Perfect example of whats wrong with parents and little kid sports

[wdleehi]

The whole thing is a mess and it is the adults on both sides creating it. 

[jgod213]

we have to stop relating this issue to football, it just doesnt work...


sure in this case, as in every sport and life in general, there is a phsical risk to playing, but that should not be a huge issue here.  One of these 8-10 year olds COULD get hit by a pitch by this hard throwing, accurate pitcher - just like any soccer player COULD break a leg because he got slide tackled, or a basketball player COULD get elbowed in the jaw/nose and break it, or how i COULD develope carpal tunnel by sitting at a computer all day at work...

There are inherent risks in everything we do, these kids are at the age where they need to learn that.  The risk is minimal, but the mental hurdle is large - it's something they need to face.

Plus we're talking about baseball...so what, the kid goes 0-2 with 2 strikeouts, there are other parts of the game that need to be developed - taking grounders, catching fly balls, throwing a ball, running the base paths, learning situations.  Plus there's always tomorrow, ok so the nasty pitcher got the better of you today - show up for the next game and give it your best.

[crownsy]

The whole thing is a mess and it is the adults on both sides creating it. 

agreed on that.

this thread generated alot more disscusion then i thought it would, good points by all.

[Redz]

There are inherent risks in everything we do, these kids are at the age where they need to learn that.  The risk is minimal, but the mental hurdle is large - it's something they need to face.

Bingo.  I remember one of my first games in Little League as a 10 year old facing a famously huge 12 year old who was close to 6 feet tall already.  I was scared poopless of getting hit by him, but I stood in there and faced him anyhow.  Of course I ended taking one in the ribs, but I got back up and was actually less afraid the next time.

I don't know what's right or wrong for each kid, but to forfeit against a fireballer seems wrong.

I also remember the kid who broke all of Little League home run records as an 11 year old.  He was scary big and strong.  He was already shaving and hair under his arms.  As a 12 year old he petitioned to be allowed to play in Babe Ruth but they wouldn't let him.  He decided he'd rather not play in Little League again since it offered no challenge to him.  Everyone always loved playing against him because he was a legend.

(sidenote: he ended up never growing another inch after he was 12 and became the original bassists for a pretty successful Boston based punk rock band!)

[blackbird]

which is exactly what every coach in this league is doing to this kid, making him quit. lets look at what was the facts reported in this, not what we infer from our own bais.

I work for a news organization, I am trained to read news critically, and I assure you that "Facts" are not being reported here, perspectives are. And from the news stories I've read on this, the dominant perspective being offered is that of the pitcher's mom and coach. And why not- this sensational story has been picked up by ESPN, the New York Times, Celticsblog, etc.

The whole angle regarding the "Option to change to the 'top' team" sounds way too conspiracy-theoryish. It's presented as a really insidious action by shadowy forces bent on destroying a promising 9-year-old's dream of pitching in the majors. I'd bet that this charge was reported, unfiltered and unverified, directly from the mother. I'm sure she is angry and is looking for reasons to validate that anger, but come on...

[BigThreePeat]

I just read the full article.   If the kid's coach resigned in protest, I don't really blame him.  Did the rules say they couldn't pitch over a certain MPH?  It's a league of 8-10 year olds and the kid was 8, right?  Did the rules say he wasn't allowed to pitch on that specific day?  Well, if they were playing within the rules and the kid wanted to pitch... let em pitch.   The team had the best record and was unbeatable.   If they wanted to put a "safety net" for the kiddies and put in a rule about MPH limits, they could do that after the season.  You don't go changing rules in the middle of a season.   Think about when Lew Alcindor dominated college basketball.  "The dunk was banned in college basketball after the 1967 season, primarily because of Alcindor's dominant use of the shot."    Hey, that's fine... if one person is dominating to the point of embarrassment, you can go ahead and change the rules for the next season.  But can you imagine if in the middle of the season they just said, "hey Lew... i know you're on the way to a national title, but you gotta stop dunking.   You're too dominant.  Hey... maybe you should try playing point guard instead?"

That's garbage.  I'm giving it a lot of thought... If I was the coach with a perfect record and we were dominating within the rules, but the league tried to prevent our dominance by breaking their own rules...  I dunno... I'm not sure whether or not I'd quit in protest but I certainly can't blame that coach for standing up for what he perceived was right.  They could have addressed the problem after the season.   Get a speedometer and disqualify pitches over a certain speed.   But do it after the season... not in the middle of the season.

[wdleehi]

I just read the full article.   If the kid's coach resigned in protest, I don't really blame him.  Did the rules say they couldn't pitch over a certain MPH?  It's a league of 8-10 year olds and the kid was 8, right?  Did the rules say he wasn't allowed to pitch on that specific day?  Well, if they were playing within the rules and the kid wanted to pitch... let em pitch.   The team had the best record and was unbeatable.   If they wanted to put a "safety net" for the kiddies and put in a rule about MPH limits, they could do that after the season.  You don't go changing rules in the middle of a season.   Think about when Lew Alcindor dominated college basketball.  "The dunk was banned in college basketball after the 1967 season, primarily because of Alcindor's dominant use of the shot."    Hey, that's fine... if one person is dominating to the point of embarrassment, you can go ahead and change the rules for the next season.  But can you imagine if in the middle of the season they just said, "hey Lew... i know you're on the way to a national title, but you gotta stop dunking.   You're too dominant.  Hey... maybe you should try playing point guard instead?"

That's garbage.  I'm giving it a lot of thought... If I was the coach with a perfect record and we were dominating within the rules, but the league tried to prevent our dominance by breaking their own rules...  I dunno... I'm not sure whether or not I'd quit in protest but I certainly can't blame that coach for standing up for what he perceived was right.  They could have addressed the problem after the season.   Get a speedometer and disqualify pitches over a certain speed.   But do it after the season... not in the middle of the season.

What about the rest of the kids on that team?  The coach just threw them under the bus when he quit. 

[oldmanspeaks]

Crownsy, my example of my brother being superstrong as a kid wasn't made up. He was twice as big as other kids his age and had a pain threshold that was incredible. He later became the biggest baddest guy in the area. His natural strength was incredible. (he was slower than continental drift which is why he didn't play major college ball). The story of him almost breaking my mother's ribs by hugging her is totally true and it took her a week to recover.

However I want to go back to what youth coaching is all about. I have seen both good and bad, coaches, leagues and parents. When they are older, you coach the kids to win and you teach him how to advance their skills to gain an advantage. When they are young, it is about teaching them the basics and challenging them based upon their individual skill set. You treat everyone different. With the superstar, you have to keep challenging them and teach them humility so when they suddenly move up and get crushed, they aren't emotionally destroyed. I have seen that happen time and time again whether it is sports or advanced engineering. When you are a superstar, it is difficult to deal with it when you are not the superstar. I have seen kids set up to fall. There was running back in our youth league and every year the next head coach would put his arm around him and act like the coach had something to do with his success. In point of fact, the kid would have been the best player in the league if the drunk on the corner coached him. However the kid was set up to fail because when when his superior skills were no longer super superior when the other players "caught up", he would be lost as he skipped a lot of learning.
However when you have a kid with no talent or skill, you nurture him/her until their body can catch up. I was the worst athlete(boy or girl) in my gradeschool when I was 11 because I was too tall and skinny. However by the time I was 17, I wasn't half bad. I coached kids remembering that and the guy who taught me to coach football was great at that as some of his lesser players did well at high school.
Yes, you rig the game to a degree. You keep the superstar from getting a swelled head. You keep the wimp from giving up. You help both of them in the process. If both are competitive to the limits of their abilities and love sports later in life, you have succeeded. If either simply gives up and hates the sport, you haven't.

[BigThreePeat]

I just read the full article.   If the kid's coach resigned in protest, I don't really blame him.  Did the rules say they couldn't pitch over a certain MPH?  It's a league of 8-10 year olds and the kid was 8, right?  Did the rules say he wasn't allowed to pitch on that specific day?  Well, if they were playing within the rules and the kid wanted to pitch... let em pitch.   The team had the best record and was unbeatable.   If they wanted to put a "safety net" for the kiddies and put in a rule about MPH limits, they could do that after the season.  You don't go changing rules in the middle of a season.   Think about when Lew Alcindor dominated college basketball.  "The dunk was banned in college basketball after the 1967 season, primarily because of Alcindor's dominant use of the shot."    Hey, that's fine... if one person is dominating to the point of embarrassment, you can go ahead and change the rules for the next season.  But can you imagine if in the middle of the season they just said, "hey Lew... i know you're on the way to a national title, but you gotta stop dunking.   You're too dominant.  Hey... maybe you should try playing point guard instead?"

That's garbage.  I'm giving it a lot of thought... If I was the coach with a perfect record and we were dominating within the rules, but the league tried to prevent our dominance by breaking their own rules...  I dunno... I'm not sure whether or not I'd quit in protest but I certainly can't blame that coach for standing up for what he perceived was right.  They could have addressed the problem after the season.   Get a speedometer and disqualify pitches over a certain speed.   But do it after the season... not in the middle of the season.

What about the rest of the kids on that team?  The coach just threw them under the bus when he quit. 

Well the article says, "Players and parents held a protest at the league's field on Saturday urging the league to let Jericho pitch."

I imagine the rest of the players (and the parents) are pretty disappointed with the league as well.  They were undefeated and not being allowed to maximize their ability to win.   It would be like being Lew Alcindor's teammate if the league went up and said, "Hey man... you're very good.  Can you do us a favor and go join the pro leagues early?  Or hey... we're not saying you have to quit or anything, but the dunking thing is out of control... we're afraid the other kids might get hurt.  How about playing point guard or something?" ...   If I was on that team I'm sure I'd support my teammate and stand-up for my squad if we were wrongfully being prevented from winning.

I understand that my hypothetical example is a little different, because in one instance we're talking about adults (the ban of the dunk after the season) and in another instance we're talking about 8-10 year old kids.  You'd supposedly want to be more sensitive to the little kids, but surprisingly I see the same kind of stuff happening with adults.  Catering to the weaker adults, because they don't want anyones feelers getting hurted.  But yeah, it definitely starts with the kids.   Definitely starts with "Field Days" across American where schools decide to give out blue "participating" ribbons to everyone regardless if they won so they don't feel left out. 

My 5th grade teacher had somehow found a way (using motivation techniques) to win the "best class" award 10 years in a row for Field Day.  "Best Class" went to the class who brought home the most 1st, 2nd and 3rd place awards in the different events.   10 years in a row this guy had won.  It didn't matter who his students were, his class always won.  The other teachers were getting jealous and coming up with theories that this teacher somehow "recruited" the best athletic students.  A couple teachers were lobbying the school principal to eliminate the "best class" award, because they felt it hurt the sensibilities of the other students.   I'm not sure if they were successful in later years at eliminating this award... but I know that we won "best class" again that year... our teacher's 11th in a row...  and he was very likely the best teacher I ever had in my life.

I get the point about teaching the kids bad lessons.  That they shouldn't "protest" or "quit".   I guess the underlying point is that you shouldn't teach kids to disrespect authority.   I agree with that, in part.   Certainly you should teach kids to respect authority, but I also think it's a good lesson to teach those kids to stand up for what is right.   I guess that's something that kinda polarizes our country right now, though....   It's not something appropriate for this forum, but... you'll always have half the country who will say "respect authority regardless" and you'll have people who will say, "stand up for what is right".   You'll have people who will say "It's our Government/President and we best support it unconditionally"  and you'll have people who say, "If something is "wrong"... we best speak out on it."   

Interesting.   That's my thoughts though. 

[crownsy]

which is exactly what every coach in this league is doing to this kid, making him quit. lets look at what was the facts reported in this, not what we infer from our own bais.

I work for a news organization, I am trained to read news critically, and I assure you that "Facts" are not being reported here, perspectives are. And from the news stories I've read on this, the dominant perspective being offered is that of the pitcher's mom and coach. And why not- this sensational story has been picked up by ESPN, the New York Times, Celticsblog, etc.

The whole angle regarding the "Option to change to the 'top' team" sounds way too conspiracy-theoryish. It's presented as a really insidious action by shadowy forces bent on destroying a promising 9-year-old's dream of pitching in the majors. I'd bet that this charge was reported, unfiltered and unverified, directly from the mother. I'm sure she is angry and is looking for reasons to validate that anger, but come on...

would agree, except the league has confirmed he was offered a spot on the "priemer team" as the team that always wins is known. at least according to mike and mike and WEEI. to be fair i've yet to see that confirmed in print, though it was reported in the orginal story.

to em, that part of the story is actualy pretty beleavable. growing up, i once didnt make an all star team for babe ruth, i was 12th out of 10 spots. 4 of the spots ahead of me were coaches sons, all of whom i was a better pitcher than. The super overzealous coachs coaches do exist at this level. My little brothers basketball coach last yar was one of these guys, so much so that my dad asked the league if he could switch teams mid season, since he didn't think the "cut thier throat!" mentality that his coach was preaching was good for him. (and yes, my little brothers league doesn't even keep score at 8. the coach had his wife keep score so he knew what they won by.)

i have little trouble beliving one of those type of guys leads this team, which in the story is supposedly the best year in and out, until this year.

[newdusk]

I think their needs to be balance in youth sports.  To a certain degree I even think people need to relax when it comes to High School sports. There needs to be winners and losers if the kids are under 8 the whole purpose for them is just getting some exercise and they will take it upon themselves to really learn the game.

What bugged me growing up and "playing" on the travel team in middle school was the amount of pressure the coaches put on me. I was benched often and early on I somewhat understood I had a hard time grasping the concepts of organized basketball. I also had a problem with my nerves.. but looking back benching me was not going to help me become a better basketball player. I don't think winning is that important when you are still developing. I genuinely worked hard showed up at practice refined my skills. I ended up with a torn ACL at the age of 14 as far as I was concerned I was done with organized sports. It's only a game, games are supposed to be fun.

As for this kid getting banned from playing... SLOW NEWS DAY. I will agree with one thing which is the overall theme ADULTS are the biggest problem with youth/school sports. I do not have kids and I know it will be hard when I watch him/her struggle to dribble or put a ball in the basket but I'm just going to let them have fun.

[cdif911]

I think their needs to be balance in youth sports.  To a certain degree I even think people need to relax when it comes to High School sports. There needs to be winners and losers if the kids are under 8 the whole purpose for them is just getting some exercise and they will take it upon themselves to really learn the game.

What bugged me growing up and "playing" on the travel team in middle school was the amount of pressure the coaches put on me. I was benched often and early on I somewhat understood I had a hard time grasping the concepts of organized basketball. I also had a problem with my nerves.. but looking back benching me was not going to help me become a better basketball player. I don't think winning is that important when you are still developing. I genuinely worked hard showed up at practice refined my skills. I ended up with a torn ACL at the age of 14 as far as I was concerned I was done with organized sports. It's only a game, games are supposed to be fun.

I think there's a difference actually - if you play on a travel team, the expectation is to win - the best players should play and develop into even better players (I know it sounds harsh, but its the point of the team) - hs sports are a little different at the sub-varsity level imo - where the point is to develop as much talent as possible to field succesive varsity teams, but still, the better players should play more. I was never a star athlete, I rode the bench on many teams, but the experience was always positive - I also played a lot of intermurals where it was more a "game" than a sport, and had a lot of fun (8 - 3 pointers in one game, I have no idea how that happened), but there's different levels for a reason.  As for varsity athletics, I really think the best players should play, the whole point is to win and represent the school well.  Now to the story of the pitcher kid, even if he's in a "developmental" league, his development is being hindered by not being allowed to work on his pitching against live batters - but it sounds from the story as its not really a developmental league at all.