MORE ON ASA

 

The article in SPY 10/20 had several objectives, including elicitation of comments from SPY readers.  This second article expands that dialogue to reflect those comments.  Like the original, there is particular focus on the upcoming ASA Council meeting in Mobile.

 

Editorialists assume that readers not only keep up-to-date by reading successive reports but recall points made in preceding articles.  Given the many indications that this assumption is faulty, let me restate some points SPY has made in the past. 

 

Let me immediately make clear a belief that all of the problems with JO and/or Gold do not originate with ASA.  There are remedial actions which coaches should also take.

 

The Council should consider:

 

  1. Gold nationals should change formats.  ASA Executive Director Ron Radigonda has consistently stated a preference which many of us support: reduce the field to 48 teams.  There are not 64 teams competitive at the Gold level.
  2. Change the tournament structure.  Eliminate the opening ceremony and parade, and schedule games including loser bracket games so that we avoid the brutal Saturday-Sunday schedule imposed on the CA Cruisers in 2004.
  3. Revise the allocation of berths.  Require that regions have at least five Gold registered teams to retain their Gold berth.  This change should be made for the 64-team format, and if the field is reduced to 48 teams.  Regions which are not competitive should surrender berths to the sector tournaments.
  4. Consult with Gold coaches on these and all changes.  Few if any ASA personnel have JO coaching experience, and too few of the ASA delegates at the annual meeting who vote on JO issues have JO coaching experience.  There should be an ASA meeting with coaches at each annual Gold tournament.
  5. The 18A tournament is too large.  There have been proposals for years to compete 18A in quadrants, or have an East-West eight-team competition.
  6. Create a national JO office with clout.  Enforce JO policies such as requirements for web sites, etc.  Oversee team registrations including pickup players.
  7. Enforce in Code the 1-4/2-3 seeding for the Gold elimination bracket.
  8. Require that the draw for the elimination bracket be initiated only after every team has completed pool play.  The early draws allowed at the last two Gold tournaments were discriminatory in that every team was not equally at risk.  Continue to use pool play for seeding the draw.
  9. Consider how best to educate commissioners and coaches on Code and playing rules.  (One excellent suggestion: have the rules on pickup players printed on the form, and require all parties to sign an affidavit that they have read and understand the rules on pickup players.)

 

ASA Legislative proposals

The annual Council meeting will vote on an infinite number of proposals, final decisions being made at the business session on Thursday, November 11.  At this time (October 28) Commissioners are telling SPY they have not yet received their “books” which contain the various proposals.  Thus, what we are hearing may not reflect the actual agenda.

 

We have heard from several sources that there will be proposals to delink Gold pool play from seeding of the elimination bracket.  I know a number of Gold coaches who agree and others who disagree.  The real heartburn is caused by tournament officials who allow teams to draw for elimination bracket berths while many teams are still playing pool games.  Statistically speaking, every team is therefore not at equal risk to be picked.  Teams should be reconvened and have a simultaneous draw.  If that squeezes the time frame, start pool play earlier (and eliminate the parade and speeches).

 

We hear there will be discussion of a new championship format.  One proposal would have the championship game decided by single elimination.  A variation we have heard would require a three-game championship contest, like the proposed new NCAA format.  ASA should hear from Gold coaches before making such decisions and I am not aware of any consultation with Gold coaches.  The major complaint from Gold coaches is that the tournament schedule inevitably results in a bunching-up of games on Saturday.  The team which finally emerges from the loser’s bracket is at a distinct disadvantage.  Colleges do not play more than two games a day.  Gold teams may have to play 6-7 games in a row to remain in contention.

 

There will reportedly be discussion of splitting 18A.  A number of formats have been proposed in recent years; none have been adopted.  Meanwhile, the 18A tournament continues to expand.  At minimum, ASA should stipulate that teams can only be invited to 18A nationals through the ASA qualification process.  No more willy-nilly padding the field through so-called “guest” teams.  (On that note, never again violate the Code ceiling of 64 teams.)  Any new format must be devised with the realization that these players care a great deal more about college scholarships – and the format must facilitate the desires of the players.

 

Hopefully, ASA will enforce its own tournament rules which require an active website, up-to-date leader boards, ands a comprehensive coaches guide.  The Olympic and national team programs, which attract so much attention from top ASA officials, are rooted in college programs, with an ever-increasing number of scholarships.  ASA has an obligation to facilitate the feeder program – JO ball – which is the foundation of fastpitch softball.

 

Pickup Players and Other Infractions

Two teams were disqualified at Gold nationals.  At least seven other pickup players were initially approved for play – in violation of ASA Code. ASA suborned its own Code to allow a 65th team at Gold nationals -- to compensate for mistakes by its commissioners.

 

I have heard all the who-shot-John explanations, and it is not my intent to assign blame.  I am encouraged that ASA will convene a committee to investigate these problems.  I know at least one Commissioner who has been told he will be questioned.

 

Somehow, ASA will hopefully correct an anomaly.  If a Gold coach and team are suspended, that coach can be banned from the national tournament for a year.  He or she pays the price for their failure to know and observe the rules.  But, what price does an ASA official pay for failing to know or enforce the rules?  Because they are quite literally appointed for life, they are virtually autonomous authorities.

 

I have no sympathy for a JO coach who does not know his ASA region.  I have no sympathy for Gold coaches who complain of a lack of concession stands for practice games (the practice fields I monitored at Marietta did have concessions).  I have no sympathy for coaches who want to manipulate brackets to avoid playing stronger teams (but I have an abiding sympathy for Gold coaches who have every reason to believe that traditional seeding procedures will be observed and, if unilaterally changed by an ASA official, that they will be properly advised).  I have no sympathy for coaches who do not know the Code and rules for registering their team and for picking up players (but some sympathy for those who are misinformed by an ASA official).  I have absolutely no sympathy for a coach who knowingly violates these rules, if that in fact occurred; he punishes his players.  Allegedly, there were misrepresentations, and misinformation.  Allegedly, there were unintentional violations.   Code is very specific -- and if all the parties (commissioners, coaches, players and parents) understood the Code correctly, these violations should have been avoided.  The short and long-term interests of the girls should be sufficiently paramount that the process is done correctly.  (If in doubt about the sagacity of advice from a local ASA official, call Oklahoma City and talk to Membership Services; you will get an answer.)

 

I do have sympathy for their players, and, in the instance of 2004, for the players on Team Florida and Wagners who were eligible.

 

By the same token, I have no sympathy for ASA officials who do not know the rules, nor care enough to learn them.   I remember a meeting at which ASA handed out a test on the Codes and rules – and there were simply too many guesses by ASA officials.  Make the test count; any commissioner etc who does not get at least a 75% score should be denied a vote at the Council meeting.

 

Or, do like NFCA.  Only those affected by a rule vote on changes, eg, JO commissioners with a priori consultation with coaches.

 

The question again:  how will the various local ASA officials be punished for their role in the misadventures of 2004?  It is gratifying to learn that ASA will convene a committee in Mobile to consider these infractions and their remedies. 

 

Perhaps it would be useful to remember why pickup players were allowed.  Teams could add players to replace rostered players who were injured or otherwise unable to compete.  Over time, the rule has enabled teams to add players who would benefit from the exposure to college coaches which is intensified at nationals.  However, the process has evolved, and many teams use the pickup player primarily to strengthen their teams, even to recruit JO players for the next season.  In and of itself, the former is not a bad motive, particularly if it gives a player needed exposure.  But, coaches have to play by the rules, and local ASA officials must ensure that they do.  That did not happen uniformly in 2004.

 

Some Reader Comments

 

1. A college coach contends there are too many fall exposure tournaments.  There is no governing body authority in play here.  JO teams want to compete, and many use these tournaments to raise their summer operating expenses.

 

2. A reader says it would be nice if JO ball had the same “clout” as slow pitch and the other “money makers”.  “Seems like the only time ASA is serious about fastpitch is around the Olympics when they can get some press.  I would hope that ASA would also realize that slow pitch and fast pitch are very different sports and that the rules and guidelines for each should be decided by those that run those sports and not by the whole body.”

 

3.  The brackets at Gold  should have been the traditional, 1, 4, 3, 2 top to bottom quadrants.  However, ASA code does not stipulate this as mandatory, all it does stipulate is that the quadrants of the winners brackets support the 1 vs 4 and 2 vs 3 match up.  Since there is no definitive direction the tournament director was within his authority to set up the brackets the way he did, 2,3,1,4   As for the seeding of the returning 1-4 teams, the code clearly states that pool play finish will be used to seed the elimination bracket.  Thus until 1-4 have completed their pool play they cannot be placed in their quadrant.

 

4.  At its Council meeting, ASA should define the National elimination bracket as a 1,4,3,2 seeding quadrant format, and that that the 1 and 3 seeded teams be placed in the top of their quadrant and the 2 and 4 seeded teams be placed in the bottom of their quadrant.  If pool play is maintained as a seeding factor, then the 1-4 spots in areas of the quadrants that the seeded teams will be placed will be “reserved” for them.

 

5. The elimination bracket not be filled until all pool play is completed.

 

6.  Eliminate pool play as a seeding factor.  Eliminating pool play from seeding will give the teams a chance to play games, to get comfortable with the tournament AND play all their players for the coaches.  As it is now they all want to win the seeding wars and so they go with their top players even in pool play and usually those players are either signed or already in college. 

 

A Final Thought

There is really no mechanism through which ASA communicates to the JO community.  I called coaches around the country and not one had been asked by his local JO Commissioner for input.  Some will send out a newsletter afterwards; a few don’t even do that.  The ASA executive includes a player rep, but these are usually stars long past their JO playing days.  If nothing else, ASA should come out of Mobile with a plan for a continuous dialogue with the JO Community.  The JO Committee is not that forum.  Not enough JO Commissioners have any background involvement in JO ball.

 

RFH

Spy Softball Home Page