Fair Play Movement and the Regulation Juggernaut

tamarin

House Member
Jun 12, 2006
3,197
22
38
Oshawa ON
I can't seem to link the local paper here in the Kawarthas but let this suffice: teapots are trembling about Peterborough, Ontario. Members of a national movement called the Fair Play Movement are letting it be known they want all kids in organized sport to be given a bigger piece of the pie- or the ball or the puck or the stick. Seems some incensed parents have watched their budding athletic geniuses cool their hinies too long on the bench during season games and they want coaches put on a leash. A figure in play at the moment is five minutes: every player must receive five minutes on the ice or on the field or whatever per game. As a guaranteed minimum. No doubt gangs of clock watchers will see that such rules are applied.
The local response has not been mixed. Most writers insist coaches have the final call and it is only they that can be aware of all the variables before a game starts.
Regulation madness. This is what democracies degenerate into. Last week it was the province announcing it intended to expand its bike helmet program. Everyone will soon be required to wear one. On it goes. Once a rule is applied it gets sticky. And augmentation digs in its hoary root.
Is it the purpose of a democracy to control the lives of its citizens?
 

TenPenny

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 9, 2004
17,466
138
63
Location, Location
I can't seem to link the local paper here in the Kawarthas but let this suffice: teapots are trembling about Peterborough, Ontario. Members of a national movement called the Fair Play Movement are letting it be known they want all kids in organized sport to be given a bigger piece of the pie- or the ball or the puck or the stick. Seems some incensed parents have watched their budding athletic geniuses cool their hinies too long on the bench during season games and they want coaches put on a leash. A figure in play at the moment is five minutes: every player must receive five minutes on the ice or on the field or whatever per game. As a guaranteed minimum. No doubt gangs of clock watchers will see that such rules are applied.
The local response has not been mixed. Most writers insist coaches have the final call and it is only they that can be aware of all the variables before a game starts.
Regulation madness. This is what democracies degenerate into. Last week it was the province announcing it intended to expand its bike helmet program. Everyone will soon be required to wear one. On it goes. Once a rule is applied it gets sticky. And augmentation digs in its hoary root.
Is it the purpose of a democracy to control the lives of its citizens?

Well, here in NB, it is typical that at the young ages (8 and under, say) the coaches try to equalize the time for all players. Once you hit 9-10, it changes; especially in hockey, where you've got AAA, AA, A, B, and house league. Although our house league team, with 2 defense lines, 3 forward lines, and only 1 goalie, they all get rotated pretty evenly. Except the poor goalie.

And yes, we are all required to wear bike helmets. Which doesn't bother me at all.
 

tamarin

House Member
Jun 12, 2006
3,197
22
38
Oshawa ON
Interesting reply! It's intriguing, given the way civic duties and legislative responsibilities divide, to witness the progress of certain initiatives across Canada. It seems once the candle's lit you can't put it out. Given the time spent on teleconferencing and its sisters, it's likely no legislative movement now operates in isolation. (Which must be an alluring beacon to those who think all standards should be nationalized.)
Peterborough is one of sport's jewels in Canada. Probably supporting the growth of more top level hockey players than any similar region and sure to be a contestant in lacrosse and baseball. The local populace seems furious that a special interest group is trying to co-op coaches at all levels and diminish the role various volunteer helpers play in building teams. Dunno.
Regulation is pushy business. On another note Ontario continues to build on its anti-smoking legislation. It's a little hypocritical given the large hole for underage users. On the front page of the Examiner today is the picture of a cigarette puffing 17 year old interviewed about NY resolutions. If i was to have given him this cigarette I'd be charged and liable to a hefty fine, if a store had sold it to him no less than a $4000 fine would be levied and yet underage smoking itself isn't a crime. Now that's a head scratcher. And one for the regulators to explain.
 

tamarin

House Member
Jun 12, 2006
3,197
22
38
Oshawa ON
You can't fault regulation on the job front. Without it, government services departments would soon be depopulated. Canada, like its fellows today, relies on incremental control of all political and educational and social functions in its jurisdiction. Regulation is huge business. That's why a boom in studies and consultants has emerged in the last quarter century. That's why panels are omnipresent that tinker with existing rules and codes. The web gets stickier year by year. The spider bigger.
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
I can't seem to link the local paper here in the Kawarthas but let this suffice: teapots are trembling about Peterborough, Ontario. Members of a national movement called the Fair Play Movement are letting it be known they want all kids in organized sport to be given a bigger piece of the pie- or the ball or the puck or the stick. Seems some incensed parents have watched their budding athletic geniuses cool their hinies too long on the bench during season games and they want coaches put on a leash. A figure in play at the moment is five minutes: every player must receive five minutes on the ice or on the field or whatever per game. As a guaranteed minimum. No doubt gangs of clock watchers will see that such rules are applied.
The local response has not been mixed. Most writers insist coaches have the final call and it is only they that can be aware of all the variables before a game starts.
Regulation madness. This is what democracies degenerate into. Last week it was the province announcing it intended to expand its bike helmet program. Everyone will soon be required to wear one. On it goes. Once a rule is applied it gets sticky. And augmentation digs in its hoary root.
Is it the purpose of a democracy to control the lives of its citizens?
As a Father of two boys on Lacrosse teams, I can understand your position. My boys get plenty of play time, but Lacrosse has always had a slightly more aggresive rotation then hockey.

I have noticed however, on my youngest' team, there a few young ones that are not as quick on the field or sharp with their handling, and they tend to get passed over once or twice a game, in the rotations.

I'm a competative guy, I'm driven to succeed, but these are kids. All of ten years old or around there. How are they going to get any better if they get passed over some many times per game. These teams are semi publicly funded, then in that case, ALL particapants should have equal oportunity to participate. It is only fair. As Ten Penny mentioned, once you hit the leagues that require "Try outs", then we are in a whole new situation. There is a level of competion and a proven need to validate the effort by taking titles. As a competitive guy, drive to succeed, I can whole heartedly agree with strategic rotations. I'm already seeing it in my oldest boys league.
Interesting reply! It's intriguing, given the way civic duties and legislative responsibilities divide, to witness the progress of certain initiatives across Canada. It seems once the candle's lit you can't put it out. Given the time spent on teleconferencing and its sisters, it's likely no legislative movement now operates in isolation. (Which must be an alluring beacon to those who think all standards should be nationalized.)
Peterborough is one of sport's jewels in Canada. Probably supporting the growth of more top level hockey players than any similar region and sure to be a contestant in lacrosse and baseball. The local populace seems furious that a special interest group is trying to co-op coaches at all levels and diminish the role various volunteer helpers play in building teams. Dunno.
Regulation is pushy business. On another note Ontario continues to build on its anti-smoking legislation. It's a little hypocritical given the large hole for underage users. On the front page of the Examiner today is the picture of a cigarette puffing 17 year old interviewed about NY resolutions. If i was to have given him this cigarette I'd be charged and liable to a hefty fine, if a store had sold it to him no less than a $4000 fine would be levied and yet underage smoking itself isn't a crime. Now that's a head scratcher. And one for the regulators to explain.
These concerns are a symptom of the liberal nanny state mentality. Vote conservative. They're like Buckley's, it tastes like shyte, but it works, lol.

I could go into the demographics of the Peterborough region and point a chubby finger at the woodsy outdoorsmen, mentality of the suburbanites that inhabit the area,as primer, to the crop of quality athletes. But that would just be hypocritical of me. But I argue that in Newmarket, there is a very good crop of players making headlong strides to stardom.

You can't fault regulation on the job front. Without it, government services departments would soon be depopulated. Canada, like its fellows today, relies on incremental control of all political and educational and social functions in its jurisdiction. Regulation is huge business. That's why a boom in studies and consultants has emerged in the last quarter century. That's why panels are omnipresent that tinker with existing rules and codes. The web gets stickier year by year. The spider bigger.
Once again, vote away from the creators and ferilizers of the nanny state, if it so infuriates you. The ndp and liberal regimes are a sure bet on increasing the burgenning welfare program, known as government waste and largess.
 

tamarin

House Member
Jun 12, 2006
3,197
22
38
Oshawa ON
Nanny state it is but I'm not sure that was the intent of those first vetting democracy. The world's best of a host of dubious alternatives seems increasingly broken.
I concur at fair play provisions early in a child's sporting life. A kid has to have a shot. But organizers here, predominantly volunteers trying to keep the huge local programs going, seem to feel under-the-gun of professional meddlers whose time working with kids seems devoted not to the kids but their minders. Will it all work out or simply mean fewer volunteers as those contributing their time increasingly refuse to be politicized?
 

TenPenny

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 9, 2004
17,466
138
63
Location, Location
What's really funny is that at young ages, they always play games where they don't keep score...except if you ask any of the kids, they know the real score. This not keeping score thing is only to appease the adults, the kids know who wins and who loses. There seems to be a generation of parents, probably the children of the love generation, who don't believe in competition. But kids do, and thrive on it.

Last year at an indoor soccer tournament,the coach asked the kids, if it's late in the game, and we're close or tied, do you want to keep rotating all the players, or go for the big guns. The kids themselves wanted the big guns, because they want to win.

This year, on the hockey team my daughter plays on, (9-10), there is one kid who never played before; he's really improving, and he gets as much ice time and pressure as the rest. He's simply reacting to the competition, and pushing himself. Isn't that a good thing? To push yourself and get better? Isn't that what the idea of sports is really all about?
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Nanny state it is but I'm not sure that was the intent of those first vetting democracy. The world's best of a host of dubious alternatives seems increasingly broken.
I concur at fair play provisions early in a child's sporting life. A kid has to have a shot. But organizers here, predominantly volunteers trying to keep the huge local programs going, seem to feel under-the-gun of professional meddlers whose time working with kids seems devoted not to the kids but their minders. Will it all work out or simply mean fewer volunteers as those contributing their time increasingly refuse to be politicized?
I'ld bank on volunteers sticking around, some has to do it and there is a sucker born every minute.

This year, on the hockey team my daughter plays on, (9-10), there is one kid who never played before; he's really improving, and he gets as much ice time and pressure as the rest. He's simply reacting to the competition, and pushing himself. Isn't that a good thing? To push yourself and get better? Isn't that what the idea of sports is really all about?
Yes it is a good thing.
Yes, pushing ones self to betterment should be everyones goal.
Yes it is.

But without ice time or time in play, how is one so young supposed to gain the practical experience?

You can only learn so much in practice.
 

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
70
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
Seems to me that it shouldn't be necessary for people to offer kids choices. If a kid has the choices of either to play or to sit on bench whattaya think? It would be nice if they all had the choice now and then. A couple get tired, pull em and let a couple rested ones go out. It takes gov't regs to make people do this? Something wrong with the picture.
 

tamarin

House Member
Jun 12, 2006
3,197
22
38
Oshawa ON
Gilbert, good points but I think what the volunteers and coaches in Ptbo are complaining about is the lack of flexibility that will steadily be built into the FPM. We all know that once regulation gets its toes wet the little sucker will want to jump all the way in. Letters to the paper here remind the public a coach also has to make sure players who break team rules are punished, that miss practices are penalized, that don't meet academic commitments - as is common in upper grade schools sports participation - are reprimanded. You can't balance those responsibilities with a group of nosy Parkers armed with stopwatches. Common sense should rule the day but some rooster is always crapping on its head.
 

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
70
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
Gilbert, good points but I think what the volunteers and coaches in Ptbo are complaining about is the lack of flexibility that will steadily be built into the FPM. We all know that once regulation gets its toes wet the little sucker will want to jump all the way in. Letters to the paper here remind the public a coach also has to make sure players who break team rules are punished, that miss practices are penalized, that don't meet academic commitments - as is common in upper grade schools sports participation - are reprimanded. You can't balance those responsibilities with a group of nosy Parkers armed with stopwatches. Common sense should rule the day but some rooster is always crapping on its head.
Then we should have a regulation limiting regulations. :D Sorta like regulating regulations. ;)
 

tamarin

House Member
Jun 12, 2006
3,197
22
38
Oshawa ON
Regulations begetting regulations. Sounds like rabbits! I think of myself a no nonsense person, unapolegetically black and white, not a fence to be found that's ever held my bum. So much of what occurs in Canada reflects unnecessary duplication. All owing to decisions poorly made or weakly implemented. If you're older you'll notice the same legislative initiatives, that marked previous parliaments and election campaigns, are still in the news. Still being worked. Still giving our 'reps' the feeling theirs is a full-time job. Regulation, the need to constantly tinker, has become institutionalized. I always considered the durability of law to be a first goal of lawmakers: get it done, get it done right. If it needs to be constantly revisited and rejigged, then the initial effort was poor. Granted, there has to be some flexibility but it should not be seen as essential.
I marvel at the great blue collar workers of my community. They know they're being had. They produce a product. Their governors produce a process. It's a game. Regulation benefits first the regulators.
 

tamarin

House Member
Jun 12, 2006
3,197
22
38
Oshawa ON
Smoking tremors in Ontario

It's regulation roulette! Gotta love the sight of the Ontario government squirming on a hot seat of its own making. With casino revenues down, the Queen's Park crew have decided it's okay to build smokers' shelters at their gambling depots. Meanwhile the prov's have told bars and restaurants no patron will be allowed such a luxury. The feud is heating up. The government insists casinos are different. (Hmmm, because the province is the key proprietor?) Bar and restaurant owners are crying foul and the government is having a hissy. Who's right? Is it a double standard?
 

tamarin

House Member
Jun 12, 2006
3,197
22
38
Oshawa ON
A recent letter to the editor here defined the situation in Ontario well: enlightened fascism.
It's got a ring to it.