|
|
Post by 19delta on Sept 4, 2016 17:19:51 GMT -6
I run a 5th/6th grade program. We are part of a 7-team conference that represents several small, rural communities. Most of the teams have anywhere from 15-35 kids. We have common rules on which all teams have agreed. One of the rules is that we have a weight limit of 126lbs for players who can advance the ball. Players over 126lbs have to be striped. Furthermore, if coaches request, a player can be weighed in. The home team must provide the scale. If the challenged player is over 126 lbs, that player is ineligible to advance the ball and must start each down on offense and defense on the LOS. So I got an email from another team in the conference. The team they played last weekend had a kid who was just running over them. In the first half, the kid had several long runs and was virtually unstoppable. At halftime, a weigh-in was requested. The kid was .8lbs under weight so he was technically eligible. Of course, had the team requested the weigh-in prior to the game, he would have easily been over 126lbs. So the kid was able to continue as a running back in that game. We played that team yesterday. So, I requested that the kid be weighed in prior to the game. The kid's father went apeshit...had a complete meltdown. Told me that the rule was stupid and that I shouldn't be able to selectively weigh kids in. I told him that the conference rules clearly allows for coaches to challenge the listed weight of players (we are required to exchange rosters at the start of the season. This kid was listed at 121lbs). The father then proceeded to have his son strip down to his underwear (this was right on the field in front of God and everyone) so he could weigh in. I was in shock. It happened so fast and I was really back on me heels. Anyway, the kid gets on the scale and he is almost 3 pounds over (he weighed in at 128.5lbs). I tell Dad the bad news and Dad just goes crazy. Says I am a terrible person for making the kid strip down in front of everyone. I reminded him that is was HIM who told the kid to strip down and that we could have done the weigh-in somewhere more private. He then proceeds to tell me that he should weigh in every one of my kids. Which, of course, I responded to by saying he was more than welcome to weigh my kids in because I didn't have anyone within 10 pounds of the weight limit. He goes on to say that I am a terrible person because I am crushing his son's self esteem and making him self conscious of his weight. Dad's argument was essentially that his son should get to be a running back because he wanted to be a running back, regardless of the what the rules said about weight limits. Kid had to play on the OL and the DL. We won 14-0. My takeaways from the incident: - I was incredulous that this parent essentially blamed me for the incident. I was a bad person for embarrassing his boy and hurting his self-esteem by requesting the weigh-in. The fact that they cheated the week before and were going to cheat yesterday if they were able to get away with it was a completely moot point.
- While the coaches of the other team were largely in agreement with me, they should not have allowed that father on the field. That father should have been told that any outburst would result in him being escorted from the field. Instead, the coaches from the other team kind of slunk around and didn't really stand up to him. My impression was that the dad is a huge a$$hole who is used to getting his way. People don't say no to people like that. My impression is that this father was mad because he wanted to sit up in the stands like some kind of bigshot and watch his 130lbs beast of son run roughshod over my kids.
- The coaches should have headed this off by simply striping the kid. Those coaches knew the kid was overweight. Yet they tried to sneak it past. If they had simply told the kid, "Look, you are overweight. You are going to play on the line this year. Next year in 7th grade, the weight limit is much higher so you will be able to play running back then this would not have been an issue. But (again...I'm assuming the coaches were intimidated and bullied by the dad) these coaches didn't do the right thing and it led to this incident happening.
I really don't have any questions. I'm not looking for any advice or anything. Just wanted to share my Saturday with you. I guess in summation, for many youth coaches, it really isn't about the kids, regardless what they say. For guys like this, winning is more important that following the rules. I don't feel badly about my actions at all. In fact, the rest of the season, I will be challenging kids who I think are over the weight limit.
|
|
|
|
Post by rsmith627 on Sept 4, 2016 18:32:28 GMT -6
I loved that you questioned cheaters for cheating, and that ruined a guy's Saturday.
Feed your kid less Big Macs bro.
|
|
|
|
Post by tiger46 on Sept 5, 2016 10:00:53 GMT -6
I know you're not looking for opinions. But, I think what you did was smart and needed to be done. However, I think the way your league handles weigh-ins is stupid.
Our league requires all players from both teams to weigh-in before the game. Weigh-ins are done at halftime of the preceeding game. It is all done with the same league official and the same scale provided by the league- not the home team. At weigh-in the players are fully suited with their helmets held in their right hand when they step on the scale. That is their playing weight. If a player is late to a game he is not allowed on the field until he is weighed in at half-time. It is not required that an opposing coach witness an opposing team weigh-in but, it is highly recommended. It would have, at least, saved you from having a direct confrontation with an angry parent.
I'm not on a high-horse. All in all, our league sucks. But, weigh-ins are one of the very few things that is done correctly. You may want to put it in as a recommendation for next season's procedures.
|
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Sept 5, 2016 11:10:16 GMT -6
I know you're not looking for opinions. But, I think what you did was smart and needed to be done. However, I think the way your league handles weigh-ins is stupid. Our league requires all players from both teams to weigh-in before the game. Weigh-ins are done at halftime of the preceeding game. It is all done with the same league official and the same scale provided by the league- not the home team. At weigh-in the players are fully suited with their helmets held in their right hand when they step on the scale. That is their playing weight. If a player is late to a game he is not allowed on the field until he is weighed in at half-time. It is not required that an opposing coach witness an opposing team weigh-in but, it is highly recommended. It would have, at least, saved you from having a direct confrontation with an angry parent. I'm not on a high-horse. All in all, our league sucks. But, weigh-ins are one of the very few things that is done correctly. You may want to put it in as a recommendation for next season's procedures. Meh... When we started the league 7 years ago, we used to weigh in every kid before each game. The problem with that is it was time consuming and largely unnecessary. The stripers don't need to be weighed, for obvious reasons. And there is no reason to weigh in kids who aren't going to carry the ball. Furthermore, we really don't have any league officials and the games aren't played at the same location. So a mass weigh-in wouldn't be possible. Our current rule (coaches allowed to challenge a player's listed weight) is new this year. Prior to this year, the league simply operated on the honor system. There weren't any weigh-ins. And, of course, there were guys every year who played overweight kids in the backfield. So, the rule change for us this year was largely due to having less-than-honorable coaches taking advantage of an honor system. The point of the story is, the coaches of the team we played this past Saturday knew they had a kid overweight. But, because they wanted to win so badly, they were willing to break the rules and put my kids at risk. I don't have any sympathy for "coaches" like that. |
|
|
|
Post by tiger46 on Sept 5, 2016 11:58:49 GMT -6
I'm in full agreement with you. I can also see how it would not be logistically possible for you to have the same solution to the problem. Not only did we have coaches in our league that broke the weight rules, we had some break the age-limit rules, the player identity rules and just about any other rule that you can think of to break. Referees that had their sons playing on the opposing teams. You can guess how the calls went in those games. Thus, all the rule changes. Like I mentioned, the league I coach in really does suck. Over the last few seasons, I've practically begged our HC to get out of it any way that he can.
I have no sympathy for any coach that can't respect the Honor System. It goes against the spirit of youth sports and all levels of competition. Those types of adults shouldn't be allowed to work with the kids. I wish they'd go live out their 'Coach of the Century' fantasies in some adult semi-pro league.
|
|
|
|
Post by vince148 on Sept 5, 2016 14:54:43 GMT -6
I coached in a league that had weigh-in for every player before each game. Wasn't a problem at all and generally took less than 10 minutes. It was a league field commissioner that conducted the weigh-in. So, if in your case, a league official was doing the weigh-in, the dad would be dealing with a league official instead of the opposing coach (you). Big difference.
|
|
|
|
Post by jrk5150 on Sept 6, 2016 8:25:28 GMT -6
But, because they wanted to win so badly, they were willing to break the rules and put my kids at risk. I don't have any sympathy for "coaches" like that. My only disagreement whatsoever is the "put my kids at risk". Bullsh*t. 130 pound 6th grade kid running the ball against unlimited weight 6th grade kids isn't putting anyone at risk. If you're happy with the striper rule, cool, but there's no "risk" element of it. It's a competitive issue, and you had every right to do what you did. But please, it's not a safety issue. Not when there are unlimited leagues all over with no striper rules that have no issues. Dad's an as*hole, the other coaches are cheating as*holes, and according to your rules you did what you should have. Pop Warner does a preseason certification weigh in where kids are out of pads, and then the weigh in before each game gives a 9 pound allowance for gear (no helmet) to avoid the strip down weigh-in. It is generous so kids AT the limit in pads are certainly over it technically, but so be it, the playing ground is level. It's a few pounds, and again, I just don't believe weight is even remotely a safety issue. |
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Sept 6, 2016 12:27:52 GMT -6
But, because they wanted to win so badly, they were willing to break the rules and put my kids at risk. I don't have any sympathy for "coaches" like that. My only disagreement whatsoever is the "put my kids at risk". Bullsh*t. 130 pound 6th grade kid running the ball against unlimited weight 6th grade kids isn't putting anyone at risk. If you're happy with the striper rule, cool, but there's no "risk" element of it. It's a competitive issue, and you had every right to do what you did. But please, it's not a safety issue. Not when there are unlimited leagues all over with no striper rules that have no issues. Dad's an as*hole, the other coaches are cheating as*holes, and according to your rules you did what you should have. Pop Warner does a preseason certification weigh in where kids are out of pads, and then the weigh in before each game gives a 9 pound allowance for gear (no helmet) to avoid the strip down weigh-in. It is generous so kids AT the limit in pads are certainly over it technically, but so be it, the playing ground is level. It's a few pounds, and again, I just don't believe weight is even remotely a safety issue. Of course it is a safety issue. That's precisely why we re-wrote the rule to provide for a coach's challenge. If we weren't concerned with safety, we wouldn't have a weight limit at all. |
|
|
|
Post by jrk5150 on Sept 7, 2016 6:50:01 GMT -6
My only disagreement whatsoever is the "put my kids at risk". Bullsh*t. 130 pound 6th grade kid running the ball against unlimited weight 6th grade kids isn't putting anyone at risk. If you're happy with the striper rule, cool, but there's no "risk" element of it. It's a competitive issue, and you had every right to do what you did. But please, it's not a safety issue. Not when there are unlimited leagues all over with no striper rules that have no issues. Dad's an as*hole, the other coaches are cheating as*holes, and according to your rules you did what you should have. Pop Warner does a preseason certification weigh in where kids are out of pads, and then the weigh in before each game gives a 9 pound allowance for gear (no helmet) to avoid the strip down weigh-in. It is generous so kids AT the limit in pads are certainly over it technically, but so be it, the playing ground is level. It's a few pounds, and again, I just don't believe weight is even remotely a safety issue. Of course it is a safety issue. That's precisely why we re-wrote the rule to provide for a coach's challenge. If we weren't concerned with safety, we wouldn't have a weight limit at all. I can't tell if you're serious. Please show me any research or even anecdotal evidence that not putting limits on ball carriers causes more injuries than doing so. Then please explain exactly how there is a difference in safety between having them "just" blocking and tackling vs. running? Do I get it as a competitive issue? Yes, absolutely I get that, whether or not I agree. But safety? Absolutely not. Just a myth perpetuated by ignorance, even if it comes from good intentions. |
|
|
|
Post by spos21ram on Sept 7, 2016 8:40:39 GMT -6
Of course it is a safety issue. That's precisely why we re-wrote the rule to provide for a coach's challenge. If we weren't concerned with safety, we wouldn't have a weight limit at all. I can't tell if you're serious. Please show me any research or even anecdotal evidence that not putting limits on ball carriers causes more injuries than doing so. Then please explain exactly how there is a difference in safety between having them "just" blocking and tackling vs. running? Do I get it as a competitive issue? Yes, absolutely I get that, whether or not I agree. But safety? Absolutely not. Just a myth perpetuated by ignorance, even if it comes from good intentions. Come on man you're just trying to get a rise out of people right? Not every heavier kid is going to be a safety concern, I agree, but an athletic agressive heavy kid is much more likely to hurt someone than a light athletic agressive kid. Two equally talented players, same speed and quickness, but one's 30 pounds heavier.....that is definitely a safety concern. No one is saying a 90 pound kid couldn't hurt someone. Injuries are gonna happen, but to say there is ZERO difference is ignorance to me. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Sept 7, 2016 9:07:29 GMT -6
Couldn't it be argued that having the manchild as the ball carrier will limit collisions because he just won't get tackled and won't be looking for big hits?
Regardless these are all unsubstantiated positions lacking in evidence-based decision-making
|
|
|
|
Post by mahonz on Sept 7, 2016 13:38:46 GMT -6
Why not just weigh in in August and be done with it?
If the kid is .8 pounds under on weigh in day....he is not over the limit for the rest of the season even though he might gain 5 pounds during the season.
This would be a tough thing to deal with if you have players right at the limit. What do you do with them the rest of the year if they play positions other than OL/ DL? Pray?
One weigh in run by the League so here is no cheating going on and move on.
You are only policing the police every week by calling out a player. Why bother?
|
|
|
|
Post by jrk5150 on Sept 7, 2016 14:03:38 GMT -6
I can't tell if you're serious. Please show me any research or even anecdotal evidence that not putting limits on ball carriers causes more injuries than doing so. Then please explain exactly how there is a difference in safety between having them "just" blocking and tackling vs. running? Do I get it as a competitive issue? Yes, absolutely I get that, whether or not I agree. But safety? Absolutely not. Just a myth perpetuated by ignorance, even if it comes from good intentions. Come on man you're just trying to get a rise out of people right? Not every heavier kid is going to be a safety concern, I agree, but an athletic agressive heavy kid is much more likely to hurt someone than a light athletic agressive kid. Two equally talented players, same speed and quickness, but one's 30 pounds heavier.....that is definitely a safety concern. No one is saying a 90 pound kid couldn't hurt someone. Injuries are gonna happen, but to say there is ZERO difference is ignorance to me. No, I'm not trying to stir anything up. This "heavy is dangerous" ignorant crap is hurting the game. It's causing kids who need to be on the field to be sitting on their couches eating Doritos. It gives soccer Moms ammunition to go after the game itself. This game is violent and dangerous enough without people saying something is dangerous when it by itself is not. Having a 126 lb weight limit for ball carriers at 6th grade and calling it safety related is completely arbitrary, not grounded in any facts whatsoever, and irresponsible of decision makers. That said - I have no real objection to HAVING that limit - your league, do what you want. But when you start calling it a "safety rule" - that's just wrong. If you're going to do that, where does it end? I mean, yes - "but an athletic agressive heavy kid is much more likely to hurt someone than a light athletic agressive kid. Two equally talented players, same speed and quickness, but one's 30 pounds heavier.....that is definitely a safety concern." - is probably true, but it applies to the WHOLE game, not just running the ball. And if you are going to say that's an issue to put a rule in, then just don't allow that 30 lb heavier kid to play! Or, just eliminate the hitting and play flag. Where does that end? My ultimate point - please explain EXACTLY how it's more dangerous for a 130 lb 12 year old to carry the ball vs. block or tackle someone. Note, I'm not even asking that question in relation to a 125 lb kid, which would be IMPOSSIBLE to quantify. I'll settle for an absolute argument. This is the kind of thinking we need to get out of the game - people just making stuff up and then labeling it "safety" so nobody can argue it. Where does 126 lbs even come from? The cynical side of me wonders whose kid was 125 when they made up that rule. |
|
|
|
Post by jrk5150 on Sept 7, 2016 14:15:07 GMT -6
Delta19 - man, I'm sorry it seems like I'm all out attacking you. That was an aggressive post, and while I mean it, I don't mean it to be AT you. At your position, yes. I think you are WAY off in your thinking about that issue. But it's hard on a board to go after your position and not have it seem like I'm going after you. So for whatever that's worth, it's not personal, just about opinions.
|
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Sept 7, 2016 14:23:13 GMT -6
Come on man you're just trying to get a rise out of people right? Not every heavier kid is going to be a safety concern, I agree, but an athletic agressive heavy kid is much more likely to hurt someone than a light athletic agressive kid. Two equally talented players, same speed and quickness, but one's 30 pounds heavier.....that is definitely a safety concern. No one is saying a 90 pound kid couldn't hurt someone. Injuries are gonna happen, but to say there is ZERO difference is ignorance to me. No, I'm not trying to stir anything up. This "heavy is dangerous" ignorant crap is hurting the game. It's causing kids who need to be on the field to be sitting on their couches eating Doritos. It gives soccer Moms ammunition to go after the game itself. This game is violent and dangerous enough without people saying something is dangerous when it by itself is not. Having a 126 lb weight limit for ball carriers at 6th grade and calling it safety related is completely arbitrary, not grounded in any facts whatsoever, and irresponsible of decision makers. That said - I have no real objection to HAVING that limit - your league, do what you want. But when you start calling it a "safety rule" - that's just wrong. If you're going to do that, where does it end? I mean, yes - "but an athletic agressive heavy kid is much more likely to hurt someone than a light athletic agressive kid. Two equally talented players, same speed and quickness, but one's 30 pounds heavier.....that is definitely a safety concern." - is probably true, but it applies to the WHOLE game, not just running the ball. And if you are going to say that's an issue to put a rule in, then just don't allow that 30 lb heavier kid to play! Or, just eliminate the hitting and play flag. Where does that end? My ultimate point - please explain EXACTLY how it's more dangerous for a 130 lb 12 year old to carry the ball vs. block or tackle someone. Note, I'm not even asking that question in relation to a 125 lb kid, which would be IMPOSSIBLE to quantify. I'll settle for an absolute argument. This is the kind of thinking we need to get out of the game - people just making stuff up and then labeling it "safety" so nobody can argue it. Where does 126 lbs even come from? The cynical side of me wonders whose kid was 125 when they made up that rule. It ends with a kid who is over 126lbs, for us anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Sept 7, 2016 14:25:12 GMT -6
Couldn't it be argued that having the manchild as the ball carrier will limit collisions because he just won't get tackled and won't be looking for big hits? Regardless these are all unsubstantiated positions lacking in evidence-based decision-making My preference was to have NO weight limits. But that idea got voted down. |
|
|
|
Post by mahonz on Sept 7, 2016 15:15:55 GMT -6
Come on man you're just trying to get a rise out of people right? Not every heavier kid is going to be a safety concern, I agree, but an athletic agressive heavy kid is much more likely to hurt someone than a light athletic agressive kid. Two equally talented players, same speed and quickness, but one's 30 pounds heavier.....that is definitely a safety concern. No one is saying a 90 pound kid couldn't hurt someone. Injuries are gonna happen, but to say there is ZERO difference is ignorance to me. This is the kind of thinking we need to get out of the game - people just making stuff up and then labeling it "safety" so nobody can argue it. Where does 126 lbs even come from? The cynical side of me wonders whose kid was 125 when they made up that rule. In my League...1st-8th single grade unlimited weight....the backfield limitations are set off some matrix off average weights for children. Then they add x number of pounds to account for the fact that this is a big mans Sport. Seems to work. I have 25 players and 8 are "stripe'rs". 7th graders. So 8 over 145 and 17 under 145. There are no limitations for 8th grade. We weigh in once in August. |
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Sept 7, 2016 19:21:42 GMT -6
The weight limit in our league used to be 131lbs. But again...it was all on the honor system and, of course, because we had people who were less than honorable, kids who were significantly heavier than that got to run the ball. When we met this spring, my contention was to get rid of the weight limit because it wasn't being enforced and people were taking advantage of that and playing big kids in the backfield. We had a long discussion and the end result was to lower the limit to 126lbs but add a rule that we would all exchange rosters 2 weeks before the first game and then reserve the right to challenge any kid's listed weight. For our league, it's a good rule. We don't have any centralized league office. Each team operates independently. The ability to challenge any player's listed weight is essential to ensuring that all the teams are operating within the rules. The ultimate irony is that when we implemented this rule back in the spring, every team voted in favor of it. Then, of course, this team got Spike from "Little Giants" to play and they decided that rule wasn't worth following.  |
|
|
|
Post by jrk5150 on Sept 8, 2016 6:03:32 GMT -6
Couldn't it be argued that having the manchild as the ball carrier will limit collisions because he just won't get tackled and won't be looking for big hits? Regardless these are all unsubstantiated positions lacking in evidence-based decision-making My preference was to have NO weight limits. But that idea got voted down. So then apparently you don't believe there's a safety issue either. So why, on a board like this, would you support it? I get you have to toe the line publicly, but this ain't public, and you've already publicly offered a counter position by proposing to eliminate the rule. |
|
|
|
Post by mahonz on Sept 8, 2016 12:04:46 GMT -6
The weight limit in our league used to be 131lbs. But again...it was all on the honor system and, of course, because we had people who were less than honorable, kids who were significantly heavier than that got to run the ball. When we met this spring, my contention was to get rid of the weight limit because it wasn't being enforced and people were taking advantage of that and playing big kids in the backfield. We had a long discussion and the end result was to lower the limit to 126lbs but add a rule that we would all exchange rosters 2 weeks before the first game and then reserve the right to challenge any kid's listed weight. For our league, it's a good rule. We don't have any centralized league office. Each team operates independently. The ability to challenge any player's listed weight is essential to ensuring that all the teams are operating within the rules. The ultimate irony is that when we implemented this rule back in the spring, every team voted in favor of it. Then, of course, this team got Spike from "Little Giants" to play and they decided that rule wasn't worth following. Weight restrictions in unlimited weight is good for business. You get parents believing its better for all because little dudes can participate. Right or wrong it does promote numbers. Here is a suggestion for the future. You dont need a centralized League Office. You have say 8 Independent teams in your League. Everyone weighs in in August. Team A weighs in on August 7th while a Rep from Team B monitors the weigh ins and signs off on an official Roster that is carried with that HC just in case someone complains about a particular Player. If someone complains now that HC has proof that the player in question did indeed weigh in at x pounds at the Official weigh ins. Now all players are allowed to grow and enjoy the season without any bs. Then on say August 8th Team B weighs and a Rep from Team C monitors the process...signs off on an Official Roster....and so on until all Teams have weighed in. The honor system is a nice idea...until you run into what you just ran into. Then chit hits the fan for all. So...avoid all that in season mess and do it during preseason....ONCE. This works VERY well. Food for thought |
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Sept 8, 2016 12:20:28 GMT -6
My preference was to have NO weight limits. But that idea got voted down. So then apparently you don't believe there's a safety issue either. So why, on a board like this, would you support it? I get you have to toe the line publicly, but this ain't public, and you've already publicly offered a counter position by proposing to eliminate the rule. As I posted previously, the weight limit was not being followed. That's why I wanted to get rid of it. |
|
|
|
Post by tiger46 on Sept 8, 2016 13:01:15 GMT -6
It's really all about youth football league politicking and BS. The stubbornness and resistance to change can be unreal. And, it almost always centers around the ball carriers. For clarification. Our league has three levels of tackle football. 8u, 10u and 12u. There are no weight restrictions whatsoever at the 12u level. The 8u & 10u levels have weight limits on ball carriers and another weight limit for all players in general. Our weight limits are higher than Pop Warner.
For those aforementioned levels, the league used to have an additional weight limit on O-linemen size which was less than the D-linemen weight limit. I argued that it was a stupid rule. All linemen should have the same weight limit. I got over-ruled. The first play of our season opener, our DT slants left and low through the OG's hips, sacks the QB. Breaks the QB's arm in the process.
Next season, instead of making all linemen weight limits the same, the league decides to reverse the linemen limits. Now, the O-line players could be heavier than the D-linemen. Again, I argued. Again, I was voted down. Guess which team got into trouble with the league because our O-linemen were destroying their counter-parts? I even had the commissioner threaten to stop a game and call it a forfeit on our part if I didn't remove my larger O-linemen from the game. I argued with the commissioner that it was their techniques and not just their size that was doing all the damage. It's a small league. Until our organization changed how we coached linemen, the league was used to fat D-linemen standing up and waddling straight forward and 'block somebody' O-line coaches.
I asked the commissioner how he thought the parents of those players were going to feel about their kids being removed from the game? I mean, it wasn't like any of us were great coaches. The parents paid their money to have their kids taught to play football. Their kids were properly taught to the best of our ability as their coaches. And, now the kids were being punished for doing as they were coached?
He told me that he didn't care and I needed to go tell the parents why their kids were being pulled from the game. I laughed in his face and told him that I wasn't about to go over there and tell their parents a damned thing. It was his stupid rule. He could go over there and explain it himself!
He was actually dumb enough to go over there and do just that. Man, did he ever walk into a chit storm! ROFL! The next season, the rules were changed so that all linemen had the same weight limits.
|
|
|
|
Post by seabass on Sept 8, 2016 22:32:49 GMT -6
I play in a weight limit league. It doesn't limit the weight of the ball carrier but it does limit weight by age. All of these weight limit arguments are about perception and not reality. All kids should just play football against other kids their age regardless of weight and no position should be determined by size. Anybody ever protest the idea of a tiny lineman? If the little kid can't tackle the big kid then why is the big kid allowed to tackle the little kid?
It's not about safety....it's about perceived fairness. I think tall youth basketball players shouldn't be allowed to shoot the ball....only rebound.
|
|
|
|
Post by jrk5150 on Sept 9, 2016 9:17:04 GMT -6
So then apparently you don't believe there's a safety issue either. So why, on a board like this, would you support it? I get you have to toe the line publicly, but this ain't public, and you've already publicly offered a counter position by proposing to eliminate the rule. As I posted previously, the weight limit was not being followed. That's why I wanted to get rid of it. Yeah...I don't get it. If you TRULY believe it's a safety issue, that kids over 126 lbs running the ball are a threat to the other kids on the field, I don't get why you'd argue to get rid of it and put kids at risk (whether it was being followed or not)... Whatever. I still think you were right to do what you did, regardless of our difference of opinion about the rule. Fact is, it IS a rule, which means it should be followed. |
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Sept 13, 2016 17:06:00 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by tiger46 on Sept 14, 2016 9:33:39 GMT -6
I saw that video, also. The funny thing is that there are other large kids on that red team. In fact, the kid running the ball isn't even the biggest kid on that team. Look in the background you'll see a kid larger than the ball carrier,.
|
|
|
|
Post by jrk5150 on Sept 14, 2016 14:05:55 GMT -6
I'll also note in the article - not a single mention of safety as an issue (unless I missed it), in fact the commentary included comments about the smaller kids weren't afraid to get after the big kid. If there was a negative slant to the article, it was about competition issues with size, not safety.
So, yeah, seems like if you're complaining about a kid 5-10 lbs over, you just might be that! ;-)
|
|
