Go Games - Good or bad - discuss...

[03,05,08]

There's loads of examples of footballers who weren't talented or had limited ability at underage going on to play Senior County football. Even Tyrone I think Meyler and Hampsey played very little county underage football. Ricey could be another. I have seen ordinary enough kids at 7, 8 and 9 go on become excellent players in u15 and 17 teams. They develop not just ability wise but physically as well.
I also remember loads of lads from School who you would have thought they will go on and be superstars and it just never happened. Some didn't even play senior club football. They maybe had a physical advantage at 10 or 11 that disappeared over time and their ability didn't develop. 

I agree it is hard at that young age, kids want to win and you want them to win so they're happy and they enjoy it, but there is a bigger picture and as coaches we have a responsibility to all the children no matter their ability or behaviour which is probably a bigger problem.

Hampsey was minor captain when they won an Ulster in 2012 and was full back on the All Ireland U21 winning team in 2015. Not sure about Meyler at county minor level but have seen in interviews saying he was playing for Omagh B teams at younger age groups so your broader point is true enough. I'd be pretty confident that you're not going to lose lads because you don't keep the score at u8/10/12 but you will 100% lose lads that are sat on the sidelines watching every week that barely get a kick.

Meyler was an omagh B for the minors when he was about 15, wasn't a superstar when he was young but he wasn't the lowly player he makes out now. I remember him being on macrory teams when he was 17.

[Itchy]

So HQ have dropped the big hammer on competitive club juvenile tournaments.

Knew it was coming but I'm disappointed.

We'd a good thing going in Down at u11.5. Non competitive leagues that allow teams to develop their weaker players, and a handful of club tournaments running concurrently, to allow the more developed and competitive players to test themselves fully.

There's so many kids at 11 years old who want to push themselves and win things, and now they can't. Not in Gaelic games anyway.

Developing the weak at the expense of the strong is a muddled strategy for any sport.

The more I think about this, it just reeks of "I don't care if your Johnny doesn't get anything out of our sport, so long as my Johnny doesn't hate it".

Well if you define kids as "weak" and "strong" at U11 then you are already a dinosaur I'm afraid. An absolutely ridiculous thing to do for so many reasons I could fill a page with.

[thewobbler]

Go for it Itchy.

I'd be particularly interested in learning how you would run coaching sessions for 11 year old boys without regularly identifying "weaker" and "stronger" players to pair off with each other.

[restorepride]

So HQ have dropped the big hammer on competitive club juvenile tournaments.

Knew it was coming but I'm disappointed.

We'd a good thing going in Down at u11.5. Non competitive leagues that allow teams to develop their weaker players, and a handful of club tournaments running concurrently, to allow the more developed and competitive players to test themselves fully.

There's so many kids at 11 years old who want to push themselves and win things, and now they can't. Not in Gaelic games anyway.

Developing the weak at the expense of the strong is a muddled strategy for any sport.

The more I think about this, it just reeks of "I don't care if your Johnny doesn't get anything out of our sport, so long as my Johnny doesn't hate it".

Well if you define kids as "weak" and "strong" at U11 then you are already a dinosaur I'm afraid. An absolutely ridiculous thing to do for so many reasons I could fill a page with.

Sounds like the 11+!!

[tbrick18]

Not a fan of tournaments myself at that age, u12 and up is soon enough imo.
I wonder does this same rule apply to primary schools?
They regularly play in tournaments for cups. Whilst I do t agree, it needs to be consistent across the age levels.

[marty34]

Not a fan of tournaments myself at that age, u12 and up is soon enough imo.
I wonder does this same rule apply to primary schools?
They regularly play in tournaments for cups. Whilst I do t agree, it needs to be consistent across the age levels.

I agree.

Issue is how will the GAA police it?

[Whishtup]

I find the underage girls coaching is a good environment for bringing a whole team of varied abilities along. There's definitely more testosterone flying around with underage boys coaching and a lot of giving out/whinging by coaches on the sideline. Way more constant shouting from the sidelines than I remember when I was underage. Sometimes I lstop any shouting, even encouragement for five minutes to see how they fair out and they seem to bring their own intensity for that period.  Every game is competitive by nature but we should avoid parading youth teams as competition winners, blitz winners-it's no good. There are some cracking youth players who need to know how to use their team mates, whose team mates need to feel like they are part of the team, no matter what the ability. It's amazing what a small spark of confidence can grow into.  Is it true that they don't keep the score in underage italian soccer?

[Minus15]

I don't like the new ruling. There seems to be a thought that clubs around the country are alienating players and not giving everyone a fair crack. In my experience as a coach the last few years that's not the case.

In Down we have a series of go games dates set out with a variety of clubs every 2-3 weeks from April to September.

We generally spread our players across 2 teams to ensure a degree of competitiveness across the board. As a result our stronger players rarely get to play together all at the same time.

The odd tournament where teams can truly test themselves against other clubs is only good for the players in my opinion. The young ones love it and it brings out that bit extra in them.

There seems to be more effort into catering for the weaker player at the expense of the stronger players.

I just don't buy into there being no place for competition at all. If can be beneficial.

I think it is more important to have players playing at their level and developing them there.
At the youngest age there are huge disparities in the ability levels for various reasons.
There are ways and means to cater for all and the answer isn't to ban competition.

[Armagh18]

Jesus give players a chance at winning something. Life is shit, life is tough there are winners and losers. This pansy attitude won't get kids too far.

[Milltown Row2]

Jesus give players a chance at winning something. Life is shit, life is tough there are winners and losers. This pansy attitude won't get kids too far.

There are thousands of kids who never played any competitive sport who do well enough in life.

[Rudi]

I take it, no more Newry Mitchells U12 National competition. Which was excellent, very well run. The odd competition at U12 level is certainly no harm, even at U10. Probably lose more lads to other sports now.

[Mourne Red]

I think u12 is a good age to start for winning/losing - End of the day it's life experience and youngsters these days hate losing look at them playing other sports or video games (Fortnite/FIFA etc) but they pick up the controller and get on with the next game if they lose same they will do in Football. If they enjoy the activity they will keep coming back.

Issue is parents/coaches who think winning is everything and will curse a ref out, parents rowing with other parents at matches or shout at young players when they do something wrong. . I've had to turn round in the sideline and parent parents along the sideline and tell them to catch themselves on and what example are they setting - they usually shut up out of embarrassment getting told off.

Coached teams from u10s/u11s to minors and competitions in training everyone wants to win and they always had fun in them, penalty comps/free taking, sprints/shooting - but that toxicity that's along the sideline at senior games trickles down through the age groups and what child is going to want to keep playing if they keep getting shouted at. 

[marty34]

I think u12 is a good age to start for winning/losing - End of the day it's life experience and youngsters these days hate losing look at them playing other sports or video games (Fortnite/FIFA etc) but they pick up the controller and get on with the next game if they lose same they will do in Football. If they enjoy the activity they will keep coming back.

Issue is parents/coaches who think winning is everything and will curse a ref out, parents rowing with other parents at matches or shout at young players when they do something wrong. . I've had to turn round in the sideline and parent parents along the sideline and tell them to catch themselves on and what example are they setting - they usually shut up out of embarrassment getting told off.

Coached teams from u10s/u11s to minors and competitions in training everyone wants to win and they always had fun in them, penalty comps/free taking, sprints/shooting - but that toxicity that's along the sideline at senior games trickles down through the age groups and what child is going to want to keep playing if they keep getting shouted at.

So the issue is the parents rather than the children?

That's a fair comment.

Why  not have a silent sideline?  That might work.

[Milltown Row2]

We've been running the May day tournament for decades at our club, great event for P5's, teams from all over the country and even American teams have taken part in it. This year was the first time we had to follow the new guidelines and while we had full attendances I'd say it will be of less prestige given how the go-games format is done.

It may change some managers approach to 'competitions' in the future, more emphasis on getting competitive games with clubs than entering tournaments

I suppose I'm old school and don't see personally anything wrong with winning and losing, thats just me, in my day you didn't have many parents turning up at undrerage games to be fair, not to the extent it is now, so screaming parents at games is a new thing

[marty34]

I don't like the new ruling. There seems to be a thought that clubs around the country are alienating players and not giving everyone a fair crack. In my experience as a coach the last few years that's not the case.

In Down we have a series of go games dates set out with a variety of clubs every 2-3 weeks from April to September.

We generally spread our players across 2 teams to ensure a degree of competitiveness across the board. As a result our stronger players rarely get to play together all at the same time.

The odd tournament where teams can truly test themselves against other clubs is only good for the players in my opinion. The young ones love it and it brings out that bit extra in them.

There seems to be more effort into catering for the weaker player at the expense of the stronger players.

I just don't buy into there being no place for competition at all. If can be beneficial.

I think it is more important to have players playing at their level and developing them there.
At the youngest age there are huge disparities in the ability levels for various reasons.
There are ways and means to cater for all and the answer isn't to ban competition.

Well argued point there.  It's a trcky one.

Will lads/lassies go to other sports moreso now?

Kids are competitive regardless.  Even if you don't keep the score, they do! They'll tell you at the end who's winning.

At, say U12, the better developed players moving up a grade to get competitive games.

As I said before, Go Games are usually played 12-15 times a year excluding the one off games with other clubs during the season also. Say in total 50 games (Go Games with maybe 4 games each day).  That's all mixed ability and is great for development.

The odd competition thrown in towards the end of the year doesn't do much harm in my opinion. Gives clubs an idea of where they're at in comparsion to other teams. As the ratio of Go Games to tournaments is fine.