Aine, I am going to disagree with you.
The suggestions her husband had (either wait at mother's for the soccer to end, or pick him up from soccer on the way back) did not compromise her safety. It compromised her CONVENIENCE. She would be in a good car in either of his suggestions.
To resolve an impasse, it helps to make an effort to understand the other person's viewpoint. In my opinion, her attitude reflects a sense that her husband's soccer is of no value. That HER time (which would be wasted either waiting at her mother's or driving all over town) is more important to her than HIS soccer game, which obviously means a lot to him. It comes off to me as "my way or no way". In a sense, his suggestions were more of a compromise than hers, I feel. At least with his suggestions, both parties get a little something (she gets her errands, he gets his soccer, just not efficiently). With the OP's suggestion, it's a one-way deal.
To top it off, the OP states the his soccer has been a point of contention previously. Based on what she said about it, I am assuming she DOESN'T put much value on his playing soccer; she pretty much tell us that without saying so explicitly. So, of course it seems to him like it is one more round of her bashing his soccer; because I think it is, too.
There are some things that are important to Mrs. Wolfman, even if I think they are not of much value intrinsically, or at least of no value to me specifically. However, because they are important to Mrs. Wolfman, they become important to me. I make the effort to see that she can have them/do them, because I like her to be happy. However, I don't see that kind of dynamic in the OP's post.
Here's a thought experiment for the OP: Suppose it WAS important to the OP that her husband get enjoyment from his soccer, to the point that she would do what she has to do to make it happen, as long as it didn't endanger her/cause real hardship? What kind of suggestions might the OP make then, with such an attitude? I suspect they might actually be close to what her husband suggested.
And I'll bet that if all the rest of the time, the OP was really supportive of his soccer, then when it was REALLY necessary, most husbands would be more willing to make the sacrifices on HIS end when no other practical choice was available. That's the give and take of marriage.
So, no, Aine, I don't agree with you, and I think Tunera's post above is closer to the mark than yours.
Wolf, you are entitled to your opinion but its not as if she is asking him to give up practice completely, it is only one evening out of many. You speak of her convenience, but it looks like he likes his convenience too.
I think that H who put their sports and extracurricular before the practical aspects of the household need to feel the reality of their choices too. Perhaps missing freshly laundered soccer gear, no groceries in the house, etc may help in that regard.
The reality is that women do many things that get taken for granted but when they need the help, it is an inconvenience. I am not saying all men are like this, but there are many who are and OP's H sounds a bit like that.
If my car is not working properly, the first thing my H does is ensure it's sorted as he doesn't want me stuck on the road in the middle of nowhere ( I drive over 100km a day). To my mind that is what a good H does. Not worry about his extra curricular for that day.
We all make choices and there is no room for selfishness, you mention 'give and take' where is his 'give and take?' just saying.