Fair Play at A Squirts...

[FLHRCI_03]

1.) Curious how other associations traveling policies are stated regarding Fair play.

My association made the following change to our traveling policy this year:
"The coaches of U10 Girls and Squirts will play all skaters evenly regardless of game situation (including penalty situations, overtime periods, the closing minutes of close games, as well as District playoffs)."

Last year and many years before it stated “(Excluding penalty situations, overtime periods, or the closing minutes of close games, as well as Districts, Regions, or State playoff Games)

2.) If you are a coach or have been a coach at the A Squirt Level, how did you handle fair play... did you have a power play line, penalty kill line or shorten the bench in the last minutes of a close game? When answering this; Image an association playing A with 36 TOTAL Squirts.... 3 teams

[DMom]

ours reads like your new one. it isn't until peewee that they can change things up, and than only on the third period. I know the reason we have never changed it is that the kids haven't hit puberty yet so it is still developmental in nature. Even a pyramid needs a large foundation. We had five squirt teams last year. I guess you are saying with only three teams, your talent drops off quickly. I believe it will continue to drop off quickly if you can't afford to play all of the kids. By 7th grade most kids would choose basketball or ski team over sitting on the bench at hockey.

[Can't Never Tried]

ours reads like your new one. it isn't until peewee that they can change things up, and than only on the third period. I know the reason we have never changed it is that the kids haven't hit puberty yet so it is still developmental in nature. Even a pyramid needs a large foundation. We had five squirt teams last year. I guess you are saying with only three teams, your talent drops off quickly. I believe it will continue to drop off quickly if you can't afford to play all of the kids. By 7th grade most kids would choose basketball or ski team over sitting on the bench at hockey.

Mehhh? maybe but I think it'd still more fun then those!

[Daulton911]

How is fair play questioned ? - didn't you say they are U 10 Kids?? better always be fair play. What kind of society would this be if we took fairness out of raising kids? Hockey (All Sports / Activities for that matter) are for a childs mental and physical development. I see stuff like this and wonder where does this end. Should we tell the fat kids in school they do not get any lunch since they muct be eating to much at home - lets let the skinny kids catch up.... aaaaaauuuuggghhhh.

a youth sports team is ussually only as good as its top player. I have seen some amazing talanted kids at the 12 and under age category, even 14 and under age group, be the whole team. once they reach high school etc DEPTH is the key. you need 3 lines... that one superstar now cannot take you as far as they did when they were young. The program my child is in is fair play all the way up through Bantams. Let the High school coaches handle not playing equal. Yes - I have seen coaches make adjustments the last 5 minutes of a game. but any youth coach is not doing his / her job if they do not work on the child development side of things.

anyway - I don't ever write much on this line, but look at it often. I am just amazed how more and more people want to wreck it for everyone. Just enjoy, develop, make friends, its a "Sport".

[Lowstickside]

First, no offense, but you really don't need to worry about special team situations in a small association. You might have a few kids on the "A" team who will be able to handle special teams from both a skill and concept perspective, but that is about it. Forget the second team powerplay, they are at your neighboring association.

Roll the lines and let the kids play and have fun. I think this idea of fair play for the younger years is the way to go. By the time a small association fields a Bantam team these days, many kids have left for various reasons, and your 36 Squirts are now 20 Bantams. Let the big associations run special teams in Bantams and others can wait until H.S..

[whockeyguy]

good God these are kids, play them all equal at this age and quit criing over it, heck rotate 5 out there and let them see what they can do.where else are they going to learn,

[Tony Soprano]

Looking at it from the HS level, all youth levels need to rotate lines and not ride the 1st or 2nd line. The only way they will learn and develop is by playing not sitting on the bench hoping for their shift.

Also do not worry too much about special teams, work the skills and small games during practices. Work to instill the idea of having fun with the game while working hard. This will carry with them up to the HS level and then the high school coaches will determine playing time.

At the Bantam level, it may not be a bad idea to let coaches work with the last 5 minutes of a game or for the last shift of a period. The balance of the game should be spent rolling the lines over the boards and buliding confidence in these young players.

[JoltDelivered]

I hate it when associations feel they have to regulate this kind of stuff. I like fair play and think it should be the rule of thumb. I know kids sign up to play and have fun but I think the coaches should have some latitude.

I highly doubt getting short shifted 1 shift at the end of a game is going to ruin a kid's psyche or development.

If a coach wants to put out his best player(s) at the end of close game for the last shift or two I have no problem with it. It happened to my kid last year in a tournament. He went out and got called back before the puck drop. The coach put in a 2nd year more expereinced player to take the last shift of the game. The sky didn't fall and my son didn't say a word about it.

By the way, there are many ways a coach can get around fair play if he really wants too. Ever seen the 3rd line get a 25 second shift in a close game and the 1st line come out and get a 2 minute shift? Happens all the time. Maybe these associations should write some rules on how long each shift needs to be and have a mom in the box to keep a time sheet.

Silly if you ask me...

[Can't Never Tried]

Jolt... They probably wouldn't do it if it weren't for some ego maniac coaches that think a win is more important then a 9 yr old players self esteem.
(Of course why not screen your coaches better then?)

Roll em all at the young ages, let em have fun and play, the power play team should be the next line going out, that's how they'll learn the basics about special teams.

[JoltDelivered]

CNT - I don't disagree with you. Fair Play should be the rule of thumb. However, I think crafting a specific rule and putting it in the handbook is pretty silly.

My guess is that some rogue coach in the above mentioned association ran his horses just a little too much and parents complained. This is what usually prompts handbook updates.

You know the saying: The squeaky wheel gets the grease.

And don't discount winning. I know it shouldn't be at the top of the priority list but the kids want to win, some of them in a really bad way. Seen plenty of tears in the locker room after a tough loss. Character builder? maybe...

But I've also seen a truly excited team of children mob a goalie after an exciting win and high fives are plentiful in the locker room after. Self esteem builder? Maybe...

[Messier]

I do know the Squirt A Coaches that my son played for and still coach the SQA Team, Stated playing time like this. District games everyone plays no matter who, situation, and score, every player will play forward and d, goalies will play every other game. As for tournaments they rolled set lines, matched lines and even sat kids for not playing hard, and played the top players in the final minutes of tight games. My son was a middle of the pack player but he pushed him self to be one that got to play in the final minutes and improved and was one that they used at the end of the year in final minutes. I liked what they coaches told us and how they ran the team, we had 2 very successful seasons and the coaches worked very hard to develop the kids and improve there skating, shotting, play at all 3 zones on the ice. I think in 2 years they sat kids at end of games to get the win or tie maybe only 4 or 5 times at the was in about 70 games over 2 years. I do like the way thes SQA coaches, coached, and developed the players and thought them live lesson also. I think it also worked because the coaches laid it on the table before the season and explained how and what they where going to do with this team.

[Can't Never Tried]

CNT - I don't disagree with you. Fair Play should be the rule of thumb. However, I think crafting a specific rule and putting it in the handbook is pretty silly.

My guess is that some rogue coach in the above mentioned association ran his horses just a little too much and parents complained. This is what usually prompts handbook updates.

You know the saying: The squeaky wheel gets the grease.

And don't discount winning. I know it shouldn't be at the top of the priority list but the kids want to win, some of them in a really bad way. Seen plenty of tears in the locker room after a tough loss. Character builder? maybe...

But I've also seen a truly excited team of children mob a goalie after an exciting win and high fives are plentiful in the locker room after. Self esteem builder? Maybe...

My point was.. a win means very little to a player that wasn't a part of it!

[JoltDelivered]

I understand and I agree. It's a matter of perspective I guess. Everybody wants to feel part of the team and share in the success. It feels good.

However, if a kid plays all game but gets short shifted 1 shift at the end means he wasn't part of the win? I'm not sure I beleive that.

Now, if a kid was only getting 2 shifts a period, yeah now I take issue with that.

Again, before I get run through the cheese grater by the fun folks on this board - Fair Play should be the rule of thumb. That is my official stance.

Stepping down off my soap box now...

[Can't Never Tried]

I understand and I agree. It's a matter of perspective I guess. Everybody wants to feel part of the team and share in the success. It feels good.

However, if a kid plays all game but gets short shifted 1 shift at the end means he wasn't part of the win? I'm not sure I beleive that.

Now, if a kid was only getting 2 shifts a period, yeah now I take issue with that.

Again, before I get run through the cheese grater by the fun folks on this board - Fair Play should be the rule of thumb. That is my official stance.

Stepping down off my soap box now...

I'd say we're in agreement on this, the little things aren't the problem anyway, even normal coaching screw ups can result in a kid getting short shifted.

[tomASS]

I understand and I agree. It's a matter of perspective I guess. Everybody wants to feel part of the team and share in the success. It feels good.

However, if a kid plays all game but gets short shifted 1 shift at the end means he wasn't part of the win? I'm not sure I beleive that.

Now, if a kid was only getting 2 shifts a period, yeah now I take issue with that.

Again, before I get run through the cheese grater by the fun folks on this board - Fair Play should be the rule of thumb. That is my official stance.

Stepping down off my soap box now...

I'd say we're in agreement on this, the little things aren't the problem anyway, even normal coaching screw ups can result in a kid getting short shifted.

sometimes it is the parents that put the wins over the development of kids so coaches at times do feel the pressure and at times could use the association's help to make sure that parents know what the priority is.

[O-townClown]

I think there is validity to Bylsma's dad's theory. Everyone plays evenly for almost the whole game, but "I like to win too" and the last 5 minutes are mine.

He advocates deviating from just rolling the lines in close games and tells everyone in advance. It doesn't come up each game and won't thwart the development of any kids.

[tomASS]

I think there is validity to Bylsma's dad's theory. Everyone plays evenly for almost the whole game, but "I like to win too" and the last 5 minutes are mine.

He advocates deviating from just rolling the lines in close games and tells everyone in advance. It doesn't come up each game and won't thwart the development of any kids.

so equitable playing time versus equal playing time.

[DMom]

I do know the Squirt A Coaches that my son played for and still coach the SQA Team, Stated playing time like this. District games everyone plays no matter who, situation, and score, every player will play forward and d, goalies will play every other game. As for tournaments they rolled set lines, matched lines and even sat kids for not playing hard, and played the top players in the final minutes of tight games. My son was a middle of the pack player but he pushed him self to be one that got to play in the final minutes and improved and was one that they used at the end of the year in final minutes. I liked what they coaches told us and how they ran the team, we had 2 very successful seasons and the coaches worked very hard to develop the kids and improve there skating, shotting, play at all 3 zones on the ice. I think in 2 years they sat kids at end of games to get the win or tie maybe only 4 or 5 times at the was in about 70 games over 2 years. I do like the way thes SQA coaches, coached, and developed the players and thought them live lesson also. I think it also worked because the coaches laid it on the table before the season and explained how and what they where going to do with this team.

I think this would be a great rule of thumb for any squirt coach. One of our coaches ran baseball this way this year. League games are one thing, but for tournaments he had warned ahead of time that playing time would be earned. A very good compromise, the kids develop and you are at least trying for more games in a tournament. I didn't say wins, but often times when a family has forked out a couple hundred bucks for a hotel and eating out, it's nice to actually play on Sunday, whether it's a championship or not.

We had a squirt coach who had a tie game and with a minute left in the game there were penalties called that left him dealing with a 5 on 3 situation. It was for the division championship and I guarantee you there wasn't one player or parent that was not okay with the three kids he played for that minute , nor were any of them concerned with those same three kids killing off the rest of the penalty in overtime. Fresh legs came on the ice after the penalty was killed and those kids scored the winning goal. The parents were okay with it because of the way he had played the kids throughout the year.

I think the other thing we have experienced in association hockey is for the coach to start the year with an idea where kids will fit, but put them in the other positions. If the coach starts out trying to win, with his best line combinations, etc, than they have no where to go but down. If you start the year giving the weaker players more responsibility than you look like a genius when the team starts to "gel" and who remembers the first few loses? The old, it isn't important to win all of the games, just the last one.

[Can't Never Tried]

I think there is validity to Bylsma's dad's theory. Everyone plays evenly for almost the whole game, but "I like to win too" and the last 5 minutes are mine.

He advocates deviating from just rolling the lines in close games and tells everyone in advance. It doesn't come up each game and won't thwart the development of any kids.

This is where I don't like it.... why is any part of the 9yr olds game a place for the coach to satisfy his ego, I agree it will have little impact on their HOCKEY development.
But..
There is plenty of time ahead to learn the lesson that others are better then you, and it should only be used when in fact that's the long term reality, if the kid hasn't matured yet we all have agreed we really don't know how good he'll be, but we can agree on this that if he gets the message early on that he's not good enough we may never know how good he really may have been, because he may find something else. To me that's the bigger picture.

[Neutron 14]

I think there is validity to Bylsma's dad's theory. Everyone plays evenly for almost the whole game, but "I like to win too" and the last 5 minutes are mine.

He advocates deviating from just rolling the lines in close games and tells everyone in advance. It doesn't come up each game and won't thwart the development of any kids.

This is where I don't like it.... why is any part of the 9yr olds game a place for the coach to satisfy his ego, I agree it will have little impact on their HOCKEY development.
But..
There is plenty of time ahead to learn the lesson that others are better then you, and it should only be used when in fact that's the long term reality, if the kid hasn't matured yet we all have agreed we really don't know how good he'll be, but we can agree on this that if he gets the message early on that he's not good enough we may never know how good he really may have been, because he may find something else. To me that's the bigger picture.

Balderdash! Coaches ego? Are you saying he can't pull his goalie either?

Poppycock! Even 9 year olds want to win, and they also want the best kids on the ice the last minute. Just ask them...

[donkypunchr]

Looking at it from the HS level, all youth levels need to rotate lines and not ride the 1st or 2nd line. The only way they will learn and develop is by playing not sitting on the bench hoping for their shift.

Also do not worry too much about special teams, work the skills and small games during practices. Work to instill the idea of having fun with the game while working hard. This will carry with them up to the HS level and then the high school coaches will determine playing time.

At the Bantam level, it may not be a bad idea to let coaches work with the last 5 minutes of a game or for the last shift of a period. The balance of the game should be spent rolling the lines over the boards and buliding confidence in these young players.

I agree Developement and hard work is the most important thing. You must develope all three lines, but coaches should have the final say on playing time at the "A" levels. "B" or "C" levels, every one should play regularly.

Last I heard true developement comes from practice & repition. Games are used to showcase what you have learned from practice. A good player touches the puck for what... maybe a minute during an entire game... So what about the weaker players.... call that developement?

I've always been tought hockey is a team game focusing on the betterment of the team, not catering to an individual or two worrying about missing a shift or two when the game is on the line. Hockey, as well as other sports, can be great building blocks in many aspects of childs life. The lesson at hand: "Life isn't always fair". Sitting the bench a couple shifts may inspire a kid to work harder so he/she can play in critical situations, it also can develope the mental toughness that you need to play at highly competitive levels.

If you want total fairness, play on a "B" or "C" level team.

Sounds like the Association at hand may have to up the ice rates this year to buy participation ribbons for everyone!!!

[Can't Never Tried]

I think there is validity to Bylsma's dad's theory. Everyone plays evenly for almost the whole game, but "I like to win too" and the last 5 minutes are mine.

He advocates deviating from just rolling the lines in close games and tells everyone in advance. It doesn't come up each game and won't thwart the development of any kids.

This is where I don't like it.... why is any part of the 9yr olds game a place for the coach to satisfy his ego, I agree it will have little impact on their HOCKEY development.
But..
There is plenty of time ahead to learn the lesson that others are better then you, and it should only be used when in fact that's the long term reality, if the kid hasn't matured yet we all have agreed we really don't know how good he'll be, but we can agree on this that if he gets the message early on that he's not good enough we may never know how good he really may have been, because he may find something else. To me that's the bigger picture.

Balderdash! Coaches ego? Are you saying he can't pull his goalie either?

Your not choosing which goalie to pull

Poppycock! Even 9 year olds want to win, and they also want the best kids on the ice the last minute. Just ask them...

And what 3rd grader told you that ?

Always got a chime in with a contrary opinion don't cha !

[H-E-doublehockeysticks]

Practice is for development - games are for doing what it takes to win.

With the relative small amount of games teams get in the association season does it really matter if everyone plays an even amount? Tell me if I'm wrong but isn't the point of a game to do your best to WIN?

Here's exactly where I stand . . . in games - for the most part the kids should be played regularly BUT the best kids should be expected to play on the power plays, penalty kill and crucial end of the game situations - it's just how it should be. Most of the development takes place during practice anyway. The best players tend to be the ones that put in the extra work during the association year with development outside of the team (speed clinics, stick handling and dry land training to name a few). Not to mention they are also usually the ones that play AAA hockey during the "off season". Those are the kids that DESERVE to be in at crucial times - if that adds up to be more ice time and some longer shifts during the games then so be it. Instead of parents complaining about it and association boards changing rules to deal with it they need to EMBRACE IT! I see it as a good way to push the kids that aren't getting as much playing to to work harder thus making the team(s) better. Maybe it pushes those kids (and parents for that matter) to go get some specialized training so they have a chance to BE one of the top players that get the extra playing time. Heck, I think it would be unfair to the parents of the better players that spent their hard earned money to put their kids through some extra training to make their kid a top player if they DIDN'T get some extra playing time. What would be the point of the extra time and money otherwise?

Association hockey (at least mine) seems to be more like PARTICIPATION hockey - very few kids playing AAA - even kids that will be on our "A" teams. Maybe we need a rule for our "A" teams that require AAA participation or a minimum number of summer development hours before being considered for the "A" team. any other ideas out there?

Love to hear other opinions . . .

[tomASS]

Practice is for development - games are for doing what it takes to win.
Love to hear other opinions . . .

If you can't take what you learned in practice and transfer that into game situations where is the development?

You have to have game development to make the practice development worthwhile or else you are not developing the complete player. Especially at the Squirt and Pee Wee level.

[H-E-doublehockeysticks]

Practice is for development - games are for doing what it takes to win.
Love to hear other opinions . . .

If you can't take what you learned in practice and transfer that into game situations where is the development?

You have to have game development to make the practice development worthwhile or else you are not developing the complete player. Especially at the Squirt and Pee Wee level.

True - but you have to learn how to crawl before you can walk - if kids can't properly skate, pass, shoot or catch the puck no sense in putting them out there on the PK or PP. If they don't have the baseline skills of the top players they will just be going backwards if you try to play them in specialty situations. Plenty of time for them to learn that on a regular shift. That's more what I was thinking about - everything SHOULD NOT be equal until the lower end kids put in their time and catch up skill wise.