This article is shared by Player Development Project
Youth sports, in many instances, are viewed through the lens of adults. John O’Sullivan, the founder of Changing the Game Project, recently journeyed to Australia and returned with insightful reflections. In this article, he emphasizes the critical need to ensure that sports primarily cater to the young participants, advocating for a balanced approach that truly serves their needs.
During late February, my travels took me to Sydney and Perth, Australia, where I had the privilege of collaborating with various sports organizations. These included the Football (Soccer) Federation of Australia, Football New South Wales, the Western Australia Department of Sports and Recreation, and the WA Aussie Rules Football Committee. While in Perth, I had the opportunity to tour the newly constructed, state-of-the-art Optus Stadium, a $1.5 billion venue. As I was guided through the stadium by Project Manager Ronnie Hurst, he continually referenced the core principle that guided the entire construction process. From the strategic placement of each seat and cup holder, ensuring ample legroom, to the thoughtful location of every food stand and accessibility for people with disabilities, every single detail of this four-year undertaking had to meet a singular criterion:
Fans First!
Every element built or designed was centered on maximizing the comfort and viewing pleasure of the fans. After all, wasn’t the stadium ultimately for them? Weren’t their contributions, through ticket purchases and concessions, the financial lifeblood that sustained the stadium’s existence? Consequently, any feature that didn’t directly enhance the fan experience was excluded from the project. This straightforward guiding principle of “Fans First” was instrumental in creating an exceptional fan experience within the stadium.
This experience prompted me to consider youth sports worldwide, from local clubs to school programs and professional team academies across all disciplines. Shouldn’t these organizations also operate under a guiding principle? If our objective is to cultivate an outstanding sports experience for children, shouldn’t every decision-maker consistently ask themselves:
Does this truly serve the needs of the children first?
This simple yet profound question should be repeatedly posed by everyone involved in youth sports. It should be the fundamental benchmark against which every decision and program is evaluated. Coaches should ask this question when planning practices or scheduling competitions. Much like Optus Stadium’s “Fans First” mantra and Google’s historical tenet “Don’t be evil”, every choice in youth sports should be grounded in “This serves the needs of the children.”
However, this principle is frequently overlooked. If we aim to retain children in sports, it’s crucial that their experiences genuinely align with their desires and requirements. Yet, time and again, decisions are made, programs are implemented, teams are formed, and competitions are structured to accommodate the needs of adult administrators, coaches, and parents, often at the expense of the young athletes. Organizations seldom prioritize the question, “Is this truly in the best interest of the kids?” This oversight is not only frustrating but also detrimental. It’s a significant factor contributing to the alarming statistic of 70% of children dropping out of organized sports before reaching middle school.
My colleague, Dr. Richard Bailey, head of research at the International Council of Sport Science and Physical Education, aptly summarizes this issue: “Let’s be honest, most elite sports programs are not designed to meet children’s needs; they are designed entirely for adult ambitions.”
Here are six prevalent scenarios in youth sports that often fail to serve the children involved, along with potential solutions to restore balance and prioritize their needs:
1. Adult Politics Overshadowing Youth Sports:
The pervasive influence of adult politics in youth sports is disheartening. Talented coaches are overlooked, deserving children are excluded, and decisions within youth sports organizations are often swayed by egos and the desire to appease adults, all to the detriment of the young athletes. It’s troubling to witness local sports leagues ostracizing families who dare to challenge abusive coaches or influential parents. This imbalance of power and priorities needs to be addressed to truly serve the children.
Solution: We need dedicated individuals with integrity to step forward and serve on local sports boards. People who can adopt a holistic perspective, looking beyond their own child’s team and focusing on the broader community of young athletes. Perhaps, a fundamental re-evaluation of the parent-run non-profit board model is necessary. It’s questionable whether this structure can consistently make impartial decisions that prioritize the well-being of numerous children, especially when personal biases and individual interests can dominate. A systemic rethink might be warranted to ensure decisions are truly child-centered, but that’s a discussion for another time.
2. Mismatched Competition and Game Formats:
The structure of competition and game formats often neglects the developmental needs of children. For instance, third-grade American football leagues still feature 11v11 tackle football. Similarly, until recently, American 8-year-olds were playing 11v11 soccer or full ice hockey. In Aussie Rules football, incredibly, children play 18v18 at every age level! The resistance from adults to adopting small-sided games across various sports has been substantial and misguided. The children’s version of a sport should not mirror the adult version, which is characterized by complex rules, numerous players, and expansive playing areas. We don’t equip first-grade classrooms with adult-sized furniture; we provide child-appropriate furnishings. We don’t introduce calculus to second graders simply to prepare them for advanced mathematics later in their education. We build foundational skills step-by-step. If the children’s version of a team sport mirrors the adult version, it signifies a fundamental flaw in the approach, failing to serve the developmental needs of the kids.
Solution: Following a disappointing performance at Euro 2000, Belgium recognized the need for a comprehensive overhaul of their youth soccer system. This led to a complete reimagining of children’s soccer development. In an upcoming podcast with Belgium FA Coaching Education Director Kris Van Der Haegen, we delve into these transformative changes, including the introduction of “Dribbling Soccer” for 5-7-year-olds. This format involves 2v2 games, with one field player and one goalkeeper per team, short game durations, and frequent opponent changes. It’s designed to cater to the developmental stage of young children who are learning to dribble, have a natural inclination to play individually rather than pass, and thrive on scoring goals. Belgium, along with Spain and other leading soccer nations, employs small-sided games up to the U14 level. This strategic shift has propelled Belgium from 66th to consistently ranking among the top soccer nations globally, while Spain has achieved World Cup and European Championship victories. In contrast, in the US, persistent debates linger about whether 11-year-olds require larger fields to play “correctly.” This resistance to developmentally appropriate formats hinders progress and doesn’t serve the children.
3. Premature Sport Specialization and Neglecting Fundamental Movement Skills:
Forcing children to specialize in a single sport at a young age, without first establishing a foundation of fundamental movement skills, leads to increased injury rates and burnout. Recent research from the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons further substantiates the detrimental effects of early single-sport specialization and excessive organized activity before the age of 12. Their findings are insightful:
- A significant 54.7% of parents encouraged their children to specialize in a single sport.
- An overwhelming 57.2% of parents aspired for their children to compete at the college or professional level (while statistically, only about 4% of high school athletes play in college, and less than 1% turn professional).
- Children whose parents invest in private lessons and specialized training exhibit a higher risk of injury compared to those who do not.
Solution: Encourage young children to explore a variety of sports. Pressuring a 9-year-old to commit exclusively to soccer, basketball, baseball, or any single sport, and prohibiting them from participating in others, is not in the child’s best interest. Yet, this scenario is all too common. Furthermore, failing to incorporate fundamental movement training within sports programs also disserves children. We must prioritize our children’s physical literacy development over the pursuit of fleeting competitive wins or financial gains. Serving balance means fostering well-rounded athletic development.
4. Early “Talent” Identification: A Misguided Approach:
Early “talent” identification systems often mistakenly select older children, not necessarily more talented ones. The Relative Age Effect clearly demonstrates this phenomenon. When we identify “talented” or “gifted” individuals at young ages, we are often simply selecting children who are chronologically older within their age group, benefiting from being born closer to the arbitrary age cutoff date. The earlier we implement selection processes and funnel children out of the system, the greater the likelihood of inaccurate assessments. Even professional sports leagues like the NFL, despite investing vast resources, struggle to accurately predict talent in 23-year-olds. Therefore, the notion that we can effectively identify true potential in 9-year-olds is unrealistic. I have elaborated on this in previous articles here and here for those interested in a deeper understanding. In essence, implementing early cuts and allocating additional resources to select groups of effectively ‘older, not better’ children at young ages does not serve the needs of the broader population of young athletes.
Solution: Psychologist Johan Fallby’s insightful perspective, shared in an interview with Mark O’Sullivan, offers a better approach: “As many as possible, as long as possible, in the best environment possible.” This philosophy emphasizes inclusivity and long-term development. We should invest in teaching all children, allocating resources to the largest possible group, allowing them to mature and develop at their own pace. Belgium, for instance, has a progressive policy where, with medical approval, a child can play down an age group to compete with peers of a similar developmental stage. Imagine this level of flexibility being implemented in youth leagues – prioritizing developmental appropriateness over strict age-based segregation.
5. Sideline Coaching: Hindering Learning and Development:
The prevalence of “joystick” sideline coaching from parents and coaches is detrimental to children’s learning. Many clubs tolerate sideline coaching, driven by the desire to ensure their children avoid making mistakes and “pass the sports test.” While many organizations verbally advocate for player-centered development, when confronted with sideline coaching, the response is often a passive “parents are paying customers, they can do what they want.” However, this customer-centric approach is inappropriate in youth sports. Just as a doctor wouldn’t defer to a parent’s unqualified medical advice for their child, sports clubs shouldn’t condone detrimental sideline coaching. This undermines the learning process and shifts the focus from child development to adult control.
Solution: Clubs and schools must adopt a zero-tolerance policy towards sideline coaching and any form of abusive behavior directed at referees. They need to overcome the fear of losing members if they ask overbearing parents to refrain from sideline coaching. In fact, prioritizing a positive, child-centered environment will likely attract more families who value genuine development over parental interference. By reducing sideline interference, we foster on-field intelligence and problem-solving skills in young athletes. We need to Win the Race to the Right Finish Line, focusing on long-term development, not short-term parental gratification.
6. Ineffective Coaching Environments: Hampering Skill Transfer:
Many coaches still employ outdated training methods, such as having children stand in lines and repetitively practice isolated techniques, believing this “blocked practice” is the most effective teaching method. However, research indicates that blocked practice is the least effective approach for skill transfer to real game situations, which demand adaptability and on-the-fly decision-making. Yet, observing youth sports practices reveals countless sessions where coaches conduct drills with no defenders, minimal decision-making opportunities, and no clear connection to game scenarios. These sessions, often characterized by neat lines of cones, may appear organized but fail to serve the long-term learning needs of the children. “Training ugly,” which emphasizes game-like scenarios and decision-making, is far more effective for developing adaptable and skilled athletes.
Solution: Incorporate variability and randomness into practices. Utilize the whole-part-whole method, starting and ending with game play, and incorporating smaller, focused activities in between. Emphasize game-based drills and introduce defenders as early as possible in training to simulate competitive situations. (For in-depth research on effective learning strategies, read Make it Stick by Peter Brown). Shift away from excessive repetitive drills and embrace coaching methodologies that promote decision-making and adaptability. Mark Bennett, founder of PDS Coaching, advocates for the Rule of 3, a problem-solving approach where (1) the player attempts to solve the problem independently, (2) the player collaborates with a teammate, and finally (3) the coach intervenes if necessary. As Mark O’Sullivan aptly states, “Our job as a coach is not to correct everything, it is to observe them solving the problems themselves.” This approach fosters player autonomy and deeper learning.
This topic extends beyond the scope of a single article, but the central message is clear.
If you are a coach or sports administrator, please critically evaluate your decisions by asking “Does this serve the needs of the children playing?” before implementation.
If you are a parent enrolling your child in a sports activity, inquire with the organization “How does your competition format serve the developmental needs of the child?”
If you are a member of a sports organization, when budgets, coaching assignments, and fund allocations are presented at AGMs, challenge the decisions by asking “How does this serve the needs of the children playing?”
Perth’s Optus Stadium prioritized its fans and created a world-class venue.
Youth sports must prioritize its kids first to cultivate an exceptional and truly beneficial experience for young athletes.
Image Credit: Photo Sport NZ
