You be the judge...
- Thread starter Trainer
- Start date
You might have a point there. If you were not allowed to play, then I dont see why they can go after you personally for not playing.
Im surprised they have a rule that punishes all the players. I suppose it's good as a way of trying to prevent that from happening (quitters who didnt get their own way who just pull out, or teams that have already won who dont feel the need to completing the round robin). But you could easily be a member of a team that wants to play but now cant because the rest of your team decided not to.
Im not sure about other areas, but here, the captain is just suspended from running a team. Probally suspending him/her from tennis would be good with me as well.
It's a shame that your captain made a simple mistake of not paying attention to the rules turn into something that's much worse.
But hopefully they let you back in. As a player it's not necessarily your job to know every single rule out when it comes to running a team, that's the captain's job. (and obviously the league should take some blame for not being more proactive when they accept the roster lists, it cant be all that hard....)
Cindysphinx
G.O.A.T.
Mighty good lawyering, I say!
Once you have been declared ineligible, you no longer have cast your lot with the others. You cannot possibly be penalized for failing to do something (play) that you had already been told you could not do.
You get 'em, Trainer!
That said, your teammates were -- how shall we say? -- Way Not Smart in stalking off like that. Me, I would have played the matches.
Once you have been declared ineligible, you no longer have cast your lot with the others. You cannot possibly be penalized for failing to do something (play) that you had already been told you could not do.
You get 'em, Trainer!
That said, your teammates were -- how shall we say? -- Way Not Smart in stalking off like that. Me, I would have played the matches.
Cindysphinx
G.O.A.T.
Oh, by the way . . . Your waiver argument?
Lame and ill-advised, IMHO. By making a waiver argument, you are essentially asking the Powers That Be to decide that they were at fault for this debacle rather than your captain. You are also subtly tainting the outcome of entire event by suggesting that the winner perhaps did not win fair and square through administrative error of those in charge. Your listener will not be receptive to these suggestions.
Focus on your second argument, as it's a keeper and you want to make sure they understand it.
Lame and ill-advised, IMHO. By making a waiver argument, you are essentially asking the Powers That Be to decide that they were at fault for this debacle rather than your captain. You are also subtly tainting the outcome of entire event by suggesting that the winner perhaps did not win fair and square through administrative error of those in charge. Your listener will not be receptive to these suggestions.
Focus on your second argument, as it's a keeper and you want to make sure they understand it.
tennis-n-sc
Professional
Nothing prevents a player from playing on two adult teams, you just can't go to state on two. You have no argument. The rules are there for everyone to read and understand. If you have a question, ask before the foul is committed. IMO.
Cindysphinx
G.O.A.T.
Say, uh . . .
What do your local rules say that justifies the suspensions? Would you quote them, please?
What do your local rules say that justifies the suspensions? Would you quote them, please?
Trainer
Rookie
There is something very ironic about that statement....
The grievance had nothing to do with playing on two teams...
While I agree that you should have been defaulted for playing on two teams... and your team should have been punished for leaving. Since you could no longer play regardless of what your teammates did, would you have been suspended if your teammates had continued and played all the matches? This is the main question that really pertains to you. Were team members that were not present at State also suspended? Gosh, I hope not. Because you really should be lumped in with them.
BTW...I'm not suggesting that you should have been suspended "only" for the two team thing...
And no please no lawsuit, that the last thing the leagues need.
I am on a grievance committee. Bearing in mind that we have heard only one side of the argument here, if everything stated is correct and complete, I would rule:
- the DQ is correct; ignorance of the rule is no defense
- the subsequent banning is incorrect - you cannot be banned for refusing to play in a match that you were not eligible to play in.
I dunno, whether Trainer is right or wrong, they probally need a good lawsuit, it might make them do a better job next time and follow their own rules.
They shouldnt even of let Trainer play a match. There cant be that many teams involved in those two levels that they cant identify conflicts like that. It just sounds like they were lazy.
(and of course it's still Trainer's captain's fault, but like anything else it pays for them to do a little extra work to avoid things like this)
Make it simpiler next time.
I was thinking about it, and what you wrote above is just way too wordy, and like Cindy said, the stuff in the first paragraph makes it sound too confusing.
The people on these committees are not lawyers and usually they are not even people with basic business skills necessarily.
So you need to make it simple and cut and dry.
Just saying "How can I be banned for not playing in a match that I was not eligable to play in???" could be enough.
Plus that rule has got to be some sort of localized rule, I cant believe that other areas would punish the entire team anyway. Unless there are facts that we dont know about.
Yep, that's just what we volunteers need - to get sued by the people we are trying to help. That'll keep us on our toes and make sure we earn the big bucks being thrown our way.
tennis-n-sc
Professional
Trainer, I believe I am right on this, but in the Southern Section and in South Carolina, I'm sure we can play on two adult teams in the same district at different levels. If we can do it here, I'm not sure I understand your state policy. Actually, we can go to state at two levels. I apoligize for the misunderstanding in your grievance.
I also agree with Amarone. I still don't feel you have any grounds for a national appeal. Lawsuit? Money wasted for the same answer. IMO.
Cindysphinx
G.O.A.T.
What exactly did they say in denying your appeal? Can you quote it for us?
Yes, finish out the appeals process, definitely. Think carefully about what you want to say. An apologetic tone will probably go a very long way, because you and your captain have to wear this one. Drop the waiver stuff, admit you screwed up, but focus on the bit about being ineligible to play the match for which you were suspended.
If you lose and want to pursue it further, forget a lawsuit. Lawsuits stink. The remedy you would want is to be reinstated, right? A small claims court cannot grant you that remedy. They can only award you damages, and you have no damages. So you'd have to go to a trial level court, which would be expensive and time-consuming and stressful and wasteful and . . . . You get the idea.
Better would be to seek redress in the court of public opinion. If your appeal is denied, make a few calls. Me, I'd start with Tennis Magazine. A good story there might be enough to get some reconsideration.
Or just accept the suspension and take up biking for a while.
Yes, finish out the appeals process, definitely. Think carefully about what you want to say. An apologetic tone will probably go a very long way, because you and your captain have to wear this one. Drop the waiver stuff, admit you screwed up, but focus on the bit about being ineligible to play the match for which you were suspended.
If you lose and want to pursue it further, forget a lawsuit. Lawsuits stink. The remedy you would want is to be reinstated, right? A small claims court cannot grant you that remedy. They can only award you damages, and you have no damages. So you'd have to go to a trial level court, which would be expensive and time-consuming and stressful and wasteful and . . . . You get the idea.
Better would be to seek redress in the court of public opinion. If your appeal is denied, make a few calls. Me, I'd start with Tennis Magazine. A good story there might be enough to get some reconsideration.
Or just accept the suspension and take up biking for a while.
Trainer
Rookie
Trying to help? You've got to be kidding? These people have no intention on helping at all. This is clearly unfair, and they should learn that treating people this way isn't something they can do.
Trainer
Rookie
Actually, I have 2 lawyers in my family who are looking at this now. If they believe that I can win and be awarded court costs and attorney fees, I'll sue immediately. Even if it's only in a small claims court, to win on principal would suit me fine.
Trainer
Rookie
No, in the Southern Section you can only advance on 1 team, but adults and seniors are seperate and you can advance on 1 each.
ugh. if that's the case where you are being punished because your team did something wrong i feel for ya.
but on the other hand - you are playing on a team and unfortunately their actions do affect you as well. just an ugly situation.
it looks like you can't play the next Combo season or the subsequent championship. it doesn't look like you are prevented from playing Mixed Doubles or Adult League though right?
but on the other hand - you are playing on a team and unfortunately their actions do affect you as well. just an ugly situation.
it looks like you can't play the next Combo season or the subsequent championship. it doesn't look like you are prevented from playing Mixed Doubles or Adult League though right?
Trainer
Rookie
Yea here it is...
I called in to the committee before they decided this, and my tone on the conference call was contrite and humble.
The point of having the waiver argument in there was to drive home the fact that I was a victim of poor organization by a USTA representative. That I was recruited and entered into the tournaments on good faith without any intention of cheating. Because this was initiated by a USTA representative, they, the entire USTA organization, should accept some of the blame for the infraction.
I know they stink. That's the whole point. I want to make them regret treating me so unfairly.
I may do that too.
No chance. I don't go away that easy.
Last edited:
tennis-n-sc
Professional
I guess I still don't understand what grounds you have for an appeal or lawsuit.
Trainer
Rookie
My grounds for the appeal is that the rule was only partially invoked. When this rule was invoked, I should have been removed from the team. Their maintain that the grievance was against members on the team's information sheet. This rule prohibits me from being on this team, and when t hey defaulted my matches based on this rule, they should have removed me from the team information sheet as well, but didn't. This resulted in unfair treatment of me.
The lawsuit would be based on me being a USTA member being denied privileges promised as a member of the organization. And that the reason for denying me these privileges is without merit.
if you want sympathy -- i think you have it in spades from most of us who has read your situation. i feel for ya. i've been DQ'ed before because my captain had more than two players on our team that were also on another team. something like that. these rules confuse the caveman in me.
but if you are looking for validation for filing a lawsuit - i think most of us would discourage you from doing so. i'm not so sure that you were denied privileges that were promised to you by the USTA. but you'd probably be better off talking to a lawyer.
but if you are looking for validation for filing a lawsuit - i think most of us would discourage you from doing so. i'm not so sure that you were denied privileges that were promised to you by the USTA. but you'd probably be better off talking to a lawyer.
I would have denied your appeal as well. Your team acted like petulant children "taking their ball and going home" when they didn't get their way. Someone needed to be the adult and step up and tell people that walking out on those matches was just the wrong move. I would suspend everyone involved just to send the message. Its just one season of sitting out, life will go on.
Trainer
Rookie
Islandtennis
Rookie
Trainer,
You do have two separate issues. I think everyone agrees that the DQ's are justified. Is there anything in your District (State) Reg.'s about action that will taken if a team does not play a playoff match? This would be critical. Depending on what that wording is should be the basis for your appeal. If there is nothing there, then you do have a point of being suspended for the year. If it specifies action that is to be taken against an entire team, then they may be right in what they did. If there is no specific rule, I think they are on somewhat shaky ground with the suspensions.
I know that we yearly discuss what action should be taken if a team withdraws from District playoffs. I know that you understand that your withdrawal not only affects your team but also other teams that may be in contention.
You do have two separate issues. I think everyone agrees that the DQ's are justified. Is there anything in your District (State) Reg.'s about action that will taken if a team does not play a playoff match? This would be critical. Depending on what that wording is should be the basis for your appeal. If there is nothing there, then you do have a point of being suspended for the year. If it specifies action that is to be taken against an entire team, then they may be right in what they did. If there is no specific rule, I think they are on somewhat shaky ground with the suspensions.
I know that we yearly discuss what action should be taken if a team withdraws from District playoffs. I know that you understand that your withdrawal not only affects your team but also other teams that may be in contention.
Last edited:
tennis-n-sc
Professional
This from the SC Combo Rules.
301H(5) Player Participation.
3.01H(5)b During the South Carolina BMW Combo Doubles Local League Season a player may play on more than one combined level in Adult and/or Senior divisions in the same Local League during the same season.
3.01H(5)c
(1) A player may not play at the same combined level in the same division (Adult or Senior) on teams in separate Local Leagues in South Carolina BMW Combo Doubles during the same season.
(2) A player may play at different combined levels in the same division (Adult or Senior) on teams in separate Local Leagues in South Carolina during the same season. The player must obtain prior approval to play out of his/her area of primary residence in accordance with Regulation 3.01H(5)c(3).
(3) A player may not play out of his/her Local League Area (as defined by the player’s primary residence as listed in USTA records) unless approved by both of the Local League Coordinators that are affected and the State League Coordinator. A player playing out of his/her Local League Area without obtaining prior approval may be subject to sanctions, which may include disqualification from further play and voiding of matches already played. Sanctions may be applied to the team captain as well. A player who received approval, in 2006 or before, to play out of his/her area MUST reapply if he/she desires to play out of his/her area in 2007.
(4) A player from another state (as defined by the player’s primary residence as listed in USTA records) may not participate in South Carolina without approval by the Local League Coordinator representing the area that is affected and the State League Coordinator. A player playing out of his/her home state without obtaining prior approval may be subject to sanctions, which may include disqualification from further play and voiding of matches already played. Sanctions may be applied to the team captain as well. A player from another state who previously received approval to play in South Carolina and who has played in South Carolina in every year since that approval was granted, need not reapply for approval to play in 2007 in the same local league and the same division (adult or senior) as in 2006.
3.01H(5)d Players who qualify for South Carolina BMW Combo Doubles State Championships may advance on more than one Adult or one Senior team in the 2007 Combo Doubles league season.
PROGRESSION
3.02A Local League Competition. Each Local League MUST complete their Local League Season prior to the South Carolina BMW Combo Doubles State League Championships and submit the required team entry fees and information to the BMW Combo Doubles State League Coordinator by October 18, 2007.
As I read this, a player can advance on more than one team, different level, to our state playoffs. I don't know about sectional.
Most of those people are not volunteers necessarily. League officials are usually paid, even if it's small.
Besides if you dont care enough to do a good job then dont bother to volunteer. (or work for cheap)
We encounter people all the time (resteraunts, service counters) that are underpaid, yet we still expect some level of service. We're the customers after all..... (in league play as well)
Islandtennis
Rookie
The combo rules do say that further action on the team may be taken by the State, 7.03M. Let us know what the captains packet says. Your captain should be aware of what was in it.
Trainer
Rookie
I've heard of this happening before. I heard about 1 team that "most" of the players went home (all but 2). The 2 showed up for the matches, but could not play, of course. The players on the team that went home were suspended, not the 2 that stayed around....
The point here is that most players only get their information from the Captain. If the Captain blows off rules and tells the players to go home, how are the player supposed to know that they could/would be punished for doing so?
You are correct we had many instances here in AR where players were playing district championships at 2 different levels, you just can not play on 2 teams in the same level at Districts and above, there nothing to stop a player from playing same level in 2 different local leagues.
Cindysphinx
G.O.A.T.
Can I suggest that you not waste the time of your friends/relatives on pursuing a lawsuit?
Yes, joining USTA and paying your money entitles you to play league tennis. You played league tennis. You have not been damaged, as you have been prevented from playing next year and can avoid being damaged by simply not joining USTA next year.
If you have been damaged, you have been damaged $25 or whatever you paid for a one-year 2007 membership. You would pay more than that just to file a court claim.
Joining USTA and paying your money means you must comply with the rules if you want to play league tennis. You failed to do that, so who breached the contract (if there is in fact a contract)?
By the time you got a court with the power to reinstate you to actually hear this case and by the time all appeals are resolved, your suspension will be over. You could perhaps get the suspension delayed while the case is pending, but I highly doubt your friends and family are interested in representing you for free for a year or more.
Remember, if you file a lawsuit and lose, you might be responsible for paying the costs of USTA. You wanna go there?
If you cannot see why your waiver claim is lame, I don't know what else to tell you. YOU YOU YOU are responsible for knowing the rules, which are clear and expressed in English and available for everyone to read. I understand how something like this could get by you, but it is not the fault of the other team or the officials. It is a responsibility you should accept; had this been done from the get-go, perhaps your team wouldn't have felt so wronged that they walked out and left you in this position.
Look, it sucks when you think you've been treated unfairly. I get that. There are times in life when you just have to cut your losses and move on, however. It's one year of amateur tennis. There is absolutely nothing at stake here and nothing to be gained by making a federal case out of it. You and your suspended teammates should go to a bar, drink an obscene amount of alcohol, take a cab home and then start looking for a club or league where you can play until your suspensions are over.
File one more appeal if you can, throw yourself on the mercy of the court and hope for the best.
Yes, joining USTA and paying your money entitles you to play league tennis. You played league tennis. You have not been damaged, as you have been prevented from playing next year and can avoid being damaged by simply not joining USTA next year.
If you have been damaged, you have been damaged $25 or whatever you paid for a one-year 2007 membership. You would pay more than that just to file a court claim.
Joining USTA and paying your money means you must comply with the rules if you want to play league tennis. You failed to do that, so who breached the contract (if there is in fact a contract)?
By the time you got a court with the power to reinstate you to actually hear this case and by the time all appeals are resolved, your suspension will be over. You could perhaps get the suspension delayed while the case is pending, but I highly doubt your friends and family are interested in representing you for free for a year or more.
Remember, if you file a lawsuit and lose, you might be responsible for paying the costs of USTA. You wanna go there?
If you cannot see why your waiver claim is lame, I don't know what else to tell you. YOU YOU YOU are responsible for knowing the rules, which are clear and expressed in English and available for everyone to read. I understand how something like this could get by you, but it is not the fault of the other team or the officials. It is a responsibility you should accept; had this been done from the get-go, perhaps your team wouldn't have felt so wronged that they walked out and left you in this position.
Look, it sucks when you think you've been treated unfairly. I get that. There are times in life when you just have to cut your losses and move on, however. It's one year of amateur tennis. There is absolutely nothing at stake here and nothing to be gained by making a federal case out of it. You and your suspended teammates should go to a bar, drink an obscene amount of alcohol, take a cab home and then start looking for a club or league where you can play until your suspensions are over.
File one more appeal if you can, throw yourself on the mercy of the court and hope for the best.
I agree with Trainer's assessment, if he's denyed the ability to play USTA then he should file a lawsuit. (after he's explored all the channels within the USTA given to him, and depending on whether there is more going on that we dont know about here)
The reason being is that whether any of this (including the DQ) is his fault is very debatable.
It's the captains job to either point out the specific league rules to their players, or at the least know them and abide by them. How many players do you know (well maybe you know a ton but it's rare otherwise) that actually know all the specific league rules?
He's basically being punished for something that as an individual he had little or no control over. It's not his job to know every single rule pertaining to league play, it's his captain's responsibility.
And it's not his fault necessarily that the team didnt play the last match, unless there was something going on that we are not aware of.
As far as him getting DQ'ed, I agree with that, he should of been DQ'ed, although it's unfortuante that it got to that point.
But if they are going to follow it thru a series of events that denys him the ability to play, and given that he really didnt have a whole lot of personal responsibility in the matter, is wrong.
Although Im not a lawyer and most of you are not either, so I guess that would be where to go first. If he has some lawyer that says they have a case, then they probally do.
The best thing would be that they settle out of court, and just let him back in. (which is what the league will do if they dont want to bother with a pesky lawsuit)
Cindysphinx
G.O.A.T.
Javier,
IMHO, this is a big problem in the U.S. People think of filing a lawsuit in situations where it is inappropriate, when they ought to just Let It Go Already.
I'm sorry, but the Ignorance Defense ("I didn't know the rule and so shouldn't have to abide by it") leaves me cold. I would be surprised if all of us as players haven't been advised we are responsible for knowing all of the rules, even the obscure easy-to-forget ones. That's pretty standard.
That said, I wouldn't count on USTA rolling over just because someone files a pesky lawsuit. They could defend a suit like this with one hand tied behind their backs. It would cost them next to nothing to just wait Trainer out. The integrity of league tennis does depend on USTA not buckling every time someone files a lawsuit over peanuts, especially when the DQ itself was totally justified.
And um . . . the mere fact that a lawyer tells you that you "have a case" does not make it so or mean you should pursue it.
Lawsuits make people lose sleep and tend to raise their blood pressure. It's gotta be worth it. This isn't. Perhaps the law wherever Trainer happens to live is favorable in some way that I haven't anticipated. If it isn't, then I gotta wonder how a lawsuit makes any sense at all.
OK, Javier. I have given you my opinion in a calm, rational way, without any personal attacks on you. Javier, should you choose to reply to me, please let's keep things that way.
IMHO, this is a big problem in the U.S. People think of filing a lawsuit in situations where it is inappropriate, when they ought to just Let It Go Already.
I'm sorry, but the Ignorance Defense ("I didn't know the rule and so shouldn't have to abide by it") leaves me cold. I would be surprised if all of us as players haven't been advised we are responsible for knowing all of the rules, even the obscure easy-to-forget ones. That's pretty standard.
That said, I wouldn't count on USTA rolling over just because someone files a pesky lawsuit. They could defend a suit like this with one hand tied behind their backs. It would cost them next to nothing to just wait Trainer out. The integrity of league tennis does depend on USTA not buckling every time someone files a lawsuit over peanuts, especially when the DQ itself was totally justified.
And um . . . the mere fact that a lawyer tells you that you "have a case" does not make it so or mean you should pursue it.
Lawsuits make people lose sleep and tend to raise their blood pressure. It's gotta be worth it. This isn't. Perhaps the law wherever Trainer happens to live is favorable in some way that I haven't anticipated. If it isn't, then I gotta wonder how a lawsuit makes any sense at all.OK, Javier. I have given you my opinion in a calm, rational way, without any personal attacks on you. Javier, should you choose to reply to me, please let's keep things that way.
CAM178
Hall of Fame
Looks like I'm not the only one who's concerned about how Javier reacts to people.
Javier,
IMHO, this is a big problem in the U.S. People think of filing a lawsuit in situations where it is inappropriate, when they ought to just Let It Go Already.
I'm sorry, but the Ignorance Defense ("I didn't know the rule and so shouldn't have to abide by it") leaves me cold. I would be surprised if all of us as players haven't been advised we are responsible for knowing all of the rules, even the obscure easy-to-forget ones. That's pretty standard.
That said, I wouldn't count on USTA rolling over just because someone files a pesky lawsuit. They could defend a suit like this with one hand tied behind their backs. It would cost them next to nothing to just wait Trainer out. The integrity of league tennis does depend on USTA not buckling every time someone files a lawsuit over peanuts, especially when the DQ itself was totally justified.
And um . . . the mere fact that a lawyer tells you that you "have a case" does not make it so or mean you should pursue it.
OK, Javier. I have given you my opinion in a calm, rational way, without any personal attacks on you. Javier, should you choose to reply to me, please let's keep things that way.
Cindy,
Dont worry, we dont have a problem when it comes to this issue.
I admit that I am not a lawyer either, so everyone is of course entitled to their opinion.
Lawyers usually will not say they have a case unless there is money involved. (in that respect you would be right, he's probally wasting his time)
However if it's a family member, Im not sure, that could probally go either way.
Hopefully it doesnt come to that anyway, perhaps he'll get somewhere with the National Appeal pursuit.
As far as the Ignorance Defense, I agree as far as the disqualification goes, it doesnt matter. He got DQ'ed which is the penalty for breaking that rule whether he's responsible for it or not.
But when you take it as far as to say that he's barred from playing USTA due to what the rest of his team did, that's diffrent.
Although Im sure we can both concede that neither of us are lawyers and that we werent there and didnt know everything that might of happened as well, so Im not going to get too uptight about this one.
I fully agree with Cindy on this one. Its not like you have an inalienable right to play in a USTA league. Its not a state run league and its not like its your job that they are taking away. You can still go to practice and you can still play tennis outside of USTA.
And Javier- how I read it was that the team showed up, found out about the DQ and then all of them left. Someone needed to be the adult in that situation- I would have suspended everyone in the lineup for being so childish about it. Teams should still play the matches even if they don't like a ruling- suspending the whole lineup is a proper penalty in my opinion.
And Javier- how I read it was that the team showed up, found out about the DQ and then all of them left. Someone needed to be the adult in that situation- I would have suspended everyone in the lineup for being so childish about it. Teams should still play the matches even if they don't like a ruling- suspending the whole lineup is a proper penalty in my opinion.
Last edited:
Actually I was thinking about that. A club or organization can probally bar any member for any reason other than race, creed, sex.
So you may have a point. However Im not a lawyer so Im not totally sure about it in this case. If he has a lawyer in the family they should know. (depending on what sort of lawyer they are, they would have to specifically deal with rights issues probally, just being a lawyer itself doesnt mean too much)
So maybe you're right.
So did your team default the match following this episode?
Cindysphinx
G.O.A.T.
Oh, man. In that early thread, it seems that Trainor's team was threatening to go to court way back at the time. Now I am wondering how much their unfortunate attitude had to do with the severity of the penalty.
Trainor, can you describe the scene and what you were doing and saying? Was there a dust-up, and what did you say at the time?
Trainer
Rookie
Well, the scene was tense.
I however was a model of diplomacy. While other members were getting quite heated, I was off on the side talking to one of the USTA reps and quietly pleading my case to no avail.
Cindysphinx
G.O.A.T.
How was it decided to take a team default?
Actually, you were on the team, just not eligible to be on the roster for the tournament. If your team would have advanced to the next level, you may have been able to rejoin your team. This depends on your section rules.
