One of the things the del sol DA coach had done was to call or threaten to call the college coach in order to vacate the scholarship. In some cases, this was in excess of $100,000+. In these cases, the parents knew what was going on and were still powerless. But hey, let's highjack the thread to talk about parent bullying.
Coach Bullying
- Thread starter Bananacorner
- Start date
InTheValley
SILVER
The lengths to which many parents will go to avoid responsibility for their child’s situation is mindboggling.
There are only a handful of “queen maker” coaches who hold a sufficient power imbalance so that the coach or club may not care enough about your money, and your superstar daughter’s ability, to at least consider what you are saying. They are universally well-established and the market has already decided that the value of their coaching style outweighs your criticism and micromanaging, even if you call it “bullying” or “verbally abusive.” If you find yourself confronting Blues Baker trying to change his coaching style, for example, you really need to ask yourself why you are trying to change him when so many people have paid Blues so much money for so long a period for his services just the way he is. And also why other parents aren’t lining up behind you. And shame on you for being surprised about how these coaches operate.
Regardless of the coach (and even if a simple google search was too much work for you before you unleashed that Del sol fella on your daughter), it is easy to avoid being retaliated against. Don’t be a jerk. Every parent understands that a coach should treat them and their players with dignity and respect but, too often, they fail to understand that it is a two way street. Be the better person, check your ego, and use a little diplomacy as you navigate the process of trying to resolve a dispute even if the coach does not share your pleasant attitude. When you don’t get what you want, which you probably won’t because it is unreasonable to expect to turn a bully/abuser into Florence Nightengale, be prepared to move on without burning bridges.
If you are so wound up that you think a coach might ruin your daughter’s soccer career, you are probably overstating how much anyone cares about you. But if that is your concern, how hard is it to tell the coach “thanks for everything you’ve done to help our daughter. We really appreciate everything you’ve done. Unfortunately, little Bella is super stressed with everything going on between school and soccer. To do what’s best for her, we’ve decided to take a more low key approach. Again, we think you’ve been great.” The problem is that you won’t bite the bullet because your ego demands that you win something that is not winnable, even if it means screwing over your own daughter’s future just so you can prove how big a tough guy you are. So you yell at the coach instead of engaging in non-confrontational discussion. You passive-aggressively try to sabotage them behind their back through your constant negativity among other parents. You go over their head to the board of directors. You send email manifestos. Trash them online. Make unreasonable demands. How do you think a jerk is going to act when you’re also a jerk?
In short, those who emphasize the importance of the parent’s behavior in this process are right on, because they’ve seen enough crazy parents in action. Underlying all of this, they also realize that the parent who cries “retaliation” when things don’t go their way is usually the insufferable complainer who lacks the objectivity necessary to understand that their kid isn’t on the bench “in retaliation” for the benign conversation they had earlier with the coach. Rather, it’s either because the conversation was not remotely benign or it is because their daughter just doesn’t give enough effort in practice and isn’t good enough to start.
You are naive to think that there is never indictive retaliation against a good player and decent parents and that it is all because of parent's delusions and bad behaviors. - you are sounding a bit like an angry bitter coach with an agenda
Agreed. I have seen a coach not only go after a player that left his team, but also try to damage the team and club he fled to.
InTheValley
SILVER
When you are ready for a referral to a psychologist for your paranoia, or to help address your anti-social behavior and lack of communication skills, feel free to private message me.
Coocoo.
What the F is your point. Why do all your posts sound like listening to a DOC at a mind numbing club meeting. Either you actually believe this or you just like saying dumb ass shi. to get attention. But considering you actually typed literally the longest dumbest collection of words strung together since your last post, I’m guessing it’s both. I’d be shocked if you actually had a kid currently playing somewhere. There are some real winners on here but you by far take the taco.
InTheValley
SILVER
My point is that you should take responsibilty for your problems. I am not surprised that you and others cannot communicate without getting incredibly defensive and throwing around profanity. You prove my point that, for most soccer parents, it is the parent who is the problem.
When my son wanted to leave a club for a team more in line with his skills and that actually developed players, we tried to be diplomatic saying that my work schedule conflicted with the new season's practice schedule and that we would love to come back if things changed. We had a good relationship up until that point. But the DOC still tried to sabotage our move by calling the new club. Soccer in SoCal is a small community and even smaller in Arizona. You cannot underestimate the power of clubs, especially due to their relationships with other clubs and coaches.
InTheValley
SILVER
Remind me again about the original topic of this thread? That’s right, it was about a parent making up a fake lawsuit alleging fake bullying by a fake coach, and then failing to own up to it. My comments about too many parents failing to take responsibility, but instead just blaming the coach and club, are directly on point.
Let me see if I can get this back on track.
In Summary:
@Bananacorner asked what exactly is "coach bullying" and how do "we" soccer parents, players, coaches know what constitutes behavior that crosses the line from a tough, negative or sarcastic coaching style to "bullying." We then had a divergent quasi-off topic discussion apparently fueled by some morbid curiosity regarding requests for factual details because the original post set up the questions with a mistaken belief that a lawsuit had been filed.
@MWN provided links to some definitions of what constitutes bullying and links to various articles specifically addressing the coach/athlete dynamic in the context of "coach bullying."
@InTheValley argues that parents misuse the term "bullying" and make the claim too easily because those parents don't want to take responsibility for their own actions. @toucan agrees and adds that parents have the power, not the coach.
@Nutmeg, @Soccer43 and others find @InTheValley's position unsatisfactory because it shifts the discussion from coaches to parents and avoids the main topic.
Moving Forward:
My first suggestion, let's try to avoid the ad hominem attacks (I know I have).
@InTheValley and @toucan,
I fundamentally agree that parents play an important role and have some power after the fact. They also have a duty to conduct a reasonable investigation/inquiry into the coaching style and tendencies to ensure their player is in the right situation. I also wholeheartedly agree that many parents are too far sensitive and misuse the term "bullying" to describe coach behavior that is simply tough or negative, but not intended to cause harm to those players.
Where I find your position unsatisfactory is placing too much focus on parents. Its almost akin to blaming the rape victim because she wore a short skirt in a bad part of town and went to the wrong bar. The argument that parents are to blame for putting their kids on teams staffed by bad coaches is relevant only to how might parents lower the odds of finding their kid on a team with a coach that victimizes certain players. But that isn't the question or the topic. However, if your response is that coaches that victimize and abuse kids are never responsible for their actions, rather its the parents because they should have known better, then OK, I disagree.
Can we agree on a definition of "bullying"?
I previously cited an article from changing the game "Is your kid's coach a bully?" that had three elements:
Can we all agree that the SafeSport definition of bullying is good and coaches that engage in behaviors should be drummed out of the club by the DOC after a reasonable investigation that validates the claims? If not, what is wrong with the SafeSport definition?
In Summary:
@Bananacorner asked what exactly is "coach bullying" and how do "we" soccer parents, players, coaches know what constitutes behavior that crosses the line from a tough, negative or sarcastic coaching style to "bullying." We then had a divergent quasi-off topic discussion apparently fueled by some morbid curiosity regarding requests for factual details because the original post set up the questions with a mistaken belief that a lawsuit had been filed.
@MWN provided links to some definitions of what constitutes bullying and links to various articles specifically addressing the coach/athlete dynamic in the context of "coach bullying."
@InTheValley argues that parents misuse the term "bullying" and make the claim too easily because those parents don't want to take responsibility for their own actions. @toucan agrees and adds that parents have the power, not the coach.
@Nutmeg, @Soccer43 and others find @InTheValley's position unsatisfactory because it shifts the discussion from coaches to parents and avoids the main topic.
Moving Forward:
My first suggestion, let's try to avoid the ad hominem attacks (I know I have).
@InTheValley and @toucan,
I fundamentally agree that parents play an important role and have some power after the fact. They also have a duty to conduct a reasonable investigation/inquiry into the coaching style and tendencies to ensure their player is in the right situation. I also wholeheartedly agree that many parents are too far sensitive and misuse the term "bullying" to describe coach behavior that is simply tough or negative, but not intended to cause harm to those players.
Where I find your position unsatisfactory is placing too much focus on parents. Its almost akin to blaming the rape victim because she wore a short skirt in a bad part of town and went to the wrong bar. The argument that parents are to blame for putting their kids on teams staffed by bad coaches is relevant only to how might parents lower the odds of finding their kid on a team with a coach that victimizes certain players. But that isn't the question or the topic. However, if your response is that coaches that victimize and abuse kids are never responsible for their actions, rather its the parents because they should have known better, then OK, I disagree.
Can we agree on a definition of "bullying"?
I previously cited an article from changing the game "Is your kid's coach a bully?" that had three elements:
- An intent to harm,
- A power imbalance
- Repeated acts or threats of aggressive behavior.
Bullying (Safesport, 2015 definition)
Bullying is the use of coercion to obtain control over another person or to be habitually cruel to another person. Bullying involves an intentional, persistent or repeated pattern of committing or willfully tolerating physical and non-physical behaviors that are intended to cause fear, humiliation, or physical harm in an attempt to socially exclude, diminish, or isolate another person. Bullying can occur through written, verbal or electronically transmitted expression or by means of a physical act or gesture.
Bullying behavior is prohibited in any manner in connection with any Team USA sanctioned activities or events. Examples of bullying prohibited by this Policy include,without limitation physical behaviors, including punching, kicking or choking; and verbal and emotional behaviors, including, the use of electronic communications (i.e., “cyber bullying”), to harass, frighten, degrade, intimidate or humiliate. Bullying does not include group or team behaviors that are reasonably designed to establish normative team behaviors or promote team cohesion.
The SafeSport definition of bullying is more detailed and directly avoids the "power imbalance" element because the definition is broader and is intended to apply to athlete on athlete situations. It has basically 4 elements (see underlined text).Bullying is the use of coercion to obtain control over another person or to be habitually cruel to another person. Bullying involves an intentional, persistent or repeated pattern of committing or willfully tolerating physical and non-physical behaviors that are intended to cause fear, humiliation, or physical harm in an attempt to socially exclude, diminish, or isolate another person. Bullying can occur through written, verbal or electronically transmitted expression or by means of a physical act or gesture.
Bullying behavior is prohibited in any manner in connection with any Team USA sanctioned activities or events. Examples of bullying prohibited by this Policy include,without limitation physical behaviors, including punching, kicking or choking; and verbal and emotional behaviors, including, the use of electronic communications (i.e., “cyber bullying”), to harass, frighten, degrade, intimidate or humiliate. Bullying does not include group or team behaviors that are reasonably designed to establish normative team behaviors or promote team cohesion.
Can we all agree that the SafeSport definition of bullying is good and coaches that engage in behaviors should be drummed out of the club by the DOC after a reasonable investigation that validates the claims? If not, what is wrong with the SafeSport definition?
No that is incorrect. It was about a parent believing (incorrectly) a lawsuit was filed as the set up to asking 4 questions. The the facts of the underlying claim have never been articulated, but certain posters can't look past that mistake and address the questions presented. The facts are irrelevant to the questions asked.
So, no, no, no.
Some clubs will use their influence within the governing organizations (Cal South, Presidio, USSFDA, etc) to hammer on their rivals.
I like the safesport definition better, but as you point out its really intended to cover athlete to athlete situations, so its not applicable. What do we call the behavior I mentioned previously regarding coaches that only know how to coach through intimidation, insults and fear where their intent is not to harm but to "motivate" their players? These coaches also tend to be equal opportunists and don't limit it to a person or two on the team. (As opposed to the bullying described by Safesport where the intent is to "exclude, diminsh or isolate" a person). I see more coaches that have an overall abusive coaching style than I see coaches that single out individuals on a repeated basis. Neither of the behaviors is OK, but by your definitions the former behavior would not be considered bullying. The reason being is that the underlying sources you cite are defining peer-to-peer bullying. That's why I'll stick with the "I know it when I see it" definition when it comes to coach vs. player bullying.
Hold on. Its broader because it applies to a all participants, which also includes coaches. So it is applicable to the Coach/Athlete and Athlete/Athlete and Official/Athlete discussion.
That coaching style is commonly referred to as "Negative Coaching" and/or "Old School." As mentioned above, it tends to be far less effective, especially with young people. It can be rude, sarcastic and generally has the effect of being demotivating to young athletes (elementary and middle schoolers). There are some athletes who can take it and brush it off. Most people picture that drill sergeant with the gruff voice yelling and pushing the team through comments that are mildly demeaning, but with the clear intent to motivate the group. Its the "stick" v. the "carrot" approach. Negative coaching is often only effective when directed at the team (as a whole) or groups of multiple players (defenders, midfielders, goalkeepers, etc.).
Old School Coaching (source: http://thesportdigest.com/archive/article/old-school-vs-new-school-coaching-styles)
When the term "old school coach" is used the following characteristics come to mind:
"Bullying" is on the same spectrum of Negative/Old School coaching style and represents "going too far" and being intentionally harmful. According to the definition, that Old School style goes too far when a coach intends to socially exclude, diminish, or isolate the player.When the term "old school coach" is used the following characteristics come to mind:
- punish first, converse later
- atmosphere of fear of failure for the athlete
- immediate short-term respect
- knowledge of technical skills, but not tactical
- undivided attention when speaking
- intimidation of those who speak against the coach’s decisions
- demeaning motivation
- nonexistent relationship with the athletes and assistant coaches
- loss of athlete’s attention due to negativity
- athletes quit due to poor treatment
When an old school coach goes too far, the consequences can be disastrous.
The problem we get into is all of us (including our kids) have a different tolerance level of "demeaning motivation" and "intimidation" and that tolerance level changes based on familiarity, age, sex and team standing. For example, a U18 "Captain" of a boys Flight 1 team will likely process demeaning comments differently than a brand new player to a girls U10 team.
Thank you for your thoughtful response. I would tend to agree that the vast majority of coaches nowadays refrain from "bully" behaviors and we have less "Old School" coaches than we did 20 years ago. As a result, the "Bully Coaches" are few and far between and most DOC's don't allow the "Old School" and "Negative" coaches into their organizations for the reasons you describe (customer dissatisfaction is high). If the threat to "blackball" is made after the player has left the team, then it isn't "bullying" under the definition as to that player. It could be argued that those remaining will feel coerced to stay for fear of their player being isolated and harmed. If on the other hand the coach has developed a reputation for vindictive actions after a player has left and responds to a parent that is "thinking of pulling his player" with threats to treat that player like the others that have left, then the "coercion" element is met.
@Bananacorner, here is the official Safesport publication for coaches on the subject of bullying. It is mostly directed at assisting coaches to understand where the line is and focuses on player to player interaction more, but offer good guidance for coaches to understand bullying behaviors that their coaching staff might engage in.
https://77media.blob.core.windows.net/uscss/1520354560859.coaches-handbook.pdf
https://77media.blob.core.windows.net/uscss/1520354560859.coaches-handbook.pdf
InTheValley
SILVER
Did this phone call have a significant negative impact your child’s soccer career and, if so, how? In the end, the risk of retaliation is way overblown. As a great soccer parent/philosopher once said on Jan. 16 in the “When should a player look for a new club?” thread:
“Yes but it take a special kind of a$@hole to call another DOC and make things up when he does not get his way. Thank goodness credible coachs and DOCs dont believe his crap.”