Defending Idiocy

12 year old Kayla Watkins, who left her Pee Wee ''A" team

after being humiliated by the parent of one of her team mates

A blog or two ago I posted about a recent article in The Star about a 12 year old girl playing on a boy's Pee Wee "A"  hockey team.  A parent, yes, a parent, not the coach, convened a meeting to discuss what he perceived as poor skills on Kayla's part and what should be done about it.  This was a 10th place team, and the parent in question, a lawyer named George Atis, seemed to feel that the onus upon Kayla's lack of talent.  He did not discuss the issue with the team's coach (who by the way, chose Kayla to be on the team and wanted her to remain), but instead drafted an agenda that he sent out to the parents entitled "Kayla Watkins — Player Ability Limitations and Suggested Options.”  When Kayla learned of the agenda, she felt humiliated and subsequently left the team.  She's now playing in a girl's league, which is not as competitive; it is, far more supportive.

All in all, it was a classic case of unneeded parental involvement in the world of minor hockey.  Instead of volunteering his time, like Kayla's coach, or her mother (who was the team's manager), he interfered in a totally inappropriate way.  Let’s be real here Mr Atis, this is single "A" hockey, if your kid is playing single "A" hockey in Toronto at the age of 12, he's not going to the NHL.  Yes, some small towns can field a high quality single "A" team, but in Toronto, with the abundance of players to chose from, unless you're playing "AAA" you're not going anywhere with your hockey career.  Therefore the hockey should be about the kids having fun, developing their skills, as well as developing their sense team work.

Atis still believes Kayla’s removal from the low-level competitive team was in the best interests of the other players, including his son.  Since her departure, the team “is having fun again,” Atis wrote on his blog two weeks ago. “I know that people don’t want to hear this but, I am going to say it anyway: the reason the team is having fun now is because the negative elements on the team have left. It’s that simple.”  Amazingly he is still defending his idiocy.  Since Kayla's the departure, the team's record is 5 - 7, so clearly Kayla's presence was not the over riding issue as to the team's performance, unfortunately, George Atis cannot accept that it's a team sport and that success or failure has to be attributed to the group, not one person.

Atis also seems blind to the fact that such politics is not only bad for the team, but also bad for his own son. Ice Dogs general manager Gus Bovoletis said he was “totally against” Atis’ agenda.  “We don’t support that,” he said. “I spoke with him at that the time and told him he had no position doing that.”  Bovoletis says he’s asked for another meeting with Atis to discuss the matter. Some want him removed from the team.  “If I were to cast the father out, the boy would go with him and that isn’t fair,” Bovoletis said.  But think what will happen next season, what team will want to take Atis' son, knowing that such a father comes along with the package?

Perhaps George Atis is so used to working in a world filled with antagonism; he obviously feels no compunction in bringing such antagonism to the world of children. 

I'm sorry that Kayla had to go through such a hurtful process.  I'm happy that she's now on a winning and supportive team.  I'm really sorry for George Atis' son



What was he thinking?



Kayla Watkins - Ousted from her team by a another parent

Today I read an article in the Toronto Star about a 12 year old girl who was ostensibly forced to leave her single A boy's hockey team due to an irate parent of one of the boys on the team.  www.thestar.com/sports/hockey/article/910773--controversy-pushes-girl-off-coed-hockey-team  The article explains that a12 year old girl, Kayla Watkins, was extremely embarrassed by the actions and more so the words of George Atis, the parent of another player on the Single A Toronto Ice Dogs Pee Wee Club.

George Atis, a lawyer, and not part of the coaching staff, called a meeting to address what he considered weakness in Kayla's hockey abilities.  He also said that he was voicing the concerns of some of the boys on the team who were squeamish about changing in a co-ed environment.  His agenda stated that Kayla lacked the necessary skills to play with the team and that a more appropriate spot should be found for her.

What must be put into consideration is this is a 10th place, Single A team in Toronto - This is not the pipeline to the NHL.  To play in Single A, players have to try out and obviously Kayla had the skills to make the team.  If anybody should have voiced concerns with regards to her level of play, it should have been her coach, Paul Macchia.  Yet Macchia contends that he wanted Kayla to remain on the team, and he points out that the team has remained in 10th place even after Kayla's departure.  Obviously her skills or lack thereof were not part of the problem, more likely it was interfering parents who can't be bothered to volunteer their time to coach, but feel that a hockey team is some sort of democracy that requires their self important input.

Kayla chose to leave the team after accidently view the email in which Atis coldly enumerates what he perceives as Kayla's faults. 

I do understand the issues of change room and as kids enter puberty, it can be fraught with awkwardness.  I never thought twice about changing with my male teammates, though we had reached the age where seeing anybody's "bits" had completely lost its thrill.  We worked it out easily and I'm sure Kayla's team had the issue well in hand.  Even on an all male team, boys enter into puberty at different ages and thus there will be an element of awkwardness present.  With wisdom and guidance on the part of parents, it could have been dealt with.

I also understand that we're dealing with double standards.  Girls want to be allowed to play in boy's leagues, but conversely, boys are not allowed to play in girl's leagues.  I know the argument, if a girl is good enough to play with the boys, she should be allowed to play, but what if a boy isn't good enough to play with the boys, should he then be allowed to play with a girl's team?  There aren't any clear cut answers, though inevitably, top male athletes will out muscle females, though I don't think that was an issue for the 12 year olds in question.

At the end of the day, George Atis had no excuse for doing what he did.  If he had a concern, he should have dealt with the coach and if he didn't find resolution, he could have taken his son to play for another team next season.  He had absolutely no right to target a 12 year old girl, who was simply playing the game she loved.