Should playing time in rec league be based on merit?

[Momo'sDad]

Sluggers, you're wrong on 2 counts, right on 1, but missing theme of the conversation starter on all 3. You've changed the thread title to something which has nothing to do with any of my statements and attacked me on suppositions you made which had nothing to do with any of my statements. I already started a thread a few weeks ago regarding earning circle time which DOES accurately reflect what you assumed my intent was here, but with all due respect, what you're arguing to be my intent in this thread has nothing to do with the points I raised.

Reading your statements and insinuations, it appears to me that you're trying to establish some direct opposition between rec and non-rec, such that they represent near polar opposites of one another.

Call it whatever you'd like, but no matter how you manipulate the numbers, because free substitution is not permitted, it's impossible to provide an equal number of defensive innings for the 9 non-pitchers/non-catchers within 8-10 innings, because the participation requirement is reset after each game (4-5 innings). In each game we play, 5 out of 13 must play an entire game. The same is not true in regular spring rec, where free substitution is allowed and everyone can play the same amount before gathering afterward for snow cones.

I would appreciate you not putting words in my mouth. Thank you for the otherwise fine job you do running the board.

 

[Momo'sDad]

But, the point is that the team is a *REC* team (recreational team) meaning that it is to be played for fun, not competitively.

The vast majority of people who play softball (not just fastpitch, but including slow pitch) play just for fun. And, we all know what it means to play "just for fun".

When people start trying to playing "rec softball" competitively, people tend to become delusional about how good everyone really is.

If someone has a DD on a rec team and wants to see if they can really compete, then they should find her a travel team.

We do keep score and based on the feedback we've received from them, a majority of the kids who choose to play in the fall want a more competitive experience than they got in spring rec. Was the system set up to be that way by the parent-coaches? Well, I honestly cannot answer that question. All I can tell you is that it is the system that exists. As for defining our team goals, I do want our team to prepare itself to do well in the November tourney and by well, yes, I would like for us to get deep into the final day. That may or may not happen. But if all I, as coach, cared about was winning, I would have taken only the best 10 girls who signed up to play or probably not taken a team at all, instead allowing DD to go play with her buddies from the summer season.

When another coach is using their players to engage in gamesmanship, do you turn the other cheek and just laugh it off? Do you lie down like a doormat for them? Or do you let your players go do their thing? Every case is different. YMMV.

 

[Axe]

Once again the travel ball elitists take a stand that kids playing rec ball shouldn't care whether they win or lose or how they perform. Just have fun baby! Guess what, 10 year old kids aren't dumb (even rec league kids!), just because they aren't "elite" athletes (a greatly overused term in these parts), doesn't mean that when they cross those white lines that they aren't interested in competing as hard as they can and working to get better all the time.

Do all of my rec league players play the same amount? Yes. Do they get to play whatever positions they want? No. Is it fair to the team to put a bad player at first base or third base? Hardly. BTW, most rec league games are timed so that if you put players in a position where they can't perform, we play fewer innings and everyone gets to play less.

The idea that I can't tell whether someone should hit 3rd without putting them there in a game is preposterous. Even in little old rec league we do have something called "practice" where we are able to evaluate (and hopefully improve) the abilities of players and determine both how they can be successful AND help the team player better.

The condescending tone of so many gets pretty old.

 

[Chris O'Leary]

Rec is a meritocracy- where you earn your position. Rec is for every child

Sorry, but this is completely contradictory.

How does the kid who wants to play, but who is terrible, get to play?

That's the thing about rec; it's full of kids who have the desire but not the talent.

As rec coaches, it's our job to give them the best opportunity that we can.

 

[nanotech14]

Once again the travel ball elitists take a stand that kids playing rec ball shouldn't care whether they win or lose or how they perform. Just have fun baby! Guess what, 10 year old kids aren't dumb (even rec league kids!), just because they aren't "elite" athletes (a greatly overused term in these parts), doesn't mean that when they cross those white lines that they aren't interested in competing as hard as they can and working to get better all the time.

Axe,not every TB coach or parent which I'am both feels this way,my dd plays both,she loves playing the game.She started in rec. just like most all players do.DD loves here rec. ball friends and travel ball friends.There are alot of rec. players that are just as good or better then TB players. Some of these girls just like to play the game.Thats why I myself love about rec league,but I do agree with you! These girls do come to play when they cross those white lines.

 

[KevinC]

I think the issue is that your league's fall ball does not resemble "rec" ball as most people would define it. Your rule set where only 9 bat and substitutions are limited and the fact that you have a 13 on your roster means that some girls are going to only get one at bat per game and sit on the bench a lot. I'm also assuming that because it's rec ball everyone who signs up get assigned to a team regardless of skill level. I wouldn't expect many less "serious" players to want to play in your system.

You could have different starting lineups for each game of your double header - an "A" and "B" team if you will. Of course this is not the best way to compete in both games and it's not "fair" to the better players.

In our area rec ball is supposed to be about fun and skill development. Winning comes into the equation only because generally it's more fun than losing. As a rec league coach I've got to find a way to make sure everyone on the team has fun and improves their skills. The tricky part is to find a way to reward the better players without leaving the others behind.

Back to the original question if you and your assistant coach don't agree on this and you can't find a compromise then the assistant is either going to have to grin and bear it or find another team that more closely matches his or her philosophy.

 

[Lozza]

Once again the travel ball elitists take a stand that kids playing rec ball shouldn't care whether they win or lose or how they perform. Just have fun baby! Guess what, 10 year old kids aren't dumb (even rec league kids!), just because they aren't "elite" athletes (a greatly overused term in these parts), doesn't mean that when they cross those white lines that they aren't interested in competing as hard as they can and working to get better all the time.

Yes, but we have people on this very board who try and state that 7 and 8 year old's should be 'earning' time for positions they have barely played. Because their coach never puts them there.

I coach from U6 right up to the top level here. It is only when you get to the aboustle top level that it should purely be based on talent. If you refuse to let a 7/8/9 year old learn a position because she's not as good as the kid who's been playing it forever (which is how long again?) she will never get the chance to get better.

Under 10 is where girls should be learning their skills. Even at travel. If you don't give a kid a chance to even try a position, how is she supposed to ever get better? By spending hours outside of practice learning the skills? That's ridiculous for little girls who might not even know if they want to play the sport for long. By expecting that level of commitment you are barring potential future players from the game.

I went to primary school with a girl who went onto play for Australia. She didn't make our school team when we were in Year 5. (primary school could be serious business. My team produced one Australian player and four state players. We were red hot) Year 6 she did. She'd started pitching halfway through that year. (start of the season was in Term 1, second half Term 4) She went up to our coach and asked if she could pitch as she'd just started pitching for her club (or rec) team but wasn't sure if she was very good. Where she played, she didn't play against the top players. He put her in for two digs against the side coming second. She did amazing. Her entire pitching 'career' before then was two games against other club sides and an hour a week pitching against the trampoline. That girl went onto pitch for Australia. All because her coach decided that it was more important to give a little girl a chance at something than to win. (and yes we did win anyways. He admitted years later that he'd have given her the two digs and she wouldn't have got more if she'd not performed)

At age 9 I was a shortstop. A good little shortstop. At 13 I became a first base and went onto represent my state at that position. Now? I'm 28 and have been pitching for ten years. You (general you) don't KNOW what these little girls will grow up to be. If you don't give them a chance because you need to win, than you are failing every single girl on that team. Even the girls who are playing their preferred positions. Even your own daughters. Because you are coaching to win at all costs. Not to improve the girls. And no-one thinks you're a hero for taking U10 to a premiership.

 

[Chris O'Leary]

If someone has a DD on a rec team and wants to see if they can really compete, then they should find her a travel team.

Do other parts of the country not have select teams?

Around here, if you don't think rec is competitive enough, but travel is too much of a hassle, there are multiple select house leagues that offer a better level of competition.

Maybe that's just the advantage of being in a bigger city.

 

[Axe]

I still think that skill development happens primarily at practice. If you watch a kid warm up at practice and she struggles to catch a thrown ball, why would you put her at 1B? What you "learn" in games is how to deal with pressure, how to process information at game speed and make decisions. You don't "learn" how to throw a pitch or catch a ball in a game. You apply what you have learned in a pressurized situation.

In your example, you make it sound like this kid magically came out and pitched. I'm guessing that the coach saw her in practice and was not taken totally by surprise by the results in the game.

BTW, our league rules REQUIRE that all kids receive playing time in the infield, so its not like little Suzy is stuck in the OF the whole time. If you are counting on a 4 inning timed game to learn how to field a grounder, you will not learn to do it.

 

[Axe]

Chris,

We also have a Select team program which allows the more competitive and advanced players to compete at a higher level without moving to a travel program. Its an extension of our rec program and runs through the summer rather than finishing in May when rec league winds down.