POLL~ about QUITING during the...

[RADcatcher]

Hmmm there are those who quit the team either during the game or during the weekend tournament.

Tell kid to get their equipment,
bag it up and let's go.

What's the dealio on this?
Would you or wouldn't you and why?

 

[Lance Steckler]

i've sat and watched several 'hissy quits" over the years. entertainment for the general bystanders, bad to insane team cancer for the teammates.

 

[Nuwin]

Given the vagueness of the question, the answer must be yes. There are lines that should never be crossed such as physical abuse of a player or umpire.

But with all of these, it's more interesting to see what bias or interpretation the individuals will apply to their answers.

If we're just talking helicopter parents trying to steamroll their kid to success... yeah, learn to preserve and fulfill your obligations. I believe it serves the kid better in the long run. Although if they're on my team I am fine with them bouncing. One less headache for me. lol

 

[benjey]

If we stipulate that we are not talking about children being in a dangerous situation, then no I don't think it is a good idea. It is most likely an emotionally charged decision and that is typically not the best way to make significant decisions. Give yourself some time after the tournament when the emotions settle to make a better more informed decision for all involved.

 

[RADcatcher]

the vagueness of the question,

is because

it's more interesting to see what bias or interpretation the individuals will apply to their answers.

The -will explain reasoning part
Is to identify if there is a valid reason for quitting in the moment. And see if there's a discussion about resolving the issue without people deciding to quit.

 

[marriard]

There has to be line that cannot be crossed. If we are talking absolutes, there are situations where a child is in imminent danger or a coach/parent/etc has crossed into total insanity (assaulting an umpire for example), that you absolutely should remove your child from that situation immediately and permanently.

That said, most of the ones I have seen were not justified and were just hissy quits. Which is total BS and could have been handled at the end of the event or even game.

 

[4Martini]

That’s not my style (except dangerous situations). But my daughter has played in the last fall tournament silently knowing she was moving to a new team for spring. She liked her teammates- so played out the season. We were going to quit after the 24 hour rule - but the team imploded rather spectacularly right after the last game. We felt a little guilty being the only family with a new team when it happened- but also illustrated many of the reasons we decided to leave.

 

[RADcatcher]

There has to be line that cannot be crossed. If we are talking absolutes, there are situations where a child is in imminent danger or a coach/parent/etc has crossed into total insanity (assaulting an umpire for example), that you absolutely should remove your child from that situation immediately and permanently.

In that situation~
Shouldn't the coach be removed?
The strength of the many remove the individual who is the problem.

That said, most of the ones I have seen were not justified and were just hissy quits. Which is total BS and could have been handled at the end of the event or even game.

 

[Cannuck]

I voted no. I would have my DD leave any situation immediately that was putting her in harm's way above the risks assumed in the activity. I do not view this as quitting. We enter into a social, and sometimes financial contract with coaches, athletic directors, teams or associations. If they are willfully or passively negligent in their duties, they have not fulfilled their obligations of the contract and leaving is a reaction to the contract being void. In all or most other situations, DD would remain available for the game.

 

[canyonjoe]

In general no but if something gets really bad it's certainly worth exploring.