Amsl

[BigMike]

Well done ASA! Drillers make it to provincials and there are 2 teams with better records. Lethbridge finished 5th and they don't even make provincials. What's the point of playing 18 games when the best teams don't even make it. Way to make things competitive ASA. That's what happens when muppets run the show they make poor decisions.

[fishman]

Perhaps consult the ASA Provincial Rules, Outdoor 2010:

http://www.albertasoccer.com/clientuploads/ProvincialRuleBooks/2010%20Outdoor%20Rule%20Book%20for%20Web.pdf

Go peruse Rule 3.7: The Mike Traficante Challenge Cup and the Fred Kern Jubilee Shield will comprise of the top six (6) AMSL Men's and Women's teams, as determined after regular season play.

If people knew the rules, they just might ask why the recently released Provincial Schedule shows the Drillers in the competition. The Provincial Rules seem pretty clear to me. Someone might want to tell Lethbridge why they are getting screwed, and maybe, just maybe, appeal?!?

[Bill Spiers]

I think I can guess what they are doing - although I don't agree with the logic. They are relying on Rule 10.4:

"Seeding for the Mike Traficante Challenge Cup and the Fred Kern Jubilee Shield will be determined through league play. North 1 will compete against South 2 and South 3. South 1 will compete against North 2 and North 3."

Lethbridge (5th. in the AMSL) is the fourth place team from the South and Calgary Callies (7th. in the AMSL) the fifth place team. Edmonton Green & Gold (6th. in the AMSL) are the second place team from the North and Edmonton Drillers (8th. in the AMSL) are the third place team.

However, this is the rule which establishes the seeding for the competition - while Rule 3.7 establishes eligibility. I think Rule 3.7 should have precedence. Either way, the rules should be cleaned up.

[coppercanuck]

Just another reason to have a common standard for each province. I know some won't be able to do it but pick one cup or league. Play-offs are ok, but this leads to a National. A some point a Provincial competition has to be provincial, not district.

[fishman]

I would support Bill Spiers in his reading of Rule 3.7. The rule that pertains to eligibility must have primacy.

I just can't believe that Lethbridge and its representatives don't know about this.

[Cooks]

Top 3 North and Top 3 South. It has always been this way. I and many others have railed against this system for years and our complaints have fallen on deaf ears. It should be the top clubs, regardless of geographic location.

I was worried that a club with two more wins, 7 fewer losses, a 28 goal advantage in goals for and against, and 11 more points in the standings was going to get screwed over. Hold your heads high, Lethbridge. You had a good season.

[a_coach_in_ab]

The top 3 format makes sense if the teams did not ever play each other, but the fact they play each other during the season makes it really strange to have a format with regional representation.

[fishman]

Cooks, I really don't care how it has always been. I played in the AMSL since its inception, and have coached in it for a number of years now.

What I know is what Rule 3.7 states. It is in the Provincial Rulebook. Just because it has never been enforced and teams go along blindly doesn't make it right. If Lethbridge had the desire, they could appeal any ruling against their claim, and probably win in time for the competition.

Just one more example of the ineptitude that is the ASA.

[oc64]

I would support Bill Spiers in his reading of Rule 3.7. The rule that pertains to eligibility must have primacy.

I just can't believe that Lethbridge and its representatives don't know about this.

+1

[oc64]

Cooks, I really don't care how it has always been. I played in the AMSL since its inception, and have coached in it for a number of years now.

What I know is what Rule 3.7 states. It is in the Provincial Rulebook. Just because it has never been enforced and teams go along blindly doesn't make it right. If Lethbridge had the desire, they could appeal any ruling against their claim, and probably win in time for the competition.

Just one more example of the ineptitude that is the ASA.

This and the other postings about the ASA situation bring a question to mind. How far in advance of the January AGM do bylaw changes need to proposed? It is time for ASA to see a major upgrade in the way they do things.

[coppercanuck]

The bigger question is can the CSA's Professional Committee dictate the format of the top senior leagues in provinces to help these leagues, clubs and players improve to maybe one day turn pro or develop pro players?

[1867]

I recall Amsl meetings years ago where we were told that we as coaches had every right to run our league-so we made resolutions-i was very naive-maybe i still am-and voted to have this rule changed and the top teams make it. Mr. Kern and whoever they would send would smile-and the competetions committee would ignore it. Of course all this stuff is about politics and has nothing to do with soccer.

[Just a Ref]

I think the districts pay for the spots in provincials. So if Lethbridge and Red Deer wants to play in Provincials, they have to declare a team at the start of the season, just like everyone else. I am not agreeing with how it is currently done, but there is lots to disagree with when it comes to the ASA these days.

I think if you want the 18 game season to mean more then you have to change the way teams go to Provincials. With the last placed team from Calgary being sent down this season made for some important games. If the top 6 went to Provincials then teams would have to play every game, with some sort of intensity. I think it is a joke when teams show up with 13 players for a double header weekend. But hey, I am Just a Ref......