USTA League Rules vs Local USTA League rules

Nacho

Hall of Fame
Asking the peanut gallery....

So we had an issue recently where a team put a person on their roster within the time allowed as designated by the Local League committee rules, which state no players are allowed to register within 14 days of the end of season. The district Coordinator allowed the player, citing the USTA league rules allowing for a player to be entered if they are computer rated. We protested, but they said the USTA League rules trumps the Local League coordinators, even though the USTA makes local league coordinators determine their rules....Confusing I know...

So, fair or not fair? Why would the local coordinators even determine rules if they don't matter or won't be upheld?
 

Cindysphinx

G.O.A.T.
You mean there is a direct conflict between local rule and national rule?

I would think local rule gets disregarded if it conflicts with national rule. Surely we can't have a situation where a national rule says players can't play below their NTRP level but the local rule says the opposite and that player is allowed to play down, right?
 

dsp9753

Semi-Pro
Asking the peanut gallery....

So we had an issue recently where a team put a person on their roster within the time allowed as designated by the Local League committee rules, which state no players are allowed to register within 14 days of the end of season. The district Coordinator allowed the player, citing the USTA league rules allowing for a player to be entered if they are computer rated. We protested, but they said the USTA League rules trumps the Local League coordinators, even though the USTA makes local league coordinators determine their rules....Confusing I know...

So, fair or not fair? Why would the local coordinators even determine rules if they don't matter or won't be upheld?

Why does this even matter? What advantage do you/they even gain by doing this? Seems to me, its bickering about the rules when it makes no real difference to the league itself.

But as far as the question itself, USTA rules should trump all local league rules. Sometimes people/coordinators don't know all of the rules and will sometimes try to add their own accidentally. Mistakes like this happen, but the USTA rules should trump all when brought to their attention.
 

kevrol

Hall of Fame
Why does this even matter? What advantage do you/they even gain by doing this? Seems to me, its bickering about the rules when it makes no real difference to the league itself.

But as far as the question itself, USTA rules should trump all local league rules. Sometimes people/coordinators don't know all of the rules and will sometimes try to add their own accidentally. Mistakes like this happen, but the USTA rules should trump all when brought to their attention.
As far as I know there is no USTA National rule about timing of adding players to a rosters o USTA Nationals is silent on this subject. The local area has a rule that you can't add players withing 14 days of the end of season so that rule should stand.

As for what advantage do they gain? The team signing up this player may need only 1 win to win the league and they go out and recruit a ringer to play. That's the advantage.
 

J_R_B

Hall of Fame
Asking the peanut gallery....

So we had an issue recently where a team put a person on their roster within the time allowed as designated by the Local League committee rules, which state no players are allowed to register within 14 days of the end of season. The district Coordinator allowed the player, citing the USTA league rules allowing for a player to be entered if they are computer rated. We protested, but they said the USTA League rules trumps the Local League coordinators, even though the USTA makes local league coordinators determine their rules....Confusing I know...

So, fair or not fair? Why would the local coordinators even determine rules if they don't matter or won't be upheld?
This is confusing because what you wrote makes no sense. What are the rules? The Local rule says no players added within the last 14 days but the national rule says they can as long as they are C-rated? And someone added a player after the 14 day deadline but it was allowed? It's hard to give you an answer on this because it's not clear what you're saying.
 

dsp9753

Semi-Pro
As far as I know there is no USTA National rule about timing of adding players to a rosters o USTA Nationals is silent on this subject. The local area has a rule that you can't add players withing 14 days of the end of season so that rule should stand.

As for what advantage do they gain? The team signing up this player may need only 1 win to win the league and they go out and recruit a ringer to play. That's the advantage.

If they could have recruited a ringer, they would have done so at the beginning of the season so it wouldn't be so close. You know, so it doesn't have to come down to the final match.

My point is that if you could have recruited a really good player earlier, any captain that could have done so would have. It gives you more opportunity to play them and win more matches and win the league. No one would do it last minute if they could help it.
 

Doan

Rookie
As far as I know there is no USTA National rule about timing of adding players to a rosters o USTA Nationals is silent on this subject. The local area has a rule that you can't add players withing 14 days of the end of season so that rule should stand.

As for what advantage do they gain? The team signing up this player may need only 1 win to win the league and they go out and recruit a ringer to play. That's the advantage.

I believe there is a USTA rule that they need to have played 2 matches in local league with only 1 default counting towards the total for them to be eligible for playoffs and anything advancing. 3 matches to be eligible for Nationals.

So a last minute ringer would still need 2 matches for him/her to help the team going forward.
 

J_R_B

Hall of Fame
I believe there is a USTA rule that they need to have played 2 matches in local league with only 1 default counting towards the total for them to be eligible for playoffs and anything advancing. 3 matches to be eligible for Nationals.

So a last minute ringer would still need 2 matches for him/her to help the team going forward.
This is typically the basis for the 14 day rule and others like it. In Middle States, you can't add players after the point at which they would not be able to get two matches to be eligible for playoffs, so it's not technically a "14-day" rule, but given that matches are once a week, it is close to it.
 

Nacho

Hall of Fame
This is confusing because what you wrote makes no sense. What are the rules? The Local rule says no players added within the last 14 days but the national rule says they can as long as they are C-rated? And someone added a player after the 14 day deadline but it was allowed? It's hard to give you an answer on this because it's not clear what you're saying.

Sorry to confuse, yes it is hard to explain.

Simply put, there is an area set of rules governing the basics of league play. So what ever area you are in, they have adopted rules that state regulations for league play, when people can register, how the championships are conducted, and so on. They then punt other local rules to local league committees, to govern and come up with their own rules depending on the local leagues. This is because there are so many different variations, it is difficult for the areas, or districts within the areas, to adapt to everything. So in essence you have:

USTA oversite
Area Oversite
Local USTA committee"volunteer"oversight, which governs the smaller community leagues.

The local oversight manages appeals, and other issues that might apply to the varies leagues.

On top of that, each district has a coordinator, that operates the tennis link site and assists with league rulings.

In this case, the district coordinator did not understand the local league rule, and ruled in favor of the area rule.

The local league set a minimum date of 14 days before the end of season to register for a match. So basically in enough time before two matches left.

The Area rules states the same thing, but also put in there there that exceptions can be made for computer rated players, not self rated.

In this case the district coordinator did not know or confirm the local rule, and just went with the area rule.

Hopefully that makes a little more sense....It may not if you don't have this sort of set up in your area
 

WhiteOut

Semi-Pro
Asking the peanut gallery....

So we had an issue recently where a team put a person on their roster within the time allowed as designated by the Local League committee rules, which state no players are allowed to register within 14 days of the end of season. The district Coordinator allowed the player, citing the USTA league rules allowing for a player to be entered if they are computer rated. We protested, but they said the USTA League rules trumps the Local League coordinators, even though the USTA makes local league coordinators determine their rules....Confusing I know...

So, fair or not fair? Why would the local coordinators even determine rules if they don't matter or won't be upheld?

Seems to me the player should be allowed to join the team any time, but *only* if they are C rated. The player can join and *maybe* get the 2 matches in to qualify for advancement. If the player is C rated at level, it should not matter...I see no difference between this, and a player who joined at the beginning of the session, but then due to work/injury, etc. was not able to play any matches until the last two of the session. I don't see the problem...if the player is joining at level, then they should be eligible to pay the money and play any time, and there is no sandbagging issue b/c they are C rated at level...If they can get their two matches in, then they get to advance with the rest of the team. If not, they don't.
 

WhiteOut

Semi-Pro
If they could have recruited a ringer, they would have done so at the beginning of the season so it wouldn't be so close. You know, so it doesn't have to come down to the final match.

My point is that if you could have recruited a really good player earlier, any captain that could have done so would have. It gives you more opportunity to play them and win more matches and win the league. No one would do it last minute if they could help it.

Think about this: forget the whole notion of 'ringer'...and let's think about C-rated, at-level players (therefore, theoretically, the notion of 'sandbagger' is rendered moot). I have personally experienced a situation where a) a team was within a shot of advancing with a couple matches left, b) two players got injured just prior to those final two matches, and others were out for work/life commitments. So captain was in a situation to either add 1-2 replacement players to finish the session, or potentially have to default courts, possibly more than one court each match.

I look at all of this from the perspective of first-and-foremost, the objective is to get people playing tennis. From there, it has to be done with a process of fairness. So how is it unfair to add a C-rated, at-level player within any time frame, who is willing to pay the money and participate? Don't forget...if courts are being defaulted, that means up to three other players *do-not* get to play, which is the exact opposite of what the ultimate objective is: increasing participation.
 

dsp9753

Semi-Pro
Think about this: forget the whole notion of 'ringer'...and let's think about C-rated, at-level players (therefore, theoretically, the notion of 'sandbagger' is rendered moot). I have personally experienced a situation where a) a team was within a shot of advancing with a couple matches left, b) two players got injured just prior to those final two matches, and others were out for work/life commitments. So captain was in a situation to either add 1-2 replacement players to finish the session, or potentially have to default courts, possibly more than one court each match.

I look at all of this from the perspective of first-and-foremost, the objective is to get people playing tennis. From there, it has to be done with a process of fairness. So how is it unfair to add a C-rated, at-level player within any time frame, who is willing to pay the money and participate? Don't forget...if courts are being defaulted, that means up to three other players *do-not* get to play, which is the exact opposite of what the ultimate objective is: increasing participation.

This is along my point. I agree with you Captains should be allowed to add players whenever they want. But some people here are saying there is an advantage to this and its "unfair".
 

Nacho

Hall of Fame
Seems to me the player should be allowed to join the team any time, but *only* if they are C rated. The player can join and *maybe* get the 2 matches in to qualify for advancement. If the player is C rated at level, it should not matter...I see no difference between this, and a player who joined at the beginning of the session, but then due to work/injury, etc. was not able to play any matches until the last two of the session. I don't see the problem...if the player is joining at level, then they should be eligible to pay the money and play any time, and there is no sandbagging issue b/c they are C rated at level...If they can get their two matches in, then they get to advance with the rest of the team. If not, they don't.

agreed, except the local USTA league rules run counter to this, and say no exceptions regardless of rating...So which do you follow? Another poster says you follow the local committee...its so confusing
 

WhiteOut

Semi-Pro
agreed, except the local USTA league rules run counter to this, and say no exceptions regardless of rating...So which do you follow? Another poster says you follow the local committee...its so confusing

Hmmm...if national is silent to the issue, then I'd defer to the section, then district, then the local CTA. If all levels are silent to the issue *except* for the CTA, then there must have been some reason (legit or not) to have added that rule at the local level. I'd take it up with the CTA's Adult League Committee -- from there they (maybe) can address this specific situation if there is still time, but more broadly, they can also suggest rule changes to the Board for adoption....but that's not something that will happen overnight...perhaps this is something to clean-up/clarify in the local CTA by-laws. Sounds like something to be addressed by the local CTA in their next board meeting.
 

catfish

Professional
USTA League rules apply in hierarchical order: USTA National League Regulations and Interpretations, USTA Section Rules, USTA District Rules and then USTA Local League Rules. Section, District and Local rules can't contradict USTA National Rules. If they do contradict, it's generally a mistake or an oversight. USTA leagues that do not advance to Nationals generally have Section or District Rules that apply in addition to local rules.

USTA Leagues do have a lot of rules, so it's easy to get confused sometimes. USTA national rules require that players must play in 2 league matches in order to advance to any championships, and local league playoffs are considered championships. So in order to make sure that players meet this requirement, most Sections, Districts, or local rules state that players can be added up to the 2nd to last match of the season. Some rules that are trying to accomplish the same thing will state something like "players cannot be added during the last 2 weeks/14 days of the league season". I think it should be worded "players can be added up to the 2nd to last match of the league season" to avoid issues of rained out matches at the end of the season.
 
As far as I can tell, USTA League Rules (i.e. National rules) are silent as to how late in the season players can be added to the roster. Have you looked at your Section rules (in my Section they're called Operating Procedures)? If they have a rule, then your local must follow it. Next check your District and Area rules, if they have a rule then it must be followed. If none of the above have a rule addressing the situation, then I believe the local league is free to establish its own rule on the matter. If your District coordinator claims that there is such a District rule that trumps the local rule, ask them to cite it. If they can't or won't, then you should consider filing an administrative grievance.

In our local leagues there is a rule saying there must be 2 matches remaining in order to add any new players, so something like it may be a common local rule. The mere fact that a player needs two matches to qualify for Championship play is interesting, and gives a logical basis for establishing such a local rule, but is not sufficient evidence that USTA has such a roster-addition rule.
 
Top