All4SU
Duos Cultores Scientia Coronat et Go Aureum
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 14,758
- Like
- 26,514
Not in NYS.I coach both boys and girls varsity soccer squads and the OT rules are identical.
Not in NYS.I coach both boys and girls varsity soccer squads and the OT rules are identical.
My example was referring to NYS High School soccer. I suppose I could have been more specific. But for the purpose of an example, it was sufficient. As a USSF AND NFHS official I can guarantee you it is accurate.You are wrong. As with most strong opinions its based on incorrect information, context, or conclusions.
FIFA have been setting rules for tie score for decades. US Federation and different soccer governing bodies have been deciding between golden goal or 2x equal timed half for OT. It has nothing to do with being strong enough to kick a ball. Which makes no sense. In fact playing OT before PKs is far harder and more difficult to definitely play as opposed to golden goal which isn't always played and is also switch sides half way through.
Look no further than lacrosse. True equality would be one team in each sport.I’m all for equal opportunity for everyone. And frankly I’m not surprised that a woman got a chance to kick in a college game. It’s inevitable. But it’s also true that on average, men are bigger, stronger and faster. They have built-in advantages - on average. Just the same I have no problem celebrating a woman who has earned an opportunity to compete.
My issue is more about the skewed perception of s e xism in sports. s e xism is NOT that women don’t have opportunity. Title 9 went a long way to correcting that, and women have LOTS of opportunity. In some ways, more than men. No my issue is the perceived notion that we need to make things easier for women or else they can’t compete. Example: In boys high school soccer, if a game goes to overtime, a sudden death period follows. Males apparently are capable of competing in a high pressure situation. In girls soccer, however, there are two equal overtime periods to try to determine a winner. I was puzzled by this for a long time. When I asked about it, I was told that the rule goes back decades, and was established to compensate for circumstances such as wind or field conditions. The theory was/is that girls are not strong enough to kick the ball hard enough to compensate for circumstances that would give a clear advantage to the other team.
You want s e xism? That’s s e xism. Don’t spend your time arguing over why there aren’t more female college football players or kickers. Ask why the rules of the game are different to “compensate” for women. Fight to get THAT changed. Ask why a women’s basketball needs to be smaller. You want to eradicate s e xism? Start there.
Girls lacrosse and boys lacrosse isn’t even the same game. I agree with you.Look no further than lacrosse. True equality would be one team in each sport.
Yeah, not in NY and not a good look.Not in NYS.
Never understood that. Women can play hockey, no reason they have to play a different version of lacrosse.Girls lacrosse and boys lacrosse isn’t even the same game. I agree with you.
You are a soccer official? God bless.My example was referring to NYS High School soccer. I suppose I could have been more specific. But for the purpose of an example, it was sufficient. As a USSF AND NFHS official I can guarantee you it is accurate.
(Note: And the comment to not being strong enough referred to compensating for windy conditions. I wasn’t saying it made sense. I’m telling you that’s how it was justified.)
Like that never happens on other teamsJust noticed Vandy had a punter doing FGs today. Why did they bring her on just to kick PATs? If you bring her in to be a kicker then let her kick. If you don't think she can kick FGs then why not roll with the punter as they have been doing for FGs. Let her kick the dang FGs. If she misses she misses. Kickers miss kicks. This makes it feel gimmicky.