Region III Championships

LP_Elite wrote:We were disqualified from the regional championships in Greensboro, North Carolina for fielding an ineligible player. The player in question has been on our roster since July 1 2016. She dual rostered with us and NWO in Oklahoma. The player in question played in all competitions with us (LP ELITE 03) except for State cup, including SRPL (USYSA) and this includes games against OFC. We believed that because NWO 02 did not advance to regionals that she was good to go and play with us. What we learned was that the rules change for the 'Champions Series' which includes state cup, regionals and national finals. Once a player plays for a certain team in any champions series competition they are automatically ineligible to compete for another team in the 'champions series' even if dual rostered in a different state. The rules were shown to us after the fact and were very unclear, yet in the eyes of the tournament directors we had violated this rule and were immediately disqualified. We won our first game against OFC 4-0 and were confident of advancing out of the group stages. What happened was unintentional and we completely accept the ruling and will live to fight another day. I accept full responsibility as the coach of this team and that's that. We look forward to competing in the next 12 months to attempt to achieve a better outcome at the next regional championships.

This has absolutely no bearing on NPL national finals (US Club) and the player in question will continue to play for Liverpool 03 Elite.

Was this the same team at NPL Nationals (link below)?

http://nationalpremierleagues.com/_element_display/#%2Fscripts%2Frunisa.dll%3FM2%3Agp%3A%3A73474%2BElements%2FDisplay%2BE%2B47116%2BTeam%2F%2B88519907%2B87039498

True it was unethical what the OK coach did. He waited for said player to step on the field then he protested. From my understanding, NTSSA told LP you could appeal but if you lose, your coach is possibly looking at a two years suspension. Now what coach is willing to risk their livelihood on a case that was not in their favor.

upper95 wrote:Side question: did NTSSA have a written release from OK to allow her to play in Texas in the first place? if not, she was never legally rostered in TX. if there was a release, the OK State Cup rosters could have been checked against Oklahoma residents released to other states.

Yes, there was a release.  NTX State Rep had twelve rosters to check for Regional. Red flag should have went up (if NTX Rep checked) and saw a player on LP roster with OK physical home address. Rosters are pulled from gotsoccer into Regional roster system. Unless you physically log into gotsoccer and remove players current roster will be uploaded.

KeeperCommander wrote:It does seem strangely odd that everyone else seemed to know that player was from OK and had played in multiple state cups but association did not. Ask anyone on sideline, they all knew. Seems you can't have secrets in NTX soccer.

Said player didn't play in multiple state cups.

OK coach is an a-hole, but I don't see the "unethical" part.

Sho'Nuff wrote:OK coach is an a-hole, but I don't see the "unethical" part.

Ahh, when it comes to youth sports nothing is unethical. My bad for thinking that.

So, message to the parents in this situation. Your time, money, and DD detication to this team and club is not worth an appeal because the coach could be suspended. The money loss by the parents of the team alone at least adds up to one year of fees lost. Very Interesting to say the least. Pfloyd, do you have any feedback on this?

Son_ofa_Pitch wrote:
Said player didn't play in multiple state cups.

So the player was on the roster for the Texas State Cup, but was not in uniform, warming up, on the field, or on the bench for any of the games?   (irrelevant to the DQ, but for clarity)

The DQ was because the player was rostered to more than one team in the National Championship Series at and beyond State Cup level, period.  (Section 224 Rule 4)

It did not matter if she was legally rostered to either team or not, or if an administrator caught it or not.

Sho'Nuff wrote:
OK coach is an a-hole, but I don't see the "unethical" part.

If the OK coach really saw the ineligible player in uniform and warming up before the game, he had a ethical duty to report it immediately, not hold the information until it benefited him.  (the way the rules are written, the DQ likely would have still occurred,
but since organizations don't always follow their own rules, they could have removed her and allowed the team to continue.)

upper95 wrote:

Son_ofa_Pitch wrote:
Said player didn't play in multiple state cups.

So the player was on the roster for the Texas State Cup, but was not in uniform, warming up, on the field, or on the bench for any of the games?   (irrelevant to the DQ, but for clarity) ... Correct

The DQ was because the player was rostered to more than one team in the National Championship Series at and beyond State Cup level, period.  (Section 224 Rule 4) ... Correct

It did not matter if she was legally rostered to either team or not, or if an administrator caught it or not.

Sho'Nuff wrote:
OK coach is an a-hole, but I don't see the "unethical" part.

If the OK coach really saw the ineligible player in uniform and warming up before the game, he had a ethical duty to report it immediately, not hold the information until it benefited him.  (the way the rules are written, the DQ likely would have still occurred,
but since organizations don't always follow their own rules, they could have removed her and allowed the team to continue.) .. and Agree. Specially when the committee told LP they believe the mistake wasn't done with intent

In this case, it was best interest of Regional Committee to DQ Elite than set precedent.. Easier to hear one complaint than hear from many..

Removed

Removed

pfloyd wrote:upper95

The DQ was because the player was rostered to more than one team in the National Championship Series at and beyond State Cup level, period.  (Section 224 Rule 4) ... Correct

Not so fast. The committee said if her OK team would have advanced she  could have played for them at Region III. That implied that she was legal on OK but not legal on LFC. There words not mine. My thesis is they got it backwards and she was legally rostered to LFC not OK.

Section 4. The first National Championships roster of a team to which the player is rostered is the only team with which the player may participate in at each level of the National Championships competitions for a seasonal year.

Texas held it's state cup before Ok so we had the legal roster. OK as soon as she played there was illegal.

Have you seen the official rosters? Just because TX State cup was first (by just a week or two), doesn't mean that the OK team couldn't have had her on their official roster weeks, or even months, before, right?

Section 5. It shall be the responsibility of the appropriate official designated by each entering State Association to certify the eligibility of competing teams and to provide the teams with a copy of this policy.

Somebody didn't do their job.

You mean NTX soccer association is not doing their job! No!

pfloyd wrote:upper95

Not so fast. The committee said if her OK team would have advanced she  could have played for them at Region III. That implied that she was legal on OK but not legal on LFC. There words not mine. My thesis is they got it backwards and she was legally rostered to LFC not OK.

This could imply that the committee was more concerned with participation than merely being on the roster, which I believe is the ultimate goal of the rules, to prevent a player's stepping onto the field and affecting games with more than one team.

If this is the case, if the player had not entered the game at regionals, the team may not have been DQ'd. (although many could have recognized the problem, still bothered that the OK coach did not report BEFORE the game...)

I still don't think it matters which team had the legal roster other than for purposes of refining processes. After the player stepped onto the field during the OK State Cup, she could not step onto the field with another team thereafter without a club pass.

Similar to the rules of golf. There are rules and there are decisions. This would fall under the latter.

Removed

Removed

Removed

Removed

I don't me this in a bad way but why discuss this on a forum when the US Youth Soccer headquarters in in Frisco? Maybe it would be more helpful for club representatives to go sit in their lobby so LFC gets their pound of flesh or better yet something like this can be avoided in the future.

Removed

pfloyd wrote:

db10 wrote:I don't me this in a bad way but why discuss this on a forum when the US Youth Soccer headquarters in in Frisco? Maybe it would be more helpful for club representatives to go sit in their lobby so LFC gets their pound of flesh or better yet something like this can be avoided in the future.

Believe me I tried to go through NTX first and they wanted nothing to do with it. I would have thought that NTX would have been helpful and demanded answers from the Region III rule committee, but they were quite the opposite.

So go over their heads...go to the source.

pfloyd wrote:

upper95 wrote:
I still don't think it matters which team had the legal roster other than for purposes of refining processes.  After the player stepped onto the field during the OK State Cup, she could not step onto the field with another team thereafter without a club pass.

The rules make no mention of the player actually playing. So, your comment about player stepping onto the field for OK is not covered by the rule and is not mentioned in the rule.

Missing the point. Whether they played is irrelevant to rule. Just being on the roster is violation as well. What is player was a scrub and never saw field for either team?

pfloyd wrote:

KeeperCommander wrote:Similar to the rules of golf.  There are rules and there are decisions. This would fall under the latter.

The decision to not abide by the clearly defined protest rules?

By not requiring a protest to have 5 copies is what you mean? Ancient requirement that came about before copiers or even carbon paper. Payment should have been required however.
Rules do not cover all situations. They have to be applied to situations and a decision has to be made.

I know.  Lets just say what really happened.  Liverpool played a player that they should not have.  You can say that they made a mistake, had permission, just plain did not care about rules.  Fact remains that a rule was broken.  So we can go around in circles and say it should have been one way and it wasn't or just go about our day. PFloyd seems to think that they were wronged and the world should stop and apologize.  Irritating really.  Who ok'd the roster with Liverpool?  With a question like this looming someone should have given AF the go ahead.  LPE submitted the lying cheating roster and its NTX fault?  Should they have caught it? Yes, but not to save LPE from a DQ, but to keep the integrity of the game intact for all the rule followers out there.  Get a grip! You cheated, got caught, got DQ'd now get on with a new season.

Pfloyd, thank you for taking up the mantle on this. I, like you, wanted to wait for time to let the emotions settle before speaking up. But beyond that I was just too damn lazy to do all the research necessary to bring the case to light - and frankly didn't have the time. Thank you for investing that time and making the case so strong in favor of LFC that most of these haters on here can't look anything but foolish in their responses trying to pick your case apart.

And you know it's hate when those like KeeperCommander, and others, want to toss out phrases like "lying, cheating roster". What kind of BS talk is that? Y'all would be making the same case if your DD and team were involved in the same situation. As  far as lying and cheating, are you serious? This team didn't need to do any of that to win.  And deep down inside you know that. It was the same core group of girls on this team that kicked your DD's, and mines previously, arse over the past 3+ years that went out to Region 3, so lie and cheat?  That implies malicious intent which I for one take exception to. Call us stupid, maybe to a certain minor extent we were, but don't call us cheaters, because y'all know what's up.

Getting back to the "legal" part of the case that's being made and a point which I don't believe has been brought up yet in pfloyd's argument is that the "illegal" player was rostered 02 in OK. Obviously the rules don't address such a scenario. Maybe somebody can enlighten me as to why that shouldn't have been a point taken into consideration by the Region 3 and USYSA folks. If the spirit of the rule is simply to prevent an individual player from having multiple opportunities to get to the national championship then I guess I get it, but if the rule is to prevent an unfair competitive advantage by the use of an illegal player, a "hired gun" so to speak, how does this situation violate that spirit? The player was on the LFC roster from day one, July 1, 2016 and the other team she was dual rostered with is in a different age group.

Beyond any strict interpretation of the rules, what this really comes down to for me, is the action of a vengeful opposing Coach acting outside of the spirit of fair play to derive a benefit for his team that they otherwise would not have gotten.  If the coach truly wanted it to be about a fair competition, he would've handled it like I believe the majority of coaches would have, by speaking directly to the LFC coach before the game to express his concerns about the legality of a given player. If he was a true sportsman, that's what he would have done, rather than have his team secure a victory outside of the field of play.  To me there's far more shame in that than anything LFC did or didn't do anywhere along the way in this entire situation.

Was TSN playing in this?