Need your opinion

[JustADad]

This really isn't an officiating question, more of a league conduct question - let me know if I should not post it here...

I'm pretty sure what *should* be done here, but want to get some unbiased opinions to make sure I'm thinking this through correctly.

Situation:

Prior to the start of the season, the league board met to hear a request by a parent that their child be allowed to play at a certain level. The child was significantly younger than the starting age for that level, but at tryouts proved to be one of the better candidates.

The league decided that it was not in the best interest of the child or the league to allow the player to "play-up" this year.

It has now come to the attention of the league that the boy's parent and a coach (both who knew about the decision) have allowed the boy to play in a number of games - neither the league nor the other teams were not aware that this occured.

There is now consideration before the board to take the following actions:

1) Prohibit the boy's father from ever holding any position in the league, including any type of coaching position, effective immediately.

2) Prohibit the coach and the assistant coach from ever holding any position in the league, effective immediately.

3) Forfeiture by the team of all the games that the ineligible boy participated in.

Any opinion if any or all of these actions should be taken? Any other action you would recommend?

Your help is appreciated...

[ref5678]

I would say parent is banned from coaching/league position and the head coach also banned. The assitant coach i would probably give a suspenion. Had this same situation happen in our league and this was the only action they took

[Edited by ref5678 on Jun 10th, 2003 at 10:13 AM]

[johnSandlin]

I agree totally with ref5678 response. I do not think there is "grey area" about this at all.

[DownTownTonyBrown]

Ban the child from playing for 5 years.

Take away his birthday.

Castrate the father.

Hang the cheatin' coach.

It was a ridiculous decision in the first place to not allow him to play. Now the board is faced with enforcing their ridiculous decision. Don't know what is appropriate. Shoot the board members might be appropriate.

Why didn't they let him to play in the first place? If he had the necessary skills then it wasn't a safety issue. What other possible reason could they have had for their original decision? Some childish coach likely had a boner about letting an ineligible player (too young), that had better skills than his older players, beat his team.

The older I get the more disgusted I become with the fact that some people just never, ever grow up. When I arrive at senority I'm certain that I'm going to find a society full of children. And I was hoping I could get out of this baby-sitting role some day. LOL

[JustADad]

I can't agree with TonyBrown.

No matter how "ridiculous" the boards decision, it was agreed to by the person who broke that rule (didn't say that initially, and not really important). I can't think of a time when it is OK to break a rule you don't believe in - not setting a very good example for the boys.

Next, the decision was made for maturity purposes. The boy is almost 2 years younger than the league minimum (he's 8, you have to be 10). There's more to playing baseball than raw ability - at least I think so.

The point that is being debated most is whether the games should be forfeit - sounds like you don't feel this would be necessary?

[Whowefoolin]

The board is voted in by the members of the League. So no matter what the board decided, it was a decision and should have been adhered to by all.

Now I would, boot the coach from the team and put him on some sort of probation (I am sure there is a grievance committee on your board).

Then I would reprimand the father. No matter how much he tried and tried, his son would not have played if it was not for the coach.

I would only forfeit the games that the child had a significant outcome with. I find it hard to believe that it would be too many. Remember the other kids on the team who might suffer from over-forfeitures because a lame-*** adult can't take responsibilities.


Just my opinion.

[CDcoach]

My question is...Why does the board care if the kid is "mature" enough? If the coach thinks he can play than let HIM deal with an immature kid...and who's to say the kid isn't ahead of his age? I just think the orignal decision was wrong.

However, the decision was made therefor needed to be followed.

I would agree with the probation of the coach and possibly the same for the parents.

Foreit the games he played in. It is no different than pulling some kids from a better team and letting him play...forfeit it they shouldn't have played.

I would thank after that happened the coach probably wouldn't hold onto the team the following year due to angered parents...that will definately be good punishment.

[DownTownTonyBrown]

You missed my point.

Unless there is something I am missing about the original decision, I think the original decision was probably biased and ridiculous.

I don't agree with cheating. And obviously the father and coach brought the issue before the board for their decision. Having done that they must live by the board's decision. They didn't; they must now pay the price.

I thought my punishments were rather facetious. Obviously none of them would be appropriate.

The ages were not in the original post. Less than two years can be a big difference, but skills at that age (8-10) can be a tremendous difference. I know 10 year olds that can't throw a ball across the infield and 8 year olds that can string one on a wire from their knees between home and 2nd.

The father is likely responsible for giving the child strong skills but it sounds like the father is probably also responsible for 'pushing' his son to play at a higher level. Most kids like to play with those that are their age - Kids 2 years older tend to make fun out of picking on the younger kids... even if they are on the same team. To play on a higher level team was likely the father's decision. By bringing the issue to the board he implicitly agreed to abiding by their decision. He didn't abide and now should be punished/reprimanded. Depriving other players of his coaching abilities may not be the correct answer either - good coaches for that age of players are difficult to find.

[ref5678]

why do they have rules. The point is rules are put in place for a reason. It is the responsibility of the board to enforce these. The second the coach allowed that player to play he underminded the authority of the board. Now speaking for an officials stand point do we alow coaches undermine our authority. I dont think so. Their is a major maturity difference between 8 and ten. Also I dont think to many of these ten year olds are gonna be very receptive to this one eight year olds. He needs to be with kids his own age. Now if this means he cant play sorry to hear this. But if their is another age divison he can play at that and become a better player by learning the fundementals at the same pace as his peers. And i bet the board took some of these points under consideration and what the based their ruling on.

[His High Holiness]

Originally posted by JustADad


3) Forfeiture by the team of all the games that the ineligible boy participated in.

Any opinion if any or all of these actions should be taken? Any other action you would recommend?

Your help is appreciated...

What in the he!l is a league of ten year olds keeping league standings for? Who cares who won or lost? Certainly not the kids.

In the old days, it was a father's business to decide what was best for his son. It appears that you have a nanny board of fathers who are unable to mind their own business. The rest seem to be living out their fantasies through their children. A league that has so lost focus of the main purpose of pre teen sports, deserves the cheating father. He fits right in. As you point a finger at his dishonesty, three fingers are pointing back at your immaturity. Forty years ago, adult men would not have wasted any time on such nonsense.

Peter

[Edited by His High Holiness on Jun 10th, 2003 at 04:31 PM]

[DownTownTonyBrown]

Nanny fathers - excellent. Well stated Triple H.

[soonerfan]

i would agree with everything they got. what the league had done was make a decision with the best interests in mind for the safety of the player, primarily, as well as follow the rules set forth by the league. i can see it now, an accident ocurr involving the younger player, not neccisarily the younger being hurt, and a lawsuit coming out of it because of negligence by the league's officials to adhere to the rules designed to protect the KIDS. As for the coaches, they put themselves in a liable position by ignoring the explicit decision on THAT player, as well as destroy any integrity that they may have had with the league. Without integrity involving children...you do not need to be showing them that breaking rules are OK. You fools. If it were my son getting hurt by someone specifically excluded by the league...I would have a law suit you would not believe. There is more than competition at stake, you are also giving our FUTURE life lessions in sportsmanship, FAIR play, and rules are made for our safety. I cannot remember how I did in ANY little league games, but I rememeber coaches arguing over the games...as well as have seen it as an umpire. The kids don't care THAT much. They will recall High School and College, that's what I recall vividly. Any "adult" that is that serious about winning a little league champions t-shirt...get a life!! All of them got exactly what they deserved! Period!

[JEL]

I agree with league, Ive seen kids "pushed" up, and that can be bad. Don't know this kid, maybe he could, maybe he couldnt. I had a 13 yr old play on my 16U travel team (girls FP) years ago, she has become awesome, but never had the maturity of the older girls. If we are talking a 8 year old here, he has 8-14 years in ball, and then whatever in majors if he wants, and earns, but he shouldnt be rushed. As for coaches playing him, they should be banned for at least two years. Rules are there for a reason, we may not agree with them, but this little guy has been taught by this action that rules only matter if you agree with them. What can that lead to as this child ages? sportsmanship begins at this level,(even earlier) and respect for laws and rules also, and this kid should never have been moved up, no matter how able. There is a lot of maturing at these early ages, don't rush the growth process, the are only young once. This sounds to me as a Dad playing his dreams through his son, bad bad bad idea.

[IHSAIllini]

The board ruled. (And incidentally, they were correct.) One thing that has come up to our board on several occasions is whether or not to allow kids to play up. The decision is always sound - in house league, the kids don't play up. The divisions are primarily age based. Travel is a different story...there's a reason they call them "Age-X and UNDER" leagues, but I still disagree in principle.

Nonetheless, I would concur with the first and second punishments offered by the original poster. Forfeiture seems somewhat over-the-top, since I would say it is not the team's fault that he cheated, and it is quite impossible to guess outcome without him.

[JustADad]

Thanks to everyone for their opinions - unfortunately, it seems too many of us have had to face a situation like this.

For HisHighHoliness, I don't understand you comment about keeping score.

We are talking about a "Majors" league for kids 10 to 12. That's when I started "keeping score" and competing against other teams over the course of a season - that was over 30 years ago - I think that's the right age.

The fact that an 8 year old has the raw skills to play in such a league is truly remarkable, but doesn't make it right. The board allowed the boy to play in minor - a 9 to 11 league, after tryouts showed his skill potential.

The sour grapes people mentioned simply aren't there. The boy was removed from the list at the draft, so no other Majors coaches were aware he could be available. Since he finished so high on skills, the board is considering forfeiture for playing an "illegal player" - same as if the coach had brought in an out-of-league AllStar, etc.

Once again, I thank everyone for their time and opinion...