3 ms·

My daughter's second grade team would come to the own-goal conclusion within about 3 minutes of being told this rule. Winning within the confines of the rules

by mrkurt 16y ago

My daughter's second grade team would come to the own-goal conclusion within about 3 minutes of being told this rule. Winning within the confines of the rules is a very big part of sports. :)

raganwald 16y ago
Well, I imagine this view is unpopular in a community devoted to hacking, but winning has very little to do with the value of sports. As a referee, I would yellow-card a youth who deliberately scored an own-goal to attempt to circumvent a rule designed to encourage fair play. It isn't, well, sporting. Of course, I prefer Ultimate, where "SOTG" is part of the basic ethos and the game is played without referees. I don't play organized hockey and I'm in no hurry to introduce my kids to it. I've heard too many horror stories about parents and coaches who believe that winning is the only reason to play.
- bh42 16y ago
  This may be just me but I've found Ultimate players to be by far the most competitive. It is almost as if people who know they have a problem are self selecting for a sport that is the most restraining in that particular way.
- garyrichardson 16y ago
  Winning is important. It's why I go to the field. It is what gives sport value. Without the opportunity to prove I'm the best, I might as well go for a quiet walk. That doesn't mean 'win at all costs,' but it does mean you need to teach kids why a level playing field is important. I don't think a 5 point auto-win rule is the right way to do this. Referrers are coming to Ultimate. It turns out than in practice, you need them in top games. There's too much room for abuse. Look at the recent College championship for an example. The winning team did it by calling 'cheap' fouls. SOTG is still valid with referees -- there are no punishments in ultimate for breaking the rules (except for offsides). Everyone is supposed to be playing without the intent of breaking the rules and that's the difference between ultimate and other sports right now.
  - raganwald 16y ago
    > Winning is important. It's why I go to the field. It is what gives sport value. Without the opportunity to prove I'm the best, I might as well go for a quiet walk. Winning is important to you. But not to others. many of us find other reasons to train, to suffer, to strive, and to enjoy a unique camaraderie with our fellow players. > The winning team did it by calling 'cheap' fouls. In what sense did they "win?" Why stop at cheap calls, why not trash your opponent's sleeping bags so they can't sleep the night before the finals? How about trash talking them so that they're too upset to play their best? Maybe 'accidentally' stomp a downed player's throwing hand? All of these things value the score above proving you are the best at anything except being able to limbo lower and lower under the minimum bar of civility. Such actions cheat everyone, including the people who 'won.' Now they'll never enjoy what you say you value, proving they are the best. Maybe they were the best, maybe they weren't. They'll never know. Back to youth soccer. In this particular case, we aren't even really talking about winning, we're talking about a rule that you aren't to win by more than five goals and a team choosing to score on their own net to "win." Honestly, if I took the field and someone did that, I would join you on a quiet walk and leave them to enjoy their "win" alone. That is neither winning nor losing soccer, it's something from a parallel universe where all that matters are some little black marks on a white piece of paper that gets tacked up on a bulletin board somewhere.
- philwelch 16y ago
  "If winning is not important, then Commander, why keep score?" --Lt. Worf

by mrkurt 16y ago

My daughter's second grade team would come to the own-goal conclusion within about 3 minutes of being told this rule. Winning within the confines of the rules is a very big part of sports. :)

raganwald 16y ago

Well, I imagine this view is unpopular in a community devoted to hacking, but winning has very little to do with the value of sports. As a referee, I would yellow-card a youth who deliberately scored an own-goal to attempt to circumvent a rule designed to encourage fair play. It isn't, well, sporting. Of course, I prefer Ultimate, where "SOTG" is part of the basic ethos and the game is played without referees. I don't play organized hockey and I'm in no hurry to introduce my kids to it. I've heard too many horror stories about parents and coaches who believe that winning is the only reason to play.

bh42 16y ago
This may be just me but I've found Ultimate players to be by far the most competitive. It is almost as if people who know they have a problem are self selecting for a sport that is the most restraining in that particular way.
garyrichardson 16y ago
Winning is important. It's why I go to the field. It is what gives sport value. Without the opportunity to prove I'm the best, I might as well go for a quiet walk. That doesn't mean 'win at all costs,' but it does mean you need to teach kids why a level playing field is important. I don't think a 5 point auto-win rule is the right way to do this. Referrers are coming to Ultimate. It turns out than in practice, you need them in top games. There's too much room for abuse. Look at the recent College championship for an example. The winning team did it by calling 'cheap' fouls. SOTG is still valid with referees -- there are no punishments in ultimate for breaking the rules (except for offsides). Everyone is supposed to be playing without the intent of breaking the rules and that's the difference between ultimate and other sports right now.
- raganwald 16y ago
  > Winning is important. It's why I go to the field. It is what gives sport value. Without the opportunity to prove I'm the best, I might as well go for a quiet walk. Winning is important to you. But not to others. many of us find other reasons to train, to suffer, to strive, and to enjoy a unique camaraderie with our fellow players. > The winning team did it by calling 'cheap' fouls. In what sense did they "win?" Why stop at cheap calls, why not trash your opponent's sleeping bags so they can't sleep the night before the finals? How about trash talking them so that they're too upset to play their best? Maybe 'accidentally' stomp a downed player's throwing hand? All of these things value the score above proving you are the best at anything except being able to limbo lower and lower under the minimum bar of civility. Such actions cheat everyone, including the people who 'won.' Now they'll never enjoy what you say you value, proving they are the best. Maybe they were the best, maybe they weren't. They'll never know. Back to youth soccer. In this particular case, we aren't even really talking about winning, we're talking about a rule that you aren't to win by more than five goals and a team choosing to score on their own net to "win." Honestly, if I took the field and someone did that, I would join you on a quiet walk and leave them to enjoy their "win" alone. That is neither winning nor losing soccer, it's something from a parallel universe where all that matters are some little black marks on a white piece of paper that gets tacked up on a bulletin board somewhere.
philwelch 16y ago
"If winning is not important, then Commander, why keep score?" --Lt. Worf