With regard the matchday side of things - My initial thought on this when I first started coaching was that there should always be equal game time for players regardless of ability and that the most important thing is the ability to participate. However I read a really interesting piece about it that a club local to me had put together which detailed their own thoughts on the matter, and it brought up some points that I hadn’t previously considered.

I’m paraphrasing in part here but they brought up certain reasons why a player may not be progressing at the rate you might expect them to, and the effect that this can have on other players in the team. Obviously at primary school age level there could be a million and one factors as to why players were at different levels, but where you talk about a general concept of “fairness”, you have to consider how committed the player is. Do they turn up every week? Does they try their best every week? Do they listen to their coaches? Etc etc. 

The idea being that, there’s a fine balance between being “fair” to lower ability players, but also maintaining fairness to higher ability player within the same set up, who may be higher level because they are more committed, try harder, etc etc. 

Basically, it’s not just as simple as being fair by giving equal playing time to everyone regardless of any context.

The piece went on to say that in the longer term, there were some negative effects stemming from trying to cater to everyone, in that the lower level/ less committed players are more likely to drop out of the game anyway, and this can affect the higher level players who have been “sacrificed” (probably not the right word to use but you get my point) in order to accommodate them.

The solution for the team in question was to separate their players early on, into levels based on commitment and ability. It was along the lines of low level low commitment, mid level low commitment, midlevel high commitment, high level high commitment. An each player was categorised reasonably early on in their development enabling players to play at a suitable level within the club and with likeminded and similar ability players.

Obviously that solution may not be possible at all clubs. 

I’m definitely of the mindset, especially at lower age groups, that participation takes priority over winning etc. 

but the above is something I thought was worth considering 

With regard the matchday side of things - My initial thought on this when I first started coaching was that there should always be equal game time for players regardless of ability and that the most important thing is the ability to participate. However I read a really interesting piece about it that a club local to me had put together which detailed their own thoughts on the matter, and it brought up some points that I hadn’t previously considered.

I’m paraphrasing in part here but they brought up certain reasons why a player may not be progressing at the rate you might expect them to, and the effect that this can have on other players in the team. Obviously at primary school age level there could be a million and one factors as to why players were at different levels, but where you talk about a general concept of “fairness”, you have to consider how committed the player is. Do they turn up every week? Does they try their best every week? Do they listen to their coaches? Etc etc. 

The idea being that, there’s a fine balance between being “fair” to lower ability players, but also maintaining fairness to higher ability player within the same set up, who may be higher level because they are more committed, try harder, etc etc. 

Basically, it’s not just as simple as being fair by giving equal playing time to everyone regardless of any context.

The piece went on to say that in the longer term, there were some negative effects stemming from trying to cater to everyone, in that the lower level/ less committed players are more likely to drop out of the game anyway, and this can affect the higher level players who have been “sacrificed” (probably not the right word to use but you get my point) in order to accommodate them.

The solution for the team in question was to separate their players early on, into levels based on commitment and ability. It was along the lines of low level low commitment, mid level low commitment, midlevel high commitment, high level high commitment. An each player was categorised reasonably early on in their development enabling players to play at a suitable level within the club and with likeminded and similar ability players.

Obviously that solution may not be possible at all clubs. 

I’m definitely of the mindset, especially at lower age groups, that participation takes priority over winning etc. 

but the above is something I thought was worth considering