|
|
Post by dubber on Nov 5, 2014 21:27:58 GMT -6
Just in case there are coaches on the board who are familiar with me or program, let me preface this.....
My compliant here has nothing to do with the school we played, their coaches or admin. I have a great deal of respect for those gentlemen. Had we won this game, I would still be upset.
Here goes:
First week of our playoffs, we are playing a team with one of the best RB's in our class (really in the whole state).
As we are going through our prep, we received notice that he was ejected from previous game. We check the local papers, watched the film, and called the opposing team's AD.......all confirmed he was ejected after two unsportsman like conduct penalties.
In our state, an ejection from one game means you are automatically ejected from the next game. There are no appeals.
We called our state association, who took the "player privacy" route and said they could neither confirm nor deny.
Come Friday night, this kid comes out to warm ups fully dressed.
Our immediate thought is they are playing mind games, so we just go about our business.
Then, first play of the game, he is out there.
In that moment, I thought "what the hell?", but then got focused on the game. I suppose we just figured we'd play to win. That was really the only thought in our heads.
We lose, and afterwards at McDonalds, we as a staff started to discuss it. Our thoughts were 1.) "surely they didn't play an ineligible player" and 2.) "but how could the newspaper, the AD, and the FILM be wrong?"
We get home and our AD (also the HC) fires an email off to our commissioner.
He got a response early Saturday morning. The commissioner said, "he reviewed the film and decided one of the unsportsman like penalties was unwarranted, and that he decided to rescind the ejection". He goes on to take full responsibility for the decision.
ISSUE #1: Why was it all about "player privacy" earlier in the week, but now we are free to discuss it?
ISSUE #2: How can you go against the by laws that clearly state there is NO review of an ejection?
Our HC/AD responds (maintaining a composure that I WOULD NOT be able to muster....probably why I will always be an assistant), and the association goes radio silent. Literally not taking phone calls or returning emails.
I could hear the wagons circling.
Then, we get this story: "The officials reviewed the film and decided not to turn in the ejection." This has now become the party line.
ISSUE #3: The by laws state that NO ONE and in NO CIRCUMSTANCE can an ejection be overturned.
ISSUE #4: If they officials decided not to turn it in, how does the commissioner have knowledge of it?
ISSUE #5: (the biggest one) Why did you, in that first email, state you reviewed it, you rescinded it, and you take full respnsibility for it?
We are not done with this........despite their refusal to discuss this further with us.
Has anyone EVER dealt with something like this from their state association?
|
|
|
|
Post by spos21ram on Nov 6, 2014 8:56:20 GMT -6
I've never been involved in something like this for football, but I had a similar case in baseball a few years ago. It had to do with an illegal pitcher that was ineligible due to the state pitching rule. The game was late in the season, both of the teams were undefeated or one loss, can't remember, but we were both fighting for the division title. Our opponent had a stud pitcher, one of the best in the state, so I anticipated he would pitch against us, why wouldn't he right? So when I saw he hit his max innings allowed on the previous Friday (we played them the following Monday), he wouldn't have the proper 4 days rest needed by state NFHS rules. I thought this was very bizarre and I had a gut feeling that their coach messed up big time and didn't realize it. Low and behold on Monday he's warming up to pitch. I anticipated this happening and over the weekend sent an email to the league director, confirming what the pitching rule is and gave this kids exact innings for the week as an example. I printed out his response and brought it with me on Monday to the game. Instead of being that guy and waiting til the game started, then protest, I brought this to the umpire and opposing coach's attention before the game. Umpire's like the refs are just there to officiate so they really couldn't do anything. The opposing coach played dumb, like he didn't know the rule, which may have been true, but he chose to pitch the kid anyway. I immediately protested the game. We ended up losing in a close game, and the official ruling was that we had to replay the game and that kid was ineligible to pitch in the make up. We won the make-up game and went on to be division champs.
Not sure if you have a full time AD, but we do. If what you described happened to us in football, our AD would have been on the phone before the game getting an official answer and we probably would have held the game up until he got it. He would have also went over to the other team and explained what he was doing and what was going on and ask why the player is suited up. Like in baseball, although it's probably a different term and may not be applicable, I still would have told the head official we were protesting the game before the game started, just so it was documented.
As for the process now you're going through...it sounds like you're getting railroaded. Actually, it's obvious you are. They are being extremely unethical and there has to be someone above them to contact, or some member of the association that will back you. I would keep fighting it. Did the opposing coach just blatantly ignore the rule, or did he know ahead of time it was overturned?
|
|
|
|
Post by dubber on Nov 6, 2014 14:41:20 GMT -6
He knew ahead of time it was overturned.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Nov 8, 2014 6:24:52 GMT -6
He knew ahead of time it was overturned. I think there are two issues at play. One, the individual game incident. On that, While it sucks to lose--my personal belief is that I don't want to really beat others because they are at a disadvantage. HOWEVER, the second issue seems to be a lack of credibility and faith in the state Assoc, and THAT is a big deal. Not sure the proper channels to take for your association though, but I am a big believer in transparency, and I think a mass email to all member AD's and PRINCIPALS showing this action would be an appropriate response. Not a complaining email, just one cautioning of a lack of proper procedures and credibility. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Nov 8, 2014 10:55:17 GMT -6
In our league if you get busted for an illegal player of any kind you forfeit, not just vacate. Which sounds great until you realize the unintended consequences it has for third-party teams. This year the #1 seed forfeited a game against the worst team (71-1 original score) that didn't hurt the top team but made a giant mess of the battle for the last playoff spot.
|
|
|
|
Post by dubber on Nov 8, 2014 12:37:17 GMT -6
He knew ahead of time it was overturned. I think there are two issues at play. One, the individual game incident. On that, While it sucks to lose--my personal belief is that I don't want to really beat others because they are at a disadvantage. HOWEVER, the second issue seems to be a lack of credibility and faith in the state Assoc, and THAT is a big deal. Not sure the proper channels to take for your association though, but I am a big believer in transparency, and I think a mass email to all member AD's and PRINCIPALS showing this action would be an appropriate response. Not a complaining email, just one cautioning of a lack of proper procedures and credibility.
I suppose my intentions weren't made clear enough, and apologize for that.
Had we won this game, I would still be upset.
Had this been the back up PAT TE, I would still be upset.
My anger has NOTHING to do with the school we played against.........they asked the state association for a review and got it.
I think everyone on this board would do that same.
My issue is with the association and commissioner over stepping their bounds and then lying to us about it.
THAT, is my issue.
Now, in full transparency, this kid rolled up 220+ on the ground, scored 2 TD's and ad 2 INT's, so yeah, if he doesn't play, we have a greater shot at winning.
And, this thread has nothing to do with sour grapes. It has to do with getting F'ed.
I do think some type of mass communication is important........forwarding the email is a good idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Nov 8, 2014 16:10:31 GMT -6
I think there are two issues at play. One, the individual game incident. On that, While it sucks to lose--my personal belief is that I don't want to really beat others because they are at a disadvantage. HOWEVER, the second issue seems to be a lack of credibility and faith in the state Assoc, and THAT is a big deal. Not sure the proper channels to take for your association though, but I am a big believer in transparency, and I think a mass email to all member AD's and PRINCIPALS showing this action would be an appropriate response. Not a complaining email, just one cautioning of a lack of proper procedures and credibility.
I suppose my intentions weren't made clear enough, and apologize for that.
Had we won this game, I would still be upset.
Had this been the back up PAT TE, I would still be upset.
My anger has NOTHING to do with the school we played against.........they asked the state association for a review and got it.
I think everyone on this board would do that same.
My issue is with the association and commissioner over stepping their bounds and then lying to us about it.
THAT, is my issue.
Now, in full transparency, this kid rolled up 220+ on the ground, scored 2 TD's and ad 2 INT's, so yeah, if he doesn't play, we have a greater shot at winning.
And, this thread has nothing to do with sour grapes. It has to do with getting F'ed.
I do think some type of mass communication is important........forwarding the email is a good idea.
To be clear--I didn't take your post as a "sour grapes" type of post---It didn't have that kind of vibe. I was just pointing out that there were two parts to the situation, and even without a sour grapes element, it is STILL a situation that exists. But the seeming lack of transparency and deviation from procedure is unacceptable. |
|
