Bloodthirsty
New Member
Website update....looks clear cut from their standpoint...?
Welcome to the TTP community
Be apart of something great, join today!
The MWSL has just decided to change the rules....
- Thread starter Captain Shamrock
- Start date
Captain Shamrock
Well-Known Member
- Thread starter
- #22
Bloodthirsty said:
It doesn't mention anything about permits. That is going to be the issue discussed on Wednesday apparently. BTW, if they don't open the permits up, the newspapers are going to be having a few things sent their way, just to let the public know..........
Fat Bastard
New Member
Gord Rogers sent me an email this morning retracting his earlier one, stating that he was mistaken. I concur with Captain in that Gord definitely appears to be in favour of the permit system. He's a 'soccer' guy, so hopefully his point of view will come through on top at Wednesday's sure-to-be-entertaining board meeting.
I have the very fortunate pleasure of being involved with one of those so-called 'super teams', and we're now beginning our u17 year. We have a national player like Paige Adams, but we also have a number of other players who have seen time with Coquitlam City FC Premier, and can play at the MWSL level. However, we would love to keep this team together for the next two years and with luck and bounces a shot at a third trip to nationals. The permit system allows this to happen by allowing club teams to satisfy parents desires for their girls to play senior soccer, without sacrificing their youth careers at the same time.
This has been an interesting debate. Most people - except some MWSL board members - seem to be coming down on the same side of the argument. What I think is a positive, is that this debate is even happening. When I first got involved in the MWSL, youth permits were rarely used. Hell, most youth players didn't even know the MWSL existed, and very few womens clubs were associated with any club, except possibly in name only. The growth of female soccer, and the involvement of the likes of experienced club soccer guys like Captain, Jimmy Holiday, and others, is changing the face of womens soccer out here. It's moving forward. I just hope the MWSL doesn't try to keep things mired in the past, as there's some very long-serving people on the board, who despite best intentions have had a tendency to avoid thinking outside the box.
I have the very fortunate pleasure of being involved with one of those so-called 'super teams', and we're now beginning our u17 year. We have a national player like Paige Adams, but we also have a number of other players who have seen time with Coquitlam City FC Premier, and can play at the MWSL level. However, we would love to keep this team together for the next two years and with luck and bounces a shot at a third trip to nationals. The permit system allows this to happen by allowing club teams to satisfy parents desires for their girls to play senior soccer, without sacrificing their youth careers at the same time.
This has been an interesting debate. Most people - except some MWSL board members - seem to be coming down on the same side of the argument. What I think is a positive, is that this debate is even happening. When I first got involved in the MWSL, youth permits were rarely used. Hell, most youth players didn't even know the MWSL existed, and very few womens clubs were associated with any club, except possibly in name only. The growth of female soccer, and the involvement of the likes of experienced club soccer guys like Captain, Jimmy Holiday, and others, is changing the face of womens soccer out here. It's moving forward. I just hope the MWSL doesn't try to keep things mired in the past, as there's some very long-serving people on the board, who despite best intentions have had a tendency to avoid thinking outside the box.
Fat Bastard
New Member
Has anyone heard if the Board came to any decision at Wed night's meeting? There was goiing to be a discussion with regards to permits.
Captain Shamrock
Well-Known Member
- Thread starter
- #25
Haven't heard a fcuking thing and they haven't e-mailed anyone yet. 
I'm sending my permits to them tonight so I'll see what the response is like. If it is a no, the local newspapers will be contacted..........
I'm sending my permits to them tonight so I'll see what the response is like. If it is a no, the local newspapers will be contacted..........Bloodthirsty
New Member
Captain Shamrock said:Haven't heard a fcuking thing and they haven't e-mailed anyone yet.
I guess we'll be seeing you in the papers then...?
Captain Shamrock
Well-Known Member
- Thread starter
- #27
Bloodthirsty said:
Bingo...............
Captain Shamrock
Well-Known Member
- Thread starter
- #28
Stephen,
There was much discussion on the issue of whether we should allow players
under 17 years old to play on a Youth to Senior Permit. In the end it was
no. A player must be 17 by Dec. 31, 2005 to register or play on Permit.
I know this isn't the answer you were looking for but that was the decision
of the majority of the Board members present at the meeting.
Bob
Nice of him to give reasons. Time to get some of the local papers involved with this. Intersting it was a 'majority' when I KNOW for a fact all 8 board members weren't there...............Another black eye for the MWSL...........
I wonder what is happening with Jodi-Ann Robinson..........
There was much discussion on the issue of whether we should allow players
under 17 years old to play on a Youth to Senior Permit. In the end it was
no. A player must be 17 by Dec. 31, 2005 to register or play on Permit.
I know this isn't the answer you were looking for but that was the decision
of the majority of the Board members present at the meeting.
Bob
Nice of him to give reasons. Time to get some of the local papers involved with this. Intersting it was a 'majority' when I KNOW for a fact all 8 board members weren't there...............Another black eye for the MWSL...........
I wonder what is happening with Jodi-Ann Robinson..........
Fat Bastard
New Member
Absolutely abyssmal. Might it be time for a new league. A league where the focus is on good soccer, and good development.
How does this League expect to sell itself to the next crop of players if they don't get to see it until they're in their last year of youth. How can Club soccer take hold, if the system can't be allowed to work as it should?
Perhaps the MWSL doesn't care about top level soccer or club development. The MWSL has done a bang up job of growing the recreational game but has failed miserably when it comes to premier soccer.
This is a huge hit for our Club, where we have tried to bring a true club system to Coquitlam girls soccer. A major step backwards.
As for Jodi Ann Robinson? Who knows? She'll probably go back to her Semiahmoo youth team. Or perhaps she won't play. Just play summer for the Whitecaps and train at Total Soccer or something.
Oh yeah, here's one that came up in discussion last night. Would the youth restriction also apply to Club Permits? Can Coquitlam City Premier bring up any player on an Intra-Club Permit from any Coquitlam City youth club. I don't think so, but I heard someone in Surrey might be exploring this option.
FB. Out.
Might it be time for a new league. A league where the focus is on good soccer, and good development. How does this League expect to sell itself to the next crop of players if they don't get to see it until they're in their last year of youth. How can Club soccer take hold, if the system can't be allowed to work as it should?
Perhaps the MWSL doesn't care about top level soccer or club development. The MWSL has done a bang up job of growing the recreational game but has failed miserably when it comes to premier soccer.
This is a huge hit for our Club, where we have tried to bring a true club system to Coquitlam girls soccer. A major step backwards.
As for Jodi Ann Robinson? Who knows? She'll probably go back to her Semiahmoo youth team. Or perhaps she won't play. Just play summer for the Whitecaps and train at Total Soccer or something.
Oh yeah, here's one that came up in discussion last night. Would the youth restriction also apply to Club Permits? Can Coquitlam City Premier bring up any player on an Intra-Club Permit from any Coquitlam City youth club. I don't think so, but I heard someone in Surrey might be exploring this option.
FB. Out.
Captain Shamrock
Well-Known Member
- Thread starter
- #30
Fat Bastard said:Absolutely abyssmal.
How does this League expect to sell itself to the next crop of players if they don't get to see it until they're in their last year of youth. How can Club soccer take hold, if the system can't be allowed to work as it should?
Perhaps the MWSL doesn't care about top level soccer or club development. The MWSL has done a bang up job of growing the recreational game but has failed miserably when it comes to premier soccer.
This is a huge hit for our Club, where we have tried to bring a true club system to Coquitlam girls soccer. A major step backwards.
As for Jodi Ann Robinson? Who knows? She'll probably go back to her Semiahmoo youth team. Or perhaps she won't play. Just play summer for the Whitecaps and train at Total Soccer or something.
Oh yeah, here's one that came up in discussion last night. Would the youth restriction also apply to Club Permits? Can Coquitlam City Premier bring up any player on an Intra-Club Permit from any Coquitlam City youth club. I don't think so, but I heard someone in Surrey might be exploring this option.
FB. Out.
Yes, there will be a lot of unhappy people with this decision. Unfortunately, the MWSL Board decided to ignore the 165 teams in the league and make a balls of a decision. If any of you would like to help out, please PM me, because this fcuking board(a couple in particular) has gone too far this time. If this was put to a vote by all the teams involved, I could almost live with it, even though the majority of the teams may not use youth players. But to have one or two people make this decision is scandalous. This isn't over yet.
On another note, our 1st game of the season is fcuking POSTPONED thanks to there not being ONE fcuking field available in Richmond(allegedly), DESPITE being told we had McMath at 11:00 on Saturdays. Allegedly, we have it starting next week but for some strange reason there was no ****ing permit for the field??????On top of that, I just drove by the field and noticed NO fcuking goal posts. Excellent. So with that, we have one game on Sunday. Thanks for coming out.......
****ingdisgusted CSC
Captain Shamrock
Well-Known Member
- Thread starter
- #31
As of now, I know that THREE of the seven members who are able to vote, voted to NOT restrict the ages of the permits. Mr. Cormack, is allegedly not allowed to vote because it is an 8 person 'board/committee'. This means that the other 4 members must have voted it down???????Hmmmmmm, it should be easy to contact those people and find out. Now that our games off tomorrow, I'll have a few hours to do some searching.
Scoop Shamrock
Scoop Shamrock
Fat Bastard
New Member
I do know that Gord Rogers was absent so he could not have voted either way. MWSL constitution does not allow for voting by proxy at Board Meetings. I don't know if Gord was already in your three NO votes.
Bob Cormack can only vote to break a tie - as he is president.
You can ask the Secretary for a copy of the minutes I believe. I think that is permitted under the constitution.
This stupid rule claimed its first victim tonight. Coquitlam City stunned 1-0 by Norvan. CC had no keeper. They had the Coquitlam City u17 keeper lined up, but that was pulled out from under them. And u18 keepers were not available. Not the only reason they lost - Norvan not a bad side - but it wasn't a good way to get the season going.
Bob Cormack can only vote to break a tie - as he is president.
You can ask the Secretary for a copy of the minutes I believe. I think that is permitted under the constitution.
This stupid rule claimed its first victim tonight. Coquitlam City stunned 1-0 by Norvan. CC had no keeper. They had the Coquitlam City u17 keeper lined up, but that was pulled out from under them. And u18 keepers were not available. Not the only reason they lost - Norvan not a bad side - but it wasn't a good way to get the season going.
Captain Shamrock
Well-Known Member
- Thread starter
- #33
Fat Bastard said:
FB,
I spoke with Gord Rogers and his vote can count in certain situations, even if he is not present. In this situation it did count. I have yet to hear back from two other members who I called..........I will be calling the rest of the members today and will also be looking to attain the minutes........There is little I can do until I actually hear from these people. Unlucky with Coquitlam City, who I know had lengthy discussions with Mr. Rogers a couple of nights ago too. regarding this issue........
Captain Shamrock
Well-Known Member
- Thread starter
- #34
Right, I've decided to make a few e-mails public because everyone should know what is going on in the MWSL. There were several e-mails before this one but I was asked by a board member to present a case, to try and get a 'special vote'. This is unfcukingbelievable...............Anyway......
Dear board members,
The more I think and hear about the youth permit issue, the more frustrated I become. I will try to establish my reasoning throughout this e-mail and hope that the board can do the same for us in return. It has also been brought to my attention that some teams have been asking for 'special exceptions' with the ruling. As far as I understand, the board will probably have to vote on these exceptions, so I am going to present the same sort of argument which will hopefully proove that there should be no restriction in age when dealing with youth permits.
This whole issue came about, at least according the MWSL website, because there were youth players playing in the summer league. Furthermore, this problem was enhanced because a whole youth team from the North Shore was allowed to take part in the same summer league. This presents two immediate problems or concerns: a) why were the youth players registered in the first place as the league surely would have known the ages of the players and b) What do rules in the summer league have to do with the winter league?
The reason I ask to clearly differentiate between summer and winter is very straight forward. In the summer, there are NO youth permits because there are NO youth leagues. In the winter, there are youth permits because there are youth leagues. Why would the board arbitrarily decide to change the age limit of the players on youth permits when there were in fact no youth permits in the league in question(summer league)? Because some teams complained about the age of the players(I understand it was mostly in the lower divisions), why should the committee/board decide to make this new rule without consent from the 160 or so teams who represent the Metro Womens Soccer League? I have talked to some board members and they clearly understand how frustrating this must be for teams like us, who use youth players for the youth players development and of course, to let the players experience a few games with our club. This in turn will let them know that there is always an alternative for them to continue when they finish high school. The age issue is and should be moot. Just like lumping the registration and permits together. This can't be done. They are two entirely different things. Permits allow youth players to play youth all season AND give them an opportunity to experience the MWSL. Would that not be a logical way to promote the womens' game? These are generic comments and observations and I would now like to try and help you understand the situation of two youth players who are currently in grade eleven and who will be turning seventeen in March, 2006.
As previously mentioned, youth permits should be used for development tools - firstly for the player and secondly for the MWSL. In our situation, we have two players in particular who have aspirations of possibly playing soccer in a post-secondary institution. They are both fantastic athletes who play several sports and enormous competitors. Because of thier multiple talents in a plethora of sports, their parents wanted to give them an opportunity to play the sports AND give them the experience of playing at a higher level of soccer. Both girls live in Tsawwassen and if you don't know, Tsawwassen does not allow Metro level teams in their association. The two girls can easily play Metro level soccer but this would obviously make things more difficult for the parents. Consequently, at the end of last season(both girls played for us at one point in the season) the parents asked to sit down with me to discuss the possiility of playing one more year of youth AND practicing/playing with Club Ireland. I have also coached these girls at South Delta Secondary. I thought this would be a great idea for the girls development, especially if they were going to choose soccer as the sport they want to develop. The girls, the girls parents, and our club thought it would be a perfect situation for everyone. Athetically and physically the girls would have no problem playing in the Selects/Division One level where our teams play. This was allegedly a concern of some of the summer teams that they didn't want to hurt any of the 'smaller and younger' girls who were playing. On the other hand, there were complaints about 'older' players being hurt by younger players. These two 'arguments' are moot because every time someone steps on the field, they run the risk of injury, no matter what the opponent's age might be. Anyway, we had all decided that this would be a perfect scenario for the girls.
We are asking that the league considers this proposal for the two girls to be able to come on permits to play on Club Ireland's 'A' and 'B' teams, depending which one is playing on Saturday. Both of our teams home games are on Saturdays, which means the girls will NEVER miss a youth game because of their Sunday schedule. The youth team comes first, especially when it comes time to playing in their cups. The coach of the team thinks this is a great idea for the girls, as it will only give them more experience to help the rest of the team on Sundays and at practices. With all this in place, you could surely understand our anger when we heard that the board, without consultation of any teams in the MWSL, decided to change the rules in the summer, AFTER the Annual General Meeting. Surely this must have come up before? If not, then it should NEVER have been brought up for the winter league because it is a SUMMER problem. It has never been a problem in the winter, at least to my knowledge, and it wouldn't and shouldn't be a problem in the future. If a 15 year-old is strong enough to play in the women's league on permits, then so be it. IT is up to the girl's parents, the girl's youth coach, and of course, the girl herself. Once again, I can't stress enough that we are NOT talking about REGISTERING these players at a younger age because there are VERY few situations in which this will benefit the youth player. Of course, there are exceptions, like Jodi-Ann Robinson for instance.
At this time, I would like for you to reconsider this issue, particularly the situation that we have been in with the two girls in question. Both girls were devastated when they found out they couldn't play last week. I would hope that your board would consider voting on our particular situation. We believe that there should be no restriction of age when it comes to YOUTH PERMITS. The registration of younger players is a completely different scenario and circumstance. Please take this into consideration and remember that this rule was implemented because of a problem in the summer league and without consultation of the teams which represent the Metro Womens Soccer League. Thank you very much for your time.
Stephen Burns
Club Ireland
Dear board members,
The more I think and hear about the youth permit issue, the more frustrated I become. I will try to establish my reasoning throughout this e-mail and hope that the board can do the same for us in return. It has also been brought to my attention that some teams have been asking for 'special exceptions' with the ruling. As far as I understand, the board will probably have to vote on these exceptions, so I am going to present the same sort of argument which will hopefully proove that there should be no restriction in age when dealing with youth permits.
This whole issue came about, at least according the MWSL website, because there were youth players playing in the summer league. Furthermore, this problem was enhanced because a whole youth team from the North Shore was allowed to take part in the same summer league. This presents two immediate problems or concerns: a) why were the youth players registered in the first place as the league surely would have known the ages of the players and b) What do rules in the summer league have to do with the winter league?
The reason I ask to clearly differentiate between summer and winter is very straight forward. In the summer, there are NO youth permits because there are NO youth leagues. In the winter, there are youth permits because there are youth leagues. Why would the board arbitrarily decide to change the age limit of the players on youth permits when there were in fact no youth permits in the league in question(summer league)? Because some teams complained about the age of the players(I understand it was mostly in the lower divisions), why should the committee/board decide to make this new rule without consent from the 160 or so teams who represent the Metro Womens Soccer League? I have talked to some board members and they clearly understand how frustrating this must be for teams like us, who use youth players for the youth players development and of course, to let the players experience a few games with our club. This in turn will let them know that there is always an alternative for them to continue when they finish high school. The age issue is and should be moot. Just like lumping the registration and permits together. This can't be done. They are two entirely different things. Permits allow youth players to play youth all season AND give them an opportunity to experience the MWSL. Would that not be a logical way to promote the womens' game? These are generic comments and observations and I would now like to try and help you understand the situation of two youth players who are currently in grade eleven and who will be turning seventeen in March, 2006.
As previously mentioned, youth permits should be used for development tools - firstly for the player and secondly for the MWSL. In our situation, we have two players in particular who have aspirations of possibly playing soccer in a post-secondary institution. They are both fantastic athletes who play several sports and enormous competitors. Because of thier multiple talents in a plethora of sports, their parents wanted to give them an opportunity to play the sports AND give them the experience of playing at a higher level of soccer. Both girls live in Tsawwassen and if you don't know, Tsawwassen does not allow Metro level teams in their association. The two girls can easily play Metro level soccer but this would obviously make things more difficult for the parents. Consequently, at the end of last season(both girls played for us at one point in the season) the parents asked to sit down with me to discuss the possiility of playing one more year of youth AND practicing/playing with Club Ireland. I have also coached these girls at South Delta Secondary. I thought this would be a great idea for the girls development, especially if they were going to choose soccer as the sport they want to develop. The girls, the girls parents, and our club thought it would be a perfect situation for everyone. Athetically and physically the girls would have no problem playing in the Selects/Division One level where our teams play. This was allegedly a concern of some of the summer teams that they didn't want to hurt any of the 'smaller and younger' girls who were playing. On the other hand, there were complaints about 'older' players being hurt by younger players. These two 'arguments' are moot because every time someone steps on the field, they run the risk of injury, no matter what the opponent's age might be. Anyway, we had all decided that this would be a perfect scenario for the girls.
We are asking that the league considers this proposal for the two girls to be able to come on permits to play on Club Ireland's 'A' and 'B' teams, depending which one is playing on Saturday. Both of our teams home games are on Saturdays, which means the girls will NEVER miss a youth game because of their Sunday schedule. The youth team comes first, especially when it comes time to playing in their cups. The coach of the team thinks this is a great idea for the girls, as it will only give them more experience to help the rest of the team on Sundays and at practices. With all this in place, you could surely understand our anger when we heard that the board, without consultation of any teams in the MWSL, decided to change the rules in the summer, AFTER the Annual General Meeting. Surely this must have come up before? If not, then it should NEVER have been brought up for the winter league because it is a SUMMER problem. It has never been a problem in the winter, at least to my knowledge, and it wouldn't and shouldn't be a problem in the future. If a 15 year-old is strong enough to play in the women's league on permits, then so be it. IT is up to the girl's parents, the girl's youth coach, and of course, the girl herself. Once again, I can't stress enough that we are NOT talking about REGISTERING these players at a younger age because there are VERY few situations in which this will benefit the youth player. Of course, there are exceptions, like Jodi-Ann Robinson for instance.
At this time, I would like for you to reconsider this issue, particularly the situation that we have been in with the two girls in question. Both girls were devastated when they found out they couldn't play last week. I would hope that your board would consider voting on our particular situation. We believe that there should be no restriction of age when it comes to YOUTH PERMITS. The registration of younger players is a completely different scenario and circumstance. Please take this into consideration and remember that this rule was implemented because of a problem in the summer league and without consultation of the teams which represent the Metro Womens Soccer League. Thank you very much for your time.
Stephen Burns
Club Ireland
Captain Shamrock
Well-Known Member
- Thread starter
- #35
Stephen,
The issue was voted on at our Director's meeting in May. This is the exact quote taken from the minutes prepared by the Secretary for the League
3. Age Restrictions: This item was discussed as well as electronic information sent to each board member. It was agreed that the minimum age would be 17 by December 31 of the registered season for any player wishing to play in our league whether by permit or full registration.
In my mind that is the end of it.
If an exceptional player in youth who would not be 17 by Dec. 31 (a 16 year old) were to apply to play in our League then we would certainly consider allowing her to play. This would be a player such as Jodi-Ann Robinson or Sidney Laroux (spelling ?). This calibre of player would be playing in Premier.
Remember, in U-18 Girls there are a potential maximum of 144 players who are playing at the Metro level and 216 playing at the Gold level. A total of 360 players. The large majority of these players will be 17 by December 31, 2005. That should give any team in the MWSL a good selection of players to bring up on Permit.
Bob Cormack,
for the Board of Directors
The issue was voted on at our Director's meeting in May. This is the exact quote taken from the minutes prepared by the Secretary for the League
3. Age Restrictions: This item was discussed as well as electronic information sent to each board member. It was agreed that the minimum age would be 17 by December 31 of the registered season for any player wishing to play in our league whether by permit or full registration.
In my mind that is the end of it.
If an exceptional player in youth who would not be 17 by Dec. 31 (a 16 year old) were to apply to play in our League then we would certainly consider allowing her to play. This would be a player such as Jodi-Ann Robinson or Sidney Laroux (spelling ?). This calibre of player would be playing in Premier.
Remember, in U-18 Girls there are a potential maximum of 144 players who are playing at the Metro level and 216 playing at the Gold level. A total of 360 players. The large majority of these players will be 17 by December 31, 2005. That should give any team in the MWSL a good selection of players to bring up on Permit.
Bob Cormack,
for the Board of Directors
Captain Shamrock
Well-Known Member
- Thread starter
- #36
Bob,
Why was this not brought up at the AGM? Why do none of the teams have a vote on this? This is what annoys me the most. You still haven't answered why you don't think this issue should be allowed. Why have FOUR of the board members I've spoken to say that they are in agreement with what I am saying? 4 out of 7 is a majority, assuming you don't have a vote on an even numbered panal. Bob, would you have a problem if I sent my e-mail to a few of the municipal papers? I feel VERY strongly about the fact that we, the teams of the MWSL, do not have a say in such an issue. BTW, your comment 'IN MY MIND THAT IS THE END OF IT" seems to take presedence over other board members opinions. I wonder how they feel about this. Also, who is determining whether a players is EXCEPTIONAL? You? Finally, I'm talking about PERMITS for the last time, not REGISTERING players. It seems to be difficult to see the difference. So the Jodi-Ann Robinsons are not allowed to register but are allowed to be brought up on permits? What is the rule? If I said my players were exceptional, does that mean they would be allowed? Why does a summer league problem become a winter league problem when it never has in the past?
Stephen
Why was this not brought up at the AGM? Why do none of the teams have a vote on this? This is what annoys me the most. You still haven't answered why you don't think this issue should be allowed. Why have FOUR of the board members I've spoken to say that they are in agreement with what I am saying? 4 out of 7 is a majority, assuming you don't have a vote on an even numbered panal. Bob, would you have a problem if I sent my e-mail to a few of the municipal papers? I feel VERY strongly about the fact that we, the teams of the MWSL, do not have a say in such an issue. BTW, your comment 'IN MY MIND THAT IS THE END OF IT" seems to take presedence over other board members opinions. I wonder how they feel about this. Also, who is determining whether a players is EXCEPTIONAL? You? Finally, I'm talking about PERMITS for the last time, not REGISTERING players. It seems to be difficult to see the difference. So the Jodi-Ann Robinsons are not allowed to register but are allowed to be brought up on permits? What is the rule? If I said my players were exceptional, does that mean they would be allowed? Why does a summer league problem become a winter league problem when it never has in the past?
Stephen
Captain Shamrock
Well-Known Member
- Thread starter
- #37
Sorry, here was the original sent over a week ago.........
Hi Bob,
>>>
>>>Thanks for the response. Of the 8 directors of the board, how many see
>>>this being a problem? I have been told by a good 'source' that only ONE
>>>person strongly opposed this. Whether that is true or not is moot at
>>>this time but it can't be ignored when looking at league policies which
>>>can be altered by one person's vote, when there are hundreds of teams in
>>>the league. My concern in all of this, is that the most important person
>>>in the equation is being forgotten - the player. If a player is living
>>>in a certain area and that area does not offer a standard which is
>>>challenging enough for the player, especially if the player has
>>>aspirations of post-secondary football at a university or college, the
>>>MWSL can often be the only choice. Should we stand in the way of players
>>>who want to better their game? I mentioned the fact that the parents of
>>>the girls highly favored this option for their daughters because they
>>>knew they would be able to stay local and still have the chance to play
>>>at a level which will help improve their game. Whether the player is 15
>>>or 16 is irrelevant because if a player is good enough to play in the
>>>league, then they should have the choice. I played in the Pacific Coast
>>>League when I was 14 turning 15 because I knew it would help improve my
>>>game. If I wasn't given that opportunity, perhaps I would not have gone
>>>on to earn a scholarship at UBC. Sometimes, youth soccer just doesn't
>>>offer enough to players nowadays. It is a punishment to the players if
>>>they're being told they can't play at the highest level possible,
>>>especially if they have goals to take their soccer to the next level.
>>>It makes it even worse when the parents are encouraging their kids to
>>>strive to play against the best competition and they're being told that
>>>this isn't possible because of their age? We are not professionals and
>>>the best players should be playing at the best level possible. This is
>>>the only way our country will continue to improve our status on the world
>>>stage.
>>>
>>>I was discouraged when I read the part about Metro coaches being happier
>>>with this rule. Who are these people in the game for? Themselves or the
>>>kids? As a coach of a metro team a few years back, I would have loved it
>>>if any of my players were given this opportunity. Unfortunately, it
>>>appears, these coaches you are referring to, have put their reputation
>>>before what is best for the individual player. I would have thought
>>>most coaches would have loved for their players to be exposed to a higher
>>>level, especially if it would be done without the player even missing
>>>their youth league games. I can't fathom how they feel great about this
>>>new 'rule' that has been in place.
>>>
>>>It has also been brought to my attention that several players complained
>>>to the league during the summer season. The players in question were
>>>from division 4 and they complained that some of the mums on one team had
>>>their daughters also play. That must have been something very special
>>>for mum and daughter to be playing on the same field. I talked to one of
>>>the mums and she said she will never forget that moment. The other team
>>>in question complained about this to the league and as a result, the
>>>league all of a sudden decides to start re-thinking the age of the
>>>players in question? Again, this doesn't seem fair to the players who are
>>>trying to improve their game by playing in the higher divisions. I'm
>>>guessing there aren't too many situations where youth players are being
>>>signed/brought up on permits for the lower divisions.
>>>
>>>Finally, if a player is playing on the National team at the age of 16,
>>>does this mean the player in question, will be forced to play youth,
>>>despite playing for the local 'professional' team in the summer?
>>>Clearly, this is backwards if we are continuing to improve our game and
>>>our league for that matter. If we have the best players playing in our
>>>league, then the league can only benefit from it. Even the youth team of
>>>the player(s) in question would benefit because the experience these
>>>players earn would be invaluable to others around her.
>>>
>>>Bob, I think 8 people in a board determining this for over 120 teams in
>>>the MWSL is unfair. Is it not possible to put this to a vote which all
>>>of the teams have a chance to have their say? It would be very easy for
>>>the league to say this is a dead issue but this issue will continue to be
>>>a thorn to the MWSL, as long as there are players trying to play at the
>>>highest level possible. I have clearly stated our intentions - which
>>>have shown that the players are the issue at hand here. It is not
>>>selfish for us, Club Ireland, to bring players up to improve their game
>>>and give them exposure to the MWSL. At the end of the day, we're all in
>>>this for the players, not the coaches or the league executive. Thanks
>>>for taking the time to read this and I hope the executive will look at
>>>this issue again. Players should have the right to play at the highest
>>>level possible, no matter what their age is.
>>>
>>>Stephen Burns
>>>Club Ireland
Hi Bob,
>>>
>>>Thanks for the response. Of the 8 directors of the board, how many see
>>>this being a problem? I have been told by a good 'source' that only ONE
>>>person strongly opposed this. Whether that is true or not is moot at
>>>this time but it can't be ignored when looking at league policies which
>>>can be altered by one person's vote, when there are hundreds of teams in
>>>the league. My concern in all of this, is that the most important person
>>>in the equation is being forgotten - the player. If a player is living
>>>in a certain area and that area does not offer a standard which is
>>>challenging enough for the player, especially if the player has
>>>aspirations of post-secondary football at a university or college, the
>>>MWSL can often be the only choice. Should we stand in the way of players
>>>who want to better their game? I mentioned the fact that the parents of
>>>the girls highly favored this option for their daughters because they
>>>knew they would be able to stay local and still have the chance to play
>>>at a level which will help improve their game. Whether the player is 15
>>>or 16 is irrelevant because if a player is good enough to play in the
>>>league, then they should have the choice. I played in the Pacific Coast
>>>League when I was 14 turning 15 because I knew it would help improve my
>>>game. If I wasn't given that opportunity, perhaps I would not have gone
>>>on to earn a scholarship at UBC. Sometimes, youth soccer just doesn't
>>>offer enough to players nowadays. It is a punishment to the players if
>>>they're being told they can't play at the highest level possible,
>>>especially if they have goals to take their soccer to the next level.
>>>It makes it even worse when the parents are encouraging their kids to
>>>strive to play against the best competition and they're being told that
>>>this isn't possible because of their age? We are not professionals and
>>>the best players should be playing at the best level possible. This is
>>>the only way our country will continue to improve our status on the world
>>>stage.
>>>
>>>I was discouraged when I read the part about Metro coaches being happier
>>>with this rule. Who are these people in the game for? Themselves or the
>>>kids? As a coach of a metro team a few years back, I would have loved it
>>>if any of my players were given this opportunity. Unfortunately, it
>>>appears, these coaches you are referring to, have put their reputation
>>>before what is best for the individual player. I would have thought
>>>most coaches would have loved for their players to be exposed to a higher
>>>level, especially if it would be done without the player even missing
>>>their youth league games. I can't fathom how they feel great about this
>>>new 'rule' that has been in place.
>>>
>>>It has also been brought to my attention that several players complained
>>>to the league during the summer season. The players in question were
>>>from division 4 and they complained that some of the mums on one team had
>>>their daughters also play. That must have been something very special
>>>for mum and daughter to be playing on the same field. I talked to one of
>>>the mums and she said she will never forget that moment. The other team
>>>in question complained about this to the league and as a result, the
>>>league all of a sudden decides to start re-thinking the age of the
>>>players in question? Again, this doesn't seem fair to the players who are
>>>trying to improve their game by playing in the higher divisions. I'm
>>>guessing there aren't too many situations where youth players are being
>>>signed/brought up on permits for the lower divisions.
>>>
>>>Finally, if a player is playing on the National team at the age of 16,
>>>does this mean the player in question, will be forced to play youth,
>>>despite playing for the local 'professional' team in the summer?
>>>Clearly, this is backwards if we are continuing to improve our game and
>>>our league for that matter. If we have the best players playing in our
>>>league, then the league can only benefit from it. Even the youth team of
>>>the player(s) in question would benefit because the experience these
>>>players earn would be invaluable to others around her.
>>>
>>>Bob, I think 8 people in a board determining this for over 120 teams in
>>>the MWSL is unfair. Is it not possible to put this to a vote which all
>>>of the teams have a chance to have their say? It would be very easy for
>>>the league to say this is a dead issue but this issue will continue to be
>>>a thorn to the MWSL, as long as there are players trying to play at the
>>>highest level possible. I have clearly stated our intentions - which
>>>have shown that the players are the issue at hand here. It is not
>>>selfish for us, Club Ireland, to bring players up to improve their game
>>>and give them exposure to the MWSL. At the end of the day, we're all in
>>>this for the players, not the coaches or the league executive. Thanks
>>>for taking the time to read this and I hope the executive will look at
>>>this issue again. Players should have the right to play at the highest
>>>level possible, no matter what their age is.
>>>
>>>Stephen Burns
>>>Club Ireland
Captain Shamrock
Well-Known Member
- Thread starter
- #38
Stephen,
There was much discussion on the issue of whether we should allow players
under 17 years old to play on a Youth to Senior Permit. In the end it was
no. A player must be 17 by Dec. 31, 2005 to register or play on Permit.
I know this isn't the answer you were looking for but that was the decision
of the majority of the Board members present at the meeting.
Interesting when I know for a fact now that at least FOUR of the members thought different. 4/7 is a majority the last time I checked.
There was much discussion on the issue of whether we should allow players
under 17 years old to play on a Youth to Senior Permit. In the end it was
no. A player must be 17 by Dec. 31, 2005 to register or play on Permit.
I know this isn't the answer you were looking for but that was the decision
of the majority of the Board members present at the meeting.
Interesting when I know for a fact now that at least FOUR of the members thought different. 4/7 is a majority the last time I checked.
Captain Shamrock
Well-Known Member
- Thread starter
- #40
Keeper said:
Yah I know, Keeper, I mentioned that in the second e-mail I sent back to him. It is ****ing disgraceful.
Members online
No members online now.
