Bantam A

[Teemu8]

I heard it had something to do with drinking at a team event.... not 100%sure

[chpNsk8]

 I have no dog in the fight but this is a very interesting thread.  Safesport follows a coach anywhere so if it was a real issue, he or any other coach wouldn't be allowed to coach.

The pdr rule is not new *but* previous to now, the writing never had specific rules on eligibility. I encourage everyone to look up the pdr 2015 rule then the new rule of today.

[BlindZebras]

As I understand it, the old PDR rule allowed teams to play in desired division but would not be playoff eligible.  Then, allegedly, a committee ruled that this Wave team could not play in AA at all.  I think that is the angst of their argument, and why words like vindictive are being thrown around.  Maybe it's just coincidence, as the Wave 3 team is the only one finding itself in this position this year.  Or, it could be perceived as a personal attack by a particular club (JD) holding a grudge against a particular coach (MT) and various parents/kids that decided to follow said coach.  Supposedly 2 of the 5 committee members were from the JD club.


My point still stands - this particular Wave team knew they were going to violate the standing PDR rule and chose to field a team anyways (enter iconic image of dancing and fire).  A ruling was made which quashed any hope of playing at the AA level, relegating them to handing out weekly beat-downs in Bantam A.  BUT, an offer was made (albeit distasteful) to have some sort of hybrid exhibition schedule, and the team opted to stay in Bantam A and adopt an "us against the world" attitude.  You had a choice, you made it, live with it.

[Teemu8]

As I understand it, the old PDR rule allowed teams to play in desired division but would not be playoff eligible.  Then, allegedly, a committee ruled that this Wave team could not play in AA at all.  I think that is the angst of their argument, and why words like vindictive are being thrown around.  Maybe it's just coincidence, as the Wave 3 team is the only one finding itself in this position this year.  Or, it could be perceived as a personal attack by a particular club (JD) holding a grudge against a particular coach (MT) and various parents/kids that decided to follow said coach.  Supposedly 2 of the 5 committee members were from the JD club.


My point still stands - this particular Wave team knew they were going to violate the standing PDR rule and chose to field a team anyways (enter iconic image of dancing and fire).  A ruling was made which quashed any hope of playing at the AA level, relegating them to handing out weekly beat-downs in Bantam A.  BUT, an offer was made (albeit distasteful) to have some sort of hybrid exhibition schedule, and the team opted to stay in Bantam A and adopt an "us against the world" attitude.  You had a choice, you made it, live with it.

The problem with that "you had a choice, you made it live with it"  statement is that you are making this all about wave 3 and not about the teams that actually belong at Bantam A.  They are the ones getting screwed here.  The other 18 teams did not have a choice and they are being forced to live with it.

[chpNsk8]

 What was the offer caha made to the wave 3?

[Handboni]

I heard it had something to do with drinking at a team event.... not 100%sure

I always drink at team events.  Makes them much more tolerable.

[lcadad]

I heard it had something to do with drinking at a team event.... not 100%sure

I always drink at team events.  Makes them much more tolerable.

Exactly. However, you are not coaching the team, so there's that.

[trans4761]

I heard it had something to do with drinking at a team event.... not 100%sure

I always drink at team events.  Makes them much more tolerable.

Ironic that the coach went to the tailgate capital of South Cal youth hockey.

[OneandDone]

I heard it had something to do with drinking at a team event.... not 100%sure

I always drink at team events.  Makes them much more tolerable.

Ironic that the coach went to the tailgate capital of South Cal youth hockey.

It wasn't just drinking, it was fall down drunk.

[BlindZebras]

The problem with that "you had a choice, you made it live with it"  statement is that you are making this all about wave 3 and not about the teams that actually belong at Bantam A.  They are the ones getting screwed here.  The other 18 teams did not have a choice and they are being forced to live with it.

Point taken, you are correct. Everybody loses here. I was just addressing the claim that it's all CAHA's fault, and not the fact that the rest of the Bantam A division now has to suffer and play for 2nd place.

[Flying Dutchman]

Recognizing that this Board has apparently already awarded this team the Bantam A banner before the end of the pre-season, it will be interesting to see how they do this weekend against the Bears team which is also undefeated and have won their pre-season games by fairly large margins.

[Teemu8]

Bears are one of a very few teams that may be able to keep it somewhat close.

[Hockey05]

I just can't believe they are allowed to play in the playoffs if all of this has been stated correctly. 

[Reality check]

Let them play. What does it matter? Don't like it don't play them take a forfeit!!

[HockeyPop2297]

I have no dog in the fight but this is a very interesting thread.  Safesport follows a coach anywhere so if it was a real issue, he or any other coach wouldn't be allowed to coach.

The pdr rule is not new *but* previous to now, the writing never had specific rules on eligibility. I encourage everyone to look up the pdr 2015 rule then the new rule of today.

What is amazing is this is the 2nd thread dedicated to the same issue! Note "Why is Wave 3 playing in Bantam A" further down the blog list! At this point, we could write a book! Imagine the thread when they lose their first game!