|
May 7, 2008

WAGS R&D Committee Meeting 

 Fairview Park Marriott

May 7, 2008

 Committee Members Present:  Lula Bauer (Director), Clarence Jones, Sally D’Italia,  Bob Emertiz, Debi Honaker, Maria Ramos, Michelle White (Administrator).

 GRFL Extreme Team Members Present: Head Coach, Assistant Coach, Team Manager, and Parents.

 Others Present:  Center Referee, Sub A/R

 Meeting Notes

Greater Falls Extreme Head Coach and Assistant Coach (U14 D5); alleged violation of WAGS Rule M.1.  Game Conduct

The Center Referee (CR) filed a report pertaining to the Head Coach (HC) and the Assistant Coach (AC); game misconduct, which initiated this hearing.

The CR began his testimony by explaining the chain of events leading up to the reason for filing his Game Report.  He explained that at the beginning of the game he had discussions with the assistant referees (AR), coaches and players emphasizing that dissent would not be tolerated.   The HC questioned a call, and the CR issued a yellow card for dissent.  The second yellow card was given to the HC when he protested a handball in the opponent’s penalty area. The CR ejected the HC who proceeded to walk slowly from the field.  The HC eventually left the field.

The GRFL AC was given his first yellow card during stoppage time.  The Center Referee called a handball in the penalty area against the home team to which he dissented.  The AC gave a non-verbal reaction questioning the CR’s call at which time the CR interpreted his non-verbal reaction as dissent and issued a second yellow card.   After receiving the second yellow card, the CR ejected the AC.  At this time it was alleged that the AC walked onto the pitch while approaching the CR in a threatening manner.  Once the AC was ejected, the CR stated that he wasn’t sure if there were any GRFL carded officials remaining.  The CR stated that since there was only a few minute remaining, he elected to let the girls play out the match.

Testimony was then given by the Head Coach (HC) to which he said that in the beginning of the game, he was carded after questioning a call made by the AR.  He admitted that it was dissent, stated he was wrong to dissent, and apologized.   The CR called a handball in the box awarding a penalty to the opposing team.   The HC’s questioned of  the call, landing him a second yellow card.  The HC was then ejected from the game. The HC said he walked at a normal pace off the field when ejected.

The HC submitted pictures showing the reaction of the AC to the call as well as statements from the HC of Vista Fury and the HC of the American Soccer Academy supporting his testimony.  He stated that his team is new to WAGS and has good character.  They do not have a history of any red or yellow card accumulations and that his team won the ODSL Sportsmanship award. 

The AC began his testimony by stating that he got to the game late, and he was completely unaware of the dynamics of some events that occurred prior to his arrival.  He stated that the CR warned him about his parents.  The AC responded by asking the CR how he knew that they were his parents.  The CR then gave him a yellow card. The AC stated that he put his head in his hand, for which the CR proceeded to issue a second yellow card.  The AC stated that as he was leaving the field, he walked in front of opposing coaches, and that he did not walk onto the pitch.  The CR continued a conversation with him as he walked at a normal pace of the field. 

The team manager testified that she was there and was a carded official.

A Committee member asked the HC if has ever been red carded before, to which he replied yes.

A Committee member asked the AC if he stepped on the pitch to which he said that he never stepped onto the pitch.  A second Committee member asked where the AC stood after being ejected, and if he could see the game.  The AC responded that he stood behind the trees at the top of the street.  The second Committee member suggested that distance was not out of sight and sound of pitch.

The step in AR testified that when the AC received his yellow card, he simply shook his head a little, which landed his second yellow and ejection from the match.

 After the deliberation, the Committee directed the following:

While the Committee concludes that no additional suspensions need be served, the GRFL Extreme Head Coach is put on probation for 1 (one) year effective immediately. The Head Coach for the Greater Falls Extreme U-14/ D5 is placed on disciplinary probation for the remainder of the season and the next season in which the team competes in the WAGSL. The terms of this probation require that the HC maintain a completely satisfactory disciplinary record. Cautions and ejections in GRFL Extreme U-14/D5 matches, supplemental reports from referees and comments on the Official Game Cards will all be evaluated to ensure that Head Coach has satisfied the terms of probation. Violation of the terms of probation will result in an additional R&D hearing.

Also, this letter constitutes an official written letter of censure for the GRFL Extreme Assistant Coach.    Questioning Referee’s calls cannot and will not be tolerated. 

The GRFL Extreme U14 Division 5 was informed that they have the right to appeal the decision of the WAGS R & D Committee according to Rule O, Protest and Appeals

Procedures.

Sincerely,

Lula E. Bauer, Director, WAGSL R&D Committee

*************************************************************************************

Committee Members Present:  Lula Bauer (Director), Clarence Jones, Sally D’Italia, Bob Emertiz, Debi Honaker, Maria Ramos, Michelle White (Administrator).

 

BAYS Baltimore BAYS 89/90 Present: Head Coach, Team Manager, Parents, (2) players

 

HSC Hagerstown Freedom 87 Present:  Assistant Coach

 

The Washington Area Girls Soccer League Rules and Discipline Committee (WAGSL-R&DC) held a hearing related to Rule M.2.c and O.2.D.

Meeting Notes

The meeting began with introductions and the R&D Director explaining the procedure of the hearing and the appeal process.

 

The Center Referee submitted a written report in lieu of attending the scheduled hearing.  He made several points.  1) He had an AR and a relative of the BAYS stepped in as a Club Linesman. 2) He switched his AR because the majority of play was on the HSC defensive end in the first half of the game and he wanted a certified AR on that end as he anticipated the majority of the second half would be played in that defensive end.  3) He ejected a BAYS parent.  4) He ejected the BAYS Head Coach, 4) Due to the HSC AC yelling over and over that the game was a forfeit and he felt at that point, emotions elevated to a disruptive level and 5) He terminated the match in the 61st minute; and 6) he did not conduct the mandatory checking of player passes at the field.

 

The Baltimore BAYS’ Head Coach (BAYS HC) began her testimony explaining it was a difficult game because she only had 9 players for their match.   The referee got to the game late, and there was only one AR.   A Baltimore BAYS’ relative stepped in as the linesman, and he was placed on the BAYS’ defensive end. The club linesman was told not to call offside by the Center Referee (CR) as he would be making those calls.   The BAYS HC felt the game was called pretty even in the first half.  At half time, the BAYS went to 8 players as another player had to leave.  The Center Referee had switched linesman placing the AR at the HSC defensive end.  The BAYS HC took issue with Center Referee switching linesman because she felt the offside calls would be unfair.  At that point, the Center Referee ejected her from the game.   The BAYS HC stated that she wasn’t shouting and screaming, but she was upset because she thought she had caused the forfeit. 

 

A BAYS’ parent testified and stated that she was embarrassed that she yell at the CR when she felt a HSC Freedom player was offside.  She was upset that one side had and AR and the other side had a Club Linesman.  The CR’s written report stated that the BAYS parent walked onto the field of play.  The BAY’s parent denied walking onto the pitch, however openly admitted to yelling at the CR, which caused her ejection from the game.

 

A BAYS player testified that in the 2nd half they were down another player, which was frustrating.  She said she was upset that the CR terminated the match, as she wanted to continue to play.  Once the match was terminated, she stated that the other team didn’t shake hands, and she was disappointed with their sportsmanship.

 

The Team Manager (TM) testified that the CR showed up approximately 10 minutes before game time so everything was rushed.  She presented the players’ passes but he did not want to check them.  The game started 15 minutes late.  She stated she spoke to him after the game regarding the game card, and informed him she was the TSL.   The CR asked her why she wasn’t wearing her game penny showing she was the TSL.  She told him that she was never given one. She further testified this is her first year being team manager.

 

The Committee member asked about the age of the AR and the checking of the players’ passes.  The BAYS HC responded that she thought the AR was 13/14 years of age and that she felt she was a good AR. The team manager responded that the Center Referee did not check the players’ passes.

 

The HSC AC testified that he agreed that the game started late. He stated that the AR had raised the flag straight up went the ball went out of bounds.  The BAYS’ player grabbed the ball for the throw in to which the HSC AC said although he agreed with the BAYS’ possession, he felt the BAYS’ player was influencing the AR call and stated his position to the Center Referee.   He further testified that during the second half he moved his players forward to take advantage.  The BAYS HC was ejected, and HSC AC stated that the BAYS HC stated inappropriate things.  He did state that he suggested a forfeit.  After the Center Referee blew his whistle for a forfeit, he and his team did cheer.  HSC AC stated that his team did line up but the BAYS’ players weren’t there.  The missed line up was not done on purpose.

 

A Committee member asked about the omission of the handshake and the end of game, and the HSC AC stated it was not intentional. 

 

The Center Referee was not in attendance for the hearing so his report stood as his given testimony.

 

During the deliberations, the Committee concluded that:

 

The behavior of the Head Coach of the BAYS as well as the HSC was inappropriate.  The referee committed several errors. WAGS rules require that player passes be checked before every match, without exception; this was not done. The referee changed the end of the field in which the neutral assistant referee was posted at the half, so that the neutral AR was judging offside against the same team for the entire match; this gave the opponent a significant and unfair advantage. And the referee "declared the game a forfeit" and abandoned it, apparently in part on the advice of one of the team’s coaches. Referees may terminate matches for cause, but they are not empowered to declare forfeits (only the league may do so).

Match # 2771 will be deemed as a non-game with no points being awarded.  

Based on WAGS Rule  M.  Game Conduct: ALL AGE GROUPS

COACHES ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CONDUCT OF THEIR PLAYERS AND SPECTATORS. IF A SPECTATOR’S CONDUCT RESULTS IN THE ISSUANCE OF A YELLOW CARD, RED CARD, OR EJECTION IT WILL BE CONSIDERED AS AWARDED TO THE COACH.  The HC of the BAYS must serve a second suspension. 

The BAYS Baltimore BAYS 89/90 and the HSC Hagerstown Freedom 87 U19 Division 4 was informed they have the right to appeal the decision of the WAGS R & D Committee according to Rule O, “Protest and Appeals Procedures.

 

Sincerely,

 

Lula E. Bauer, Director, WAGSL R&D Committee

 

 

 

 

 

© Copyright 2014 Washington Area Girls Soccer League, LTD. All rights reserved.
© Copyright 2014 Demosphere International, Inc. All rights reserved.
Youth Sports WebWriter Websites, Online Registration Management, Tournament and League Scheduling Systems