SC Soccer Forums SCSoccer.com Forums Boys Varsity Soccer Mercy rule

this is the only consideration that makes me hesitate to vote yes.

But also, I think mercy rules smack of the reputation that soccer can't seem to shake. You know...trophy for everyone, don't hurt anybody's feelings...everybody in the winner circle garbage. We all know that boys soccer in SC has developed into a pretty good product and I think we should have the attitude of football and basketball which is the winning team should win with class and losing teams should fight to the bitter end. And if you look at scores last year, there really aren't many games at all that were of the 10-0 at halftime and play keep away in the second half variety. Now, girl's soccer is different. They just don't seem as able to overcome technical inferiority with athleticism and fight. Therefore you see teams quit. Maybe they do need a rule but boys do not IMO.

Quote:

---

Aiken High beat someone last year 10-0 in Georgia. The Georgia team tried to keep the score down in the first half. The Georgia team held us to 5 goals in the first half. Five minutes the second half the game was over. The rule helps keep scores down, but it also makes it easy for teams to quit.

The rule makes teams try to win the game in the first half and never play bench players to get the game over as soon as possible.

I do not want to drive over an hour for a 40 minute game.

---

As a former player I hate mercy rules due to a clock being used for soccer. Eventually time will run out. You can use a continuous clock and even 'shave' some time if you wish. However, the biggest issue to me is scheduling. Why schedule a team that you're going to beat 10-0? I know region opponents have to play each other, but non-region should never be a huge discrepancy. The other argument I have though, is it's hard to play 'other players' on your team if you're in a 10-0 game and you give up a goal and your region tie-breaker is goals allowed or differential or something like that. You end up screwing yourself.

If they put a mercy rule in for soccer, would they do it for other sports? I have heard of basketball teams losing 70-3 and if you look at the results of the first round of AAAA Division 2 football PLAYOFFS 7 of the 8 games were decided by 30 or more points with Goose Creek beating a team 76-0.

I agree with player about non region games but sometimes it's not that easy. Teams get better/worse from year to year and travel is also taking into consideration when scheduling non-region games.

I like Alister's thought: If they do it in pads and helmets, then maybe we should think about it in cleats and shin guards. Of course we know that will never happen. I go back to it being about class and dignity. If you have your third string GK scoring the tenth goal against me, okay. I have no problem with that. But if you have your starting QB throwing TD passes in the the last 30 seconds to go up by 30(Byrnes), well.... you're classless regardless of what happened in the game. IMO

Is this one of those thread hijacks from Mademoiselle Magazine?

Florida -- 8-goal lead at or after halftime, match ends

Illinois -- 7-goal lead after half, second half is cut in half

Kentucky -- 10-goal lead at or after halftime, match ends

Wisconsin -- 10-goal lead at half, losing coach has the option to end match; 10-goal lead after 60 minutes, the match is over.

NO MERCY RULE
Alaska
Maryland

I am in favor of their being a Mercy Rule in Soccer, as it would take the guess work out of it in these situations for all players, coaches and referees involved. Anytime there is a lopsided game in progress everyone is uncomfortable so this would be a way of having guidelines for all to work with.

I have done matches in both Ga and SC and I can tell you...SC really needs one. Having been involved in dozens of mercy rule games there is no embarrassment when a team loses by 10, is accepted in GA. In fact MOST of their girls first round playoff games end in a mercy rule. It actually protects the players from potential injury, or a red card sit out. And while some think it may be unfair to the losing team, it really is unfair to the winning team. Why should they be out there for a full 80 minutes kicking the ball around for no reason when they are the superior team.

I am not in favor of it at all. IMO it is a coach’s responsibility to manage the game to recognize when it is over as a contest and manage the bench accordingly. I have no problem being on the end of a big loss if their coach at least tried to manage the game at some point and my players didn't quit. Besides, you take away a crucial element of match fitness by ending the contest early, especially for players who may never see much playing time. What if you travelled over an hour to get there? Taking a good licking is an opportunity to question your players commitment, to make them stronger, to teach life lessons, to never quit despite facing tremendous adversity. Shielding them from these life lessons is not healthy. In the long run, it is counter-productive. I understand why people may think that it is beneficial, I really do, but it’s a sad indictment of today’s society that we want to adopt a "mercy" rule in an inherently competitive environment. Extrapolate that thinking and you may as well have teams deciding whether to play or not based upon their records alone. This rule is a copout.

I think Cav and CJ made great points. Its about class and dignity. We won a scrimmage 9-0 with starters off after 15 mins. Their coached thanked me and didn't want my bench to hold up as it wasn't fair to them. We possessed the ball two touch for the last 15 and it was a good exercise in speed of play. We did what we could to be respectful. It was a mismatch as I couldn't get anyone else to travel to us but we fed them pizza and mingled after the game together. Conversely, Northwestern taught us a lesson 7-0 and we watched tape of every goal to learn from it. Losing 7-0 was a defining moment for us this season. We have gone 3-0 since then. Picking an arbitrary number to end the contest creates problems in of itself. What if a team keeps the score at 6-0 and plays keep-ball for a whole half when the mercy rule kicks in at 7? Are we okay with that?

I’d be more in favor with carding a coach (who is pounding on a team relentlessly) for "ungentlemanly conduct / unsportsmanlike behavior" for not respecting his opponents than simply cutting the game short. Perhaps i'm intentionally opening a can of worms with that comment but if you want to see the game managed better, you’d get more mileage out of that, especially if the coach runs the risk of being out of his next game and the fines that accompany coaches ejections. Just my two cents.