Under 8's / 10's query

[johnneycool]

We had 35+ kids (boys and girls) at U-8 level last year so we decided to split them and run two squads. We split them as equally as we could in terms of age and ability. We let the other clubs know we were doing this and most co-operated and brought as many as they could and rotated properly etc and gave everyone game time. Occasionally you'd run into a crowd who would arrive with their 10 to 12 best boys only and end up scratching your head. Really hard to bite the tongue but it had to be done.

Seen that happen alright. We'd generally try and balance both teams to be fair - good mix of the better players and the weaker.

Have seen some clubs land with everyone but pack one team and have another team who can't keep it kicked out. In a supposed non-competitive environment its so fustrating and a few comments have been passed if truth been told.

I have been to a few underage blitzes recently where something similar has happened, some clubs split the A's and B's into equal strengths and others have a loaded A team and weak B team. The problem then lies with each section is set up so all the A teams are together and all the B teams are together.

This leads to mismatches in both sections where strong A sections dominate but the B squad from the same club are taking big beatings in the other section. No one wins IMO.

There are two possible solutions, all clubs distribute their good/lesser players evenly, making the games more evenly balanced, but even at that the strong players can dominate.
       
or all clubs pick a strong A and weaker B.

That way A players are up against equal quality players, less likely to see players dominate and the B's in theory will be better matched and be more competitive.

Either way clubs need to be doing the same thing to keep the thing interesting for the children as ultimately who gives a shit if they win in some u-8, u-10 blitz or go games??

[The Gs Man]

Thanks for the replies lads. Looks like it varies across Counties.

Has your County Board set the age rule or does it just depend on the rules set down by the club hosting the Blitz/Games?

The Down county board changed it to primary school year last year, some of the reasons being that you didn't have a separation of school friends at underage level which could lead to losing some children if their mates weren't going to the same training as them, and that Armagh clubs were Primary School year. With the increasing number of blitzes being open to both counties, it was decided that it was fairer if all clubs were playing like for like.
I think this took about five years to get county board approval, although some clubs took the issue into their own hands long before that.

In North Antrim its typically been P3/P4 and P5/P6 with the P5/6 transitioning to birth year U10 later in the year. Some clubs though have kept organising their teams by calendar year and now there's some pressure to revert

I believe the reason above in bold was the considered factor. I'd agree with this approach. Big difference in a child's mind between a P4 and a P6 yet playing birth years brings this about, so before they've really learned the skills of the games there's a big risk that you'll put them off before they get started.
This age should be 95% all about keep as many youngsters playing as possible. There's always going to be weak players and I think its important that there's enough slack to allow lads like this to gain confidence competing at an ability level they find achievable.

As others have said, the half wits will always ruin that type of fair minded principle

SW Antrim play class years as well

Skull, we played in the Aldergrove Go Games the past few years and it has been at birth year.  There's a possibility it may not be happening this year and we could be going into SW which, as you say, is based on class years.

 

[theskull1]

or all clubs pick a strong A and weaker B.

That way A players are up against equal quality players, less likely to see players dominate and the B's in theory will be better matched and be more competitive.

Either way clubs need to be doing the same thing to keep the thing interesting for the children as ultimately who gives a shit if they win in some u-8, u-10 blitz or go games??

If all clubs can bring enough for 2 teams, I'd prefer the strong and weak team who play in 2 different sections. Keeps the ability level tighter.

[AZOffaly]

or all clubs pick a strong A and weaker B.

That way A players are up against equal quality players, less likely to see players dominate and the B's in theory will be better matched and be more competitive.

Either way clubs need to be doing the same thing to keep the thing interesting for the children as ultimately who gives a shit if they win in some u-8, u-10 blitz or go games??

If all clubs can bring enough for 2 teams, I'd prefer the strong and weak team who play in 2 different sections. Keeps the ability level tighter.

Problem is in most small clubs they can only bring one team, which is a mixture. So maybe you put them in B, but then they always have a few handy lads that can run a game like that. I think mixing the teams is the way to go.

[theskull1]

No ideal solution AZ...the important thing is not give too much of a fook where they go as long as everyone is well intentioned and interested in every clubs players developing at this age rather than laying down markers.

Not always the case

[AZOffaly]

No ideal solution AZ...the important thing is not give too much of a fook where they go as long as everyone is well intentioned and interested in every clubs players developing at this age rather than laying down markers.

Not always the case

True, but I do prefer that the kids have as even a match as we can. I don't give a continental who wins

[Bingo]

No ideal solution AZ...the important thing is not give too much of a fook where they go as long as everyone is well intentioned and interested in every clubs players developing at this age rather than laying down markers.

Not always the case

The whole rules and set up of the Go Games/First Touch blitzs are to ensure that strong players don't dominate a team/game and that everyone gets a touch and takes part. So this should be the case.

We've actually a good system in Monaghan for U12 games - the game is played in 3 parts but only the first two parts actually count towards the final score. In the third part everyone gets a game, so that subs who may not get a run in a game will get playing every week. Works well.

[Zulu]

In Britain it's a bit different but I'd support most of what's been said. We would always allow a few overage players if it's necessary to field a team or even if it helped balance up a game as quality can vary greatly over here.

I think there is no set way of doing it and there shouldn't be. As long as the coaches of all the clubs involved have the kids best interests at heart then you should be fine. I tend to use mixed teams and teams based on ability and again, I would argue, this is the best way forward. As long as clubs all play mixed teams and then match teams based on ability then every player should have a positive experience.

[magpie seanie]

In Britain it's a bit different but I'd support most of what's been said. We would always allow a few overage players if it's necessary to field a team or even if it helped balance up a game as quality can vary greatly over here.

I think there is no set way of doing it and there shouldn't be. As long as the coaches of all the clubs involved have the kids best interests at heart then you should be fine. I tend to use mixed teams and teams based on ability and again, I would argue, this is the best way forward. As long as clubs all play mixed teams and then match teams based on ability then every player should have a positive experience.

I agree completely! First time for everything Zulu!

[Bingo]

In Britain it's a bit different but I'd support most of what's been said. We would always allow a few overage players if it's necessary to field a team or even if it helped balance up a game as quality can vary greatly over here.

I think there is no set way of doing it and there shouldn't be. As long as the coaches of all the clubs involved have the kids best interests at heart then you should be fine. I tend to use mixed teams and teams based on ability and again, I would argue, this is the best way forward. As long as clubs all play mixed teams and then match teams based on ability then every player should have a positive experience.

Cheats 

[Zulu]

Ah Seanie, we agree on a lot of things. We just strongly disagree on one or two things!! But sure it'd be dull around here if we didn't have the odd toys out of the pram, feet stomping, my Da would batter your Da type of arguments! No harm ever meant.

[BarryBreensBandage]

I wish we were competing in the same utopian u8 and u10 blitzes as you guys are!

Case in point - we have a team that went up through u8, u10 and are now u12. Every other year they have been very strong as they are at the normal age and not playing a year above them. Two years ago when they were a younger u10 side, we were invited to every blitz going and got walloped by the stronger teams with bigger numbers. Last year, when we would have been known to be strong, we were invited to just two u10 blitzes - not kidding you. And we were given no reason for this; the management of the team holding the blitz purposefully left us out!

And to answer, who gives a toss about the results? The kids do. And this bollix about not keeping score, the first thing the teams will ask you if you are refereeing is "who won"?

It is very tough to watch a young team at that age going through the season without a win. And we stick to the rules of age groups. That's why it winds me up when I see teams fielding older players in their age group. We field with what we have got, if we held some of them back, we would have no u10 team at all this year!

[theskull1]

I wish we were competing in the same utopian u8 and u10 blitzes as you guys are!

Case in point - we have a team that went up through u8, u10 and are now u12. Every other year they have been very strong as they are at the normal age and not playing a year above them. Two years ago when they were a younger u10 side, we were invited to every blitz going and got walloped by the stronger teams with bigger numbers. Last year, when we would have been known to be strong, we were invited to just two u10 blitzes - not kidding you. And we were given no reason for this; the management of the team holding the blitz purposefully left us out!

And to answer, who gives a toss about the results? The kids do. And this bollix about not keeping score, the first thing the teams will ask you if you are refereeing is "who won"?

It is very tough to watch a young team at that age going through the season without a win. And we stick to the rules of age groups. That's why it winds me up when I see teams fielding older players in their age group. We field with what we have got, if we held some of them back, we would have no u10 team at all this year!

Maybe you should help create it BBB?

And the bit about the score not being kept being a load of oul bollix ....well.... let the kids do the maths if they want but its important that the kids learns that the adults dont get to hot and bothered about win or losing but are more interested in them learning to play and enjoy the game.

[Hound]

But again, why would you really care at that age? A 9 year old playing with 8s might win the game, but a) who cares and b) why would you bother if you didn't need to make up numbers.

That's how sensible people think. A lot of people are not sensible.

That's completely understandable, but I think it can be dangerous to get into a habit of continually letting lads play while overage. It should be really a rare exception where you pick someone out as not being good enough to play in their own age group

When it comes to keeping score and keeping tables, which I think is U12 in Dublin, then a line has to be drawn. Playing an overage player is just cheating, no matter what excuse you might convince yourself of.

[theskull1]

Dangerous at 8 or 9.....
Really?