politics

inthestands · Post by **inthestands** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 9:54 am

The only problem we had was a coordinator attempting to talk an evaluator into adjusting the final rankings so a particular player of a friend of his (and someone he wanted to coach the team) could get on to the A team. This was not a rumor, nor was it heresay. As a matter of fact, that coordinator was voted out this past spring due to that very reason.

Glad to hear that problem was taken care of. It's no good when the kids pay for adult indiscretions.

SECoach · Post by **SECoach** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 2:25 pm

muckandgrind wrote:
SECoach wrote:Loud and over zealous parents do make up a small percentage of youth sports parents. They are also easy to identify and help.

Far greater harm is done by the parents that want to provide their opinion to their child regarding tryouts, games, practices, etc under the disguise of support and parenting. It's easy to say that "my son asks". That may be, but all too often its offered without being asked, and when they do ask it's seen as an invitation to coach away. There are some parents that would reply giving positive feedback as to how they felt they performed. You may be one of them but there are not many. Most will rant on about things their son or daughter should do better, or worse yet, compare them to others. They don't have to yell or negative. It still becomes white noise.

Muck, when you say there are a few bad apples, I would say this is where I disagree. I believe MANY parents become too involved with THEIR opinion and I've witnessed many players close their eyes and ears to coaching because they just can't take any more than they get on the ride home and at the dinner table.

The only thing closed tryouts take away is the parents ability to be uninformed and pollute the child with it. Oh yea, and they can't do an evaluation at the end of the season. I've never seen a hockey tryout where a kid missed the drills and only picked up pucks. I suppose the remote possibility outweighs the dramatic benifits of closed tryouts.

One last thing. Players clearly have a better practice and ENJOY their time on the ice when dad reads the paper and has a cup of coffee. Closed practices should be next.
Closed games after that??

I love how people want to tell others what is best for their children. I tell you what, if you don't want to watch your kid skate....DON'T!! Just don't tell the rest of us that we can't.

"Players clearly have a better practice" when dad is reading his paper, huh? And you know this HOW??? This is your opinion and is based on nothing more than that. Do you have any evidence that this is true?

In all honestly, I watch very few practices and to be really honest, I have not watched every tryout session my sons have been part of.....but I don't want someone telling me or other parents that we aren't allowed to watch OUR KIDS skate. The more someone tells me that I shouldn't watch, the more I want to watch. I ask myself, what are they hiding?

A good association will have a tryout policy in place. Most use independent evaluators, some use non-parent coaches to fill the teams. Most policies state that all placements are final and not subject to discussion. If all this exists, what is the harm with parents watching? Like I said before, as a parent, I'm ask to fill out a survey at the end of every season. As part of that survey, they are about five questions that pertain to the tryout process, if I'm barred from watching, how can I answer those questions? If enough parents provide low grades to the process, than it should be changed. What is wrong with that?

Personally, I don't have an issue with our tryout process, and I've never had an issue with how my kids have performed or which team they were placed on. But that doesn't mean that I believe the parents should be locked out. I have heard of many shenanighans that have occurred during the tryouts, and like I said before locking out the parents only breeds more mistrust that actually makes things worse.

After all my hard work on this respone, you reply only to the touch of sarcasm in the end regarding closed practices. I provided my answer to your question asking why tryouts SHOULD be closed. Why don't you respond to that?

In regard to how I beleive this to be true with closed practices? 24 years of coaching kids while they look over my shoulder to see if dad is watching, seeing them smile and have fun at practice when they are gone, but paint on the droopy "I'm not happy with they way I played today so you don't have to tell me dad" look on their face. Not fact, just my opinion.

You have a habit of asking questions and then ignoring the answers you get. This makes it hard to discuss and debate a topic in any positive way. Some of the most difficult parents are those that believe in their own minds that they are the gems, but they are apples none the less. Not all of them are viscious, most are not. Just uninformed and ignorant. Take another look at my response above. Does this fit anyone you know? Perhaps a few of the "good parents". Good intentioned yes, good results? Generally not.

inthestands · Post by **inthestands** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 7:32 am

SEC, You have a habit of asking questions and then ignoring the answers you get. This makes it hard to discuss and debate a topic in any positive way. Some of the most difficult parents are those that believe in their own minds that they are the gems, but they are apples none the less. Not all of them are viscious, most are not. Just uninformed and ignorant. Take another look at my response above. Does this fit anyone you know? Perhaps a few of the "good parents". Good intentioned yes, good results? Generally not.

This is some pretty keen insight right there..

muckandgrind · Post by **muckandgrind** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 7:46 am

SECoach wrote:
muckandgrind wrote:
SECoach wrote:Loud and over zealous parents do make up a small percentage of youth sports parents. They are also easy to identify and help.

Far greater harm is done by the parents that want to provide their opinion to their child regarding tryouts, games, practices, etc under the disguise of support and parenting. It's easy to say that "my son asks". That may be, but all too often its offered without being asked, and when they do ask it's seen as an invitation to coach away. There are some parents that would reply giving positive feedback as to how they felt they performed. You may be one of them but there are not many. Most will rant on about things their son or daughter should do better, or worse yet, compare them to others. They don't have to yell or negative. It still becomes white noise.

Muck, when you say there are a few bad apples, I would say this is where I disagree. I believe MANY parents become too involved with THEIR opinion and I've witnessed many players close their eyes and ears to coaching because they just can't take any more than they get on the ride home and at the dinner table.

The only thing closed tryouts take away is the parents ability to be uninformed and pollute the child with it. Oh yea, and they can't do an evaluation at the end of the season. I've never seen a hockey tryout where a kid missed the drills and only picked up pucks. I suppose the remote possibility outweighs the dramatic benifits of closed tryouts.

One last thing. Players clearly have a better practice and ENJOY their time on the ice when dad reads the paper and has a cup of coffee. Closed practices should be next.
Closed games after that??

I love how people want to tell others what is best for their children. I tell you what, if you don't want to watch your kid skate....DON'T!! Just don't tell the rest of us that we can't.

"Players clearly have a better practice" when dad is reading his paper, huh? And you know this HOW??? This is your opinion and is based on nothing more than that. Do you have any evidence that this is true?

In all honestly, I watch very few practices and to be really honest, I have not watched every tryout session my sons have been part of.....but I don't want someone telling me or other parents that we aren't allowed to watch OUR KIDS skate. The more someone tells me that I shouldn't watch, the more I want to watch. I ask myself, what are they hiding?

A good association will have a tryout policy in place. Most use independent evaluators, some use non-parent coaches to fill the teams. Most policies state that all placements are final and not subject to discussion. If all this exists, what is the harm with parents watching? Like I said before, as a parent, I'm ask to fill out a survey at the end of every season. As part of that survey, they are about five questions that pertain to the tryout process, if I'm barred from watching, how can I answer those questions? If enough parents provide low grades to the process, than it should be changed. What is wrong with that?

Personally, I don't have an issue with our tryout process, and I've never had an issue with how my kids have performed or which team they were placed on. But that doesn't mean that I believe the parents should be locked out. I have heard of many shenanighans that have occurred during the tryouts, and like I said before locking out the parents only breeds more mistrust that actually makes things worse.

After all my hard work on this respone, you reply only to the touch of sarcasm in the end regarding closed practices. I provided my answer to your question asking why tryouts SHOULD be closed. Why don't you respond to that?

In regard to how I beleive this to be true with closed practices? 24 years of coaching kids while they look over my shoulder to see if dad is watching, seeing them smile and have fun at practice when they are gone, but paint on the droopy "I'm not happy with they way I played today so you don't have to tell me dad" look on their face. Not fact, just my opinion.

You have a habit of asking questions and then ignoring the answers you get. This makes it hard to discuss and debate a topic in any positive way. Some of the most difficult parents are those that believe in their own minds that they are the gems, but they are apples none the less. Not all of them are viscious, most are not. Just uninformed and ignorant. Take another look at my response above. Does this fit anyone you know? Perhaps a few of the "good parents". Good intentioned yes, good results? Generally not.

I read your response and I disagree with much. Like I said, I also have many years of coaching experiences, and I can only count the number of times on one hand where I had a player who was genuinely negatively affected by his parents in the stand. The worst example, his parents were giving him hand signals, and to make matter worse, they had a specific hand signal when they wern't happy with how their son was playing. Worse yet, this occurred when this player was a Mite. Needless to say, as soon as I found out about it, I had a discussion with this parents and told them that I was the coach...not them. Not to long after that, they waived out of the association.

Other than that, I have found the majority of parents to be extremely suppotive of their kids. I have had parents ask me questions with regards to how I thought their kids were doing, and I had no problem engaging them in that respect.

I'm not sure where you coached, but I've never heard of a situation where the majority of parents caused problems. On most teams I coached, I could go into the season expecting that I might have one or two problem parents out of 17-18. Usually, I could find out who that parent was right away and nip the problem in the bud.

I see nothing wrong with parents wanting to watch their kid do something they enjoy. Heck, most parents I know enjoy watching their kids have fun.

inthestands · Post by **inthestands** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 8:11 am

I see nothing wrong with parents wanting to watch their kid do something they enjoy. Heck, most parents I know enjoy watching their kids have fun.

I don't think anyone would argue this point, but since the thread is about the tryout trials and tribulations many associations out there run into, that is the point some of the people are trying to maintain.

I had a discussion with this parents and told them that I was the coach...not them.

This is a similar discussion officials have with coaches during a game, only it goes something like this - You're the coach, I'm the ref, you worry about your teams play, I worry about calling the game. Got it, OK good.

Actually heard that one myself...

SECoach · Post by **SECoach** » Wed Jan 21, 2009 9:32 pm

Missed my point again...I'll try to be more clear. I don't beleive most parents are a problem in the stands. The problems occur at the dinner table and on the ride home. They may "instruct" in a positive manner they may not. Either can be just as harmful.

Its' a bit like when a doctor writes you a prescription for a medicine. It's suppose to be good for you, but too much can cause problems. In an effort to avoid drug interactions the doctor will ask what other medications you may be taking.

Coaches should be giving information in the correct doses. Every kid is different and the amount needed to make them better will vary from player to player. Too much can cause them to overdose. Too little and there is not enough effect. If a good coach pays attention, they will find they have to adjust the dose based on the other medications, I mean the amount of coaching they are getting elsewhere. Put simply, since the coach can rarely control the dose away from the rink, the coach has to adjust. Good parents adjust too. Way too many don't adjust and cause horrible overdoses. As I said earlier, even if the medication, i mean the advice and or criticism, is meant to do good, it is often misused.

If you don't look for these symtoms, you won't notice them and it will seem like the only problem are loud parents in the stands. If you take the players temperature on a regular basis you will find that many of them are ill and either about to overdose, or already in a coma.

We don't have any more troubling parents than anywhere else. We just try to dig deeper and offer parent and coaching education in an effort to create a successful atomosphere and experience for the kids.

Closed tryouts take away some of the possibilty of overdose during tryouts. The loud parent at tryouts is easy. You ask them to be quiet or leave. It's the ones that are not giving it in teaspoons, but are forcing their mouths open and pouring the whole bottle down their throats. If you have coached for a long time and don't see the players with a glazed over look in their eyes or a nervous twitch while they look at dad up in the stands then I'd respectufully suggest that you do an examination sometime.

northwoods oldtimer · Post by **northwoods oldtimer** » Thu Jan 22, 2009 8:37 am

Hit the nail on the head there SECoach with coaching today's youth hockey. Excellant post.

inthestands · Post by **inthestands** » Thu Jan 22, 2009 9:12 am

northwoods oldtimer wrote:Hit the nail on the head there SECoach with coaching today's youth hockey. Excellant post.

.

X's 2. Nuff said.

hockey relic · Post by **hockey relic** » Mon Jan 26, 2009 11:18 am

what?

edgeUcated · Post by **edgeUcated** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 10:26 am

SECoach nailed it on the head. I think if you polled kids (without dad or mom looking over their shoulder) they would be in favor of closed tryouts. Having coached and a parent in the stands, parents are not objective period (including me -- until you start to realize what the coach is looking for -- and coaches are different on what they want in a player). The biggest problem I see is that parents start to rip the other players and do so in front of their own kids.....so what happens when little johnny goes to school he repeats what dad said -- it becomes a bad recipe for tryouts. The parents that want it open typically are the parents who's kids are bubble (and trust me mine have always been bubble and some years make it and some years they didn't) and they think by watching they can somehow coach the kid at the dinner table to get them over the hump---It's just not healthy. Having played hockey thru the high school level, I learned early, just simply ask your child to give it their best because that it all HE/SHE can truly control. I just don't understand {open or closed tryouts} what as parents you think you can change outside of lighting up the tryout coordinator or coach evaluator when things don't turn out in "your" favor. Life is short, let the kids have fun, try their hardest and learn all the life sessions sports can prepare you for.

TerryMoore · Post by **TerryMoore** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 11:47 am

Something to remember:

Broadly speaking, coaches pick kids based on how good they are, how they fit into the team, what type of character they have and what their parents are like.

Coaches pick teams to win and to create a good team experience. Coaches have the right to not choose a kid or parent who will disrupt the experience. They have to live with these families all winter.

If your kid is often left off of the team he "should have made" based on his ability, take a close look at his and your own behavior around the rink. You might find the answer.

Of course, it could be that you have a great kid who is just not quite good enough to make the team. Keep working!

netminder.net · Post by **netminder.net** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 12:01 pm

edgeUcated wrote;

SECoach nailed it on the head. I think if you polled kids (without dad or mom looking over their shoulder) they would be in favor of closed tryouts.

Our association did just that! The first year they closed tryouts they took "informal" polls of the kids to ask what they thought. No pencil, no paper or anything. The overwhelming majority liked it. I am sure there could be reasons why some "voted" they way they did, and I don't want to argue the validity of the poll, but I think the players prefer it without "us" there.

muckandgrind · Post by **muckandgrind** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 12:35 pm

netminder.net wrote:edgeUcated wrote;
SECoach nailed it on the head. I think if you polled kids (without dad or mom looking over their shoulder) they would be in favor of closed tryouts.
Our association did just that! The first year they closed tryouts they took "informal" polls of the kids to ask what they thought. No pencil, no paper or anything. The overwhelming majority liked it. I am sure there could be reasons why some "voted" they way they did, and I don't want to argue the validity of the poll, but I think the players prefer it without "us" there.

I'd be interested to know what the "poll question" was...did they ask ALL the kids, or just a few? Was it an objective or leading questions?

It's my opinion that most kids don't really care whether or not their parents watch. From my experience as a player, it didn't bother me one bit. Of course, I can't speak for everybody, just like the few who are against open tryouts shouldn't speak for everyone, either.

Like I said before, I'm against anything that's done in secret. Especially, when our association has run into issues with a coordinator manipulating tryout results to get the teams put together the way HE wanted them instead of the way the independant evaluators scored them. If the tryout was done in secret, he may very well have gotten away with it and still be our coordinator. It's my opinion that transparency is the best solution.

play4fun · Post by **play4fun** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 1:04 pm

Between SECoach and TMoore, a lot of good common sense.

MandG, a couple of questions for you since you seem to be passionate about this issue.

In your opinion, should outside evaluators be used to ensure objectivity? Should their opinions be used exclusively? Weighted more than those of the association's coaches? Should the coaches have any say in who is selected for a given team?

Or, should the coaches be handcuffed into whatever the evaluators' scoring indicates?

Or, is your real concern over whether parents should have a say in who either the evaluators or the coaches select?

If you're central issue is secrecy, simply publish what the outside evaluators scores were. No secrecy issues with that. Maybe allow a couple of coaches selections, up or down, based on the scoring.

To quote you, if the "kids really don't care whether or not their parents watch," then closed tryouts, with fewer distractions for the kids, coaches, and evaluators make sense.

Maybe the parents care more than the kids???

muckandgrind · Post by **muckandgrind** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:27 pm

play4fun wrote:Between SECoach and TMoore, a lot of good common sense.

MandG, a couple of questions for you since you seem to be passionate about this issue.

In your opinion, should outside evaluators be used to ensure objectivity? Should their opinions be used exclusively? Weighted more than those of the association's coaches? Should the coaches have any say in who is selected for a given team?

Or, should the coaches be handcuffed into whatever the evaluators' scoring indicates?

Or, is your real concern over whether parents should have a say in who either the evaluators or the coaches select?

If you're central issue is secrecy, simply publish what the outside evaluators scores were. No secrecy issues with that. Maybe allow a couple of coaches selections, up or down, based on the scoring.

To quote you, if the "kids really don't care whether or not their parents watch," then closed tryouts, with fewer distractions for the kids, coaches, and evaluators make sense.

Maybe the parents care more than the kids???

Here's what I think:

At the "A" levels, non-parent coaches should be required. If the association deems that coach qualified, I think they should be allowed to pick their own teams. If that non-parent coach has no ties to the players or parents, than I think it's fair to trust that their only motivation is to pick the players they feel will give their team the best chance to succeed. Indendent evaluators should also be involved as to place the B and C level players. B coaches should probably have the ability to pick the last player or two on their roster.

If non-parent coaches are not hired, than the evaluators should pick the top players and allow the parent coach to pick the bottom five players, but the players they pick must be within a predetermined ranking area. For example, if the coach picks five players, those players must fall within the next ten as ranked by the evaluators. Of course, this is all assuming that the coach's son/daughter is in the top group. If that player is not in the top group, than you run into a sticky situation....which is why non-parent coaches are the best solution, IMO.

If an association isn't willing to go with the non-parent coach. Then they should allow a predetermined parent(s) to sit in the evaluator room when the players are ranked and the teams are formed. For instance, you could have a Bantam parent sit in the room for the PeeWees, and PeeWee parent sit in with the Squirts, etc. Obviously, that parent can not have a player who is involved in the discussion. Having another person witnessing what is happening, would obviously inhibit any type of skull-duggery when it comes to picking teams.

netminder.net · Post by **netminder.net** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 2:57 pm

muck, I think we have "agreed to disagree" on this topic in the past. One of the reasons I made the disclaimer about the informal poll, is because I was sure someone would question the means buy which it was offered.

I'd be interested to know what the "poll question" was...did they ask ALL the kids, or just a few? Was it an objective or leading questions?

Of course, we (parents) weren't there, due to the fact the tryouts were closed. I got the info from my player. He told me they asked the entire locker room (20 per group) in a "show of hands". At the time he said "it must have been at least 60%, like 18 of the twenty kids" His struggles with math continue to this day. They did this with all three groups, each day (3 days). They also did it with all levels. I spoke with many parents after this to find out if this happened with thier player as well, it did, with similar results. Again, I was not personally involved in the questioning, nor does the association use this as any sort of advertisment for closed tryouts, but I seriously doubt the questions were "loaded".
After reading many of your posts on this, and similar threads, I understand that you enjoy being there for these events, as did I. I am by no means against open tryouts, what I am against is the theory that if they were open, all of the secrets would be revealed. A few times, with no success, I have asked the question "would a situation be different if parents could watch?" Of all of the horror stories I have seen, or read about regarding tryouts, all of the problems came once the teams were announced. Typically these problems are created when someone didn't make the team they were expecting to make, or even worse when a perceived lesser player did. Well, tryouts are essentially over by then, how would being in attendance help in these situations?
Other stories involving outward changing of results, placing friends on the team, ect.. If these situations are as blatant as suggested, they would have come to light regardless if mom/dad were there, or not.
Being able to attend the tryout sesion to "police" what is going on does not hold water.

play4fun · Post by **play4fun** » Wed Jan 28, 2009 3:20 pm

MandG, that's helpful in understanding your position on the evaluation process, and I don't disagree with your concerns and suggestions for addressing them.

If the safeguards you mention are in place, do you still object to closed-session tryouts? If non-parents are involved, or oversee the process, do you take the same position in favor of open vs. closed tryouts?

I only ask, because I've heard too many parents criticize virtually every aspect of tryouts when they've been open, right down to which drills/scrimmage formats/times of day were involved. Unfortunately, parents don't always complain outside the hearing of their kids, and can cause the kids to question whether or not they were treated fairly or not -- and set them up for a negative attitude toward the season -- rather than either celebrating, or quickly moving past their tryout experience. For those reasons among others, I favor closed tryouts, if only to quiet some of the negativity surrounding a time of both celebration, and disappointment for many kids.

I agree that the process should be "open" enough to avoid blatant favoritism, but how best to accomplish that will vary from association to association.
[/quote]

penaltyshot · Post by **penaltyshot** » Sat Jan 31, 2009 11:34 pm

judgeandjury, what association are you talking about? Was the coach a parent coach? If the coach u are talking about was a parent coach then I doubt they had any influence on picking anyone. I believe that many associations that involve 5-6 people (boardmembers) in the process are fair and give no favors. Look at your associations process, if they involve board members look where their kids fell. I know a couple that board members kids obviously got no favors, by their response and their placement. I have read many of your posts on the same subject. U sound like a typical complainer. Same tune, "I know" is a dead give-away to "I know nothing", I just need to stir trouble. Let the kids play.

Judgeandjury · Post by **Judgeandjury** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 5:12 pm

penaltyshot wrote:judgeandjury, what association are you talking about? Was the coach a parent coach? If the coach u are talking about was a parent coach then I doubt they had any influence on picking anyone. I believe that many associations that involve 5-6 people (boardmembers) in the process are fair and give no favors. Look at your associations process, if they involve board members look where their kids fell. I know a couple that board members kids obviously got no favors, by their response and their placement. I have read many of your posts on the same subject. U sound like a typical complainer. Same tune, "I know" is a dead give-away to "I know nothing", I just need to stir trouble. Let the kids play.

Penalty- No names. There's no doubt that politics happen in each and every association. Human Nature. If speaking the truth is complaining then I'm guilty as charged. I agree let the kids play. No need for parents to ruin a good thing. Right?

penaltyshot · Post by **penaltyshot** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 11:08 pm

Judge, I agree that there must be cases of wrong doing around, however being involved, most are not well founded. Typically, either a higher opinion from a parent or just one that no matter what happens there will always be a problem. All I have read from a previous post of yours was how a coach had a parent sucking up by holding their child, thus they must have picked their child ahead of others? No facts there, do you have more?

I always feel if a tryout is fair there will be a surprise or two, evaluating is not perfect but hopefully fair to all. Good luck.

keepmeoutofit · Post by **keepmeoutofit** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 11:15 pm

no one has said they had this experience. but our association has some meddling parents in every level. goalie parents seem to be the worst. i've never been to a tryout but have heard players say they wish some other kids parents weren't there. one or two parents throwing their weigh around can effect more than just their own kids

justagirl · Post by **justagirl** » Tue Feb 10, 2009 9:53 pm

I'm curious to hear what people think of the way youth hockey is organized and ran in Eveleth.

thebigman · Post by **thebigman** » Wed Apr 08, 2009 10:27 pm

[quote="Judgeandjury"]Wanted to know what everyone thinks about the politicians within associations? We have a Mom and Dad that does nothing but campaining for his kids to play on the best teams. They were a treat to watch at squirt tryouts this year. You would think the Dad was running for political office. Shaking hands, hugs and smiles all around. Another dad was holding the squirt A coaches baby during tryouts getting favorable points from the coaches wife. It was a treat to watch the _ss kissers at work.

This is all for fun. Any stories?[/quote]

not much different than what what you do!

drop the puck · Post by **drop the puck** » Thu Apr 09, 2009 9:04 am

What you see during try-outs is just the tip of the ice berg. The real politics, manuvering, and butt kissing goes on from the end of the past season if not year around.

You would be surprised at what is discussed, who calls who during the summer, etc.... plenty of backdoor selling and politics ...

Plenty of potential and/or named A coaches have a roster penciled in-place before try-outs. Fine if a paid coach that has held that position for awhile, but what if they are a parent-coach?

Hockey is no different than careers, city / state politics, business, it is just that you are "potentially messing" with people's children and that gets them really upset.

InigoMontoya · Post by **InigoMontoya** » Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:23 am

Fewer parents would vocalize complaints if you put a high-profile, powerful (peeweeA, bantamA) coach in charge of player development, in charge of assigning all coaches to all teams, in charge of the tryouot/selection process, including placing friends and relatives on the evaluation committees. Parents would also increase interest in placing their children in that persons summer development program. The association would also not have to bother with finding another coach or evaluating the direction of the program when that individual only managed to win 2 or 3 games a year. Just put one guy in charge and put your feet up.

HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

politics

Coaching Today

Re: Coaching Today

seCoach nailed it

The politics of Eveleth Hockey

Re: politics