>>[socdad] What about the players/parents of the team from which these young men/women are transferring off of? Are they any less important in consideration of "what's best for the player"?<<
>>[Soccer16] I too think the commitment should be for both seasons at U-14. What has happened in this scenario? Who are the kids playing for now? As I see it the kids did have the opportunity to change but needed to notify SCYSA within the 30 days then so be it. There is an avenue for them to participate but it just wasn't met. Correct? If you allow unrestricted free agency all bets are off as to what new heights recruiting 14 year old soccer players will reach.<<
I understand the point of view that the few must suffer for the many -- I just haven't had a lot of empathy for that point of view since understanding what Stalin wrought with that ideology.
Players transfer for many reasons. Families move. Fellow team members don't want to practice, travel, etc. Playing time. Etc.
Should a transferring player be "penalized" for any of this? I argue that they should not...and I argue that having a rejected coach have to sign a piece of paper allowing a transfer is a penalty.
Again...I have absolutely no problems with parents having to pay for an entire season of training even if they have their kid transferred...because when a kid joins a team and then decides to leave it there should be consequences for that.
