Still, not quite as objectionable as the first scenario. If they kids are unfit, then have them run whether they win or lose... whether they missed practice or not. The objectionable part is the correlation between fitness and punishment. Punishing young kids for losing is precisely why some many good athletes quit. And we wonder why American players lack the creativity of other countries' players: I wonder why American players have this fear of failure that stiffles creativity. Hmm... "What is the right amount of running without the ball for 11 and 12 year olds?" My personal opinion: not much... at least during practice. I try to do as much fitness as possible with the ball. At that age, they need touches, touches and more touches.
That's odd: my teams this winter and spring combined to be 24-4-4 and played some pretty dang good soccer. Neither me, my co-coaches nor my kids were a**holes. I don't consider any of us to be particularly exceptional.
Because where we live, the Magic & Sockers tend to win everything on the boys' side, and they pretty much have hard-assed coaches. Now the Wind and some other clubs are getting competitive, and ditto. On the girls' side ... have you heard Rory when he's coaching his national-champion Eclipse girls? Whew. Not that I care per se about teams but the teams do reflect player quality. It is players from these teams who tend to succeed in college soccer, and indeed who are the pro prospects. I'm happy if nice coaches finish first but in our area, that doesn't seem to happen.
I agree with the guy who said the coach's a**-ness is because of his ego. He wants to show off to the parents that that he views losing as completely unacceptable and that he's 'doing something', so he makes the kids run... which of course has nothing to do with soccer coaching. My grandmother could tell the kids to run laps (not to sound like LaVolpe); she couldn't help them become better soccer players.
Agreed. Don't see Granny short. As long as she kept the kids playing with soccer balls, she'd do better than this guy.
It's not about being mean. It is about expectations and limits. In order to have a nationally competitive side, the expectations MUST be set at a certain level, and the bottom limits must be non-negotiable. It doesn't mean you have to be a jerk, but you DO have to be firm.
There's a huge difference between setting expectations and being firm, vs being a yelling screaming jerk. The best coaches I have seen, you will rarely hear them say a word during the game, they will talk to players, but they do the coaching in practice. Yelling rarely does much except alienating kids, some react well, others shut down, a good coach will see this and will know how to get the best out of his players. Winning out of desire is much more effective than fear of loosing.