| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Critical Mass
277 Posts |
 Posted - 06/08/2014 : 12:31:43
|
I welcome all comments.
We played in a tourney this weekend sponsored by a local cobb county academy. We were 3-1 in our pool and tied with 2 other teams, all 3-1. The academy rules state the following "tie-breaker" process in their tourney rules.
"Tie Breaker- Teams will be ranked according to the following tie-breaker system- Record, Head-to-Head, Run Differential (+7/-7), Runs Allowed, and Runs Scored."
Our team was 3-1 as mentioned and the two other "academy" teams in our pool were 3-1 as well. We beat both of them "Head-to-Head" and found out last night that we did not make the semifinals and aren't the #1 seed in their tournament. We were down (1 run) in the diff to one of those teams but that is the 3rd metric in the tie-breaker formula, right? Shouldn't we have won #1 seed in our pool on the Head to Head metric?
It just so happens that due to this "interpretation" by the academy tourney director, all the "academy" teams are in semi's playing today.
The competitor in me says we should have swept the last team we played (we were a better team and checked out mentally) and not let it come down to the rules. We could've also been smarter on the bases during the previous 3 games and not run out of scoring chances to have improved our differential. All valid and accurate critiques.
You hear that all the time when you don't get a call here or there and we tell our boys to not leave it up to the officials...finish the opponent and win outright...but beating the other two teams and having the same record and we get screwed like this, sure sucks for the kids.
My advice would be to be very clear moving forward if you ever enter an "academy" tournament as to what the rules are (didnt matter in our case) and better yet how they will be interpreted.
IMHO, that "academy" group are dishonest and suffer from a serous case of nepotism. That rule change at the last minute screwed our program out of a chance to win a championship on their field.
I am asking our coach to not enter any more tourneys with them, we should've played the PG event....i bet they never screw teams out of #1 seeds.
#rantover |
|
|
AllStar
762 Posts |
Posted - 06/08/2014 : 15:08:06
|
quote:
Originally posted by Critical Mass
I welcome all comments.
We played in a tourney this weekend sponsored by a local cobb county academy. We were 3-1 in our pool and tied with 2 other teams, all 3-1. The academy rules state the following "tie-breaker" process in their tourney rules.
"Tie Breaker- Teams will be ranked according to the following tie-breaker system- Record, Head-to-Head, Run Differential (+7/-7), Runs Allowed, and Runs Scored."
Our team was 3-1 as mentioned and the two other "academy" teams in our pool were 3-1 as well. We beat both of them "Head-to-Head" and found out last night that we did not make the semifinals and aren't the #1 seed in their tournament. We were down (1 run) in the diff to one of those teams but that is the 3rd metric in the tie-breaker formula, right? Shouldn't we have won #1 seed in our pool on the Head to Head metric?
It just so happens that due to this "interpretation" by the academy tourney director, all the "academy" teams are in semi's playing today.
The competitor in me says we should have swept the last team we played (we were a better team and checked out mentally) and not let it come down to the rules. We could've also been smarter on the bases during the previous 3 games and not run out of scoring chances to have improved our differential. All valid and accurate critiques.
You hear that all the time when you don't get a call here or there and we tell our boys to not leave it up to the officials...finish the opponent and win outright...but beating the other two teams and having the same record and we get screwed like this, sure sucks for the kids.
My advice would be to be very clear moving forward if you ever enter an "academy" tournament as to what the rules are (didnt matter in our case) and better yet how they will be interpreted.
IMHO, that "academy" group are dishonest and suffer from a serous case of nepotism. That rule change at the last minute screwed our program out of a chance to win a championship on their field.
I am asking our coach to not enter any more tourneys with them, we should've played the PG event....i bet they never screw teams out of #1 seeds.
#rantover
I don't have a dog in the hunt anymore as my son "retired" from organized baseball at the end of the HS team, but it sure would be helpful to people down the road to know whom you are talking about. Then they can make informed decisions about who they do and don't want to play against. |
 |
|
|
WPB Baseball
200 Posts |
Posted - 06/08/2014 : 16:17:15
|
| Did you ask the director why this happened or just took it and asking everyone here the interpretation? If everything you are saying is accurate, then yes, you should've been the 1 seed and there should not be any question about that. Don't know the academy or their rules, but am curious as to what director said in response to his own rules (if what you explained were his rules). |
|
|
|
Critical Mass
277 Posts |
Posted - 06/08/2014 : 19:22:26
|
It's 643. The Tournament director had no real reason as to why we were not the #1 seed. He brought up the fact that there were 3 teams tied at 3-1 and that had an efffect on the rules interpretation.......like that has anything to do with the price of cheese.
I emailed the owner of the organization and he has yet to respond.....a friend of mine on our team reminded me, he's probably coaching his "teams" in the semis and championship vs his teams today. Too funny.
Ball is in his court, we wont play in any more 643 events after gettng hosed like this. Everyone needs to know how they pretect their own.
#LAME
|
|
|
|
Gwinnett
791 Posts |
Posted - 06/08/2014 : 22:04:02
|
Thanks for sharing. Doesn't surprise me.
quote:
Originally posted by Critical Mass
It's 643. The Tournament director had no real reason as to why we were not the #1 seed. He brought up the fact that there were 3 teams tied at 3-1 and that had an efffect on the rules interpretation.......like that has anything to do with the price of cheese.
I emailed the owner of the organization and he has yet to respond.....a friend of mine on our team reminded me, he's probably coaching his "teams" in the semis and championship vs his teams today. Too funny.
Ball is in his court, we wont play in any more 643 events after gettng hosed like this. Everyone needs to know how they pretect their own.
#LAME
|
|
|
|
jacjacatk
154 Posts |
Posted - 06/09/2014 : 04:01:09
|
| A lot of tie-breaker rules only count HTH results in a tiebreaker if all of the tied teams have the same opponents in common or if there are only two teams tied since it's often possible for imbalanced pool schedules to end up with teams tied with the same record while playing substantially different levels of opponents. I don't have a dog in this hunt either, and this should be spelled out clearly in the rules (and maybe wasn't in your case here), but it's not the strangest thing I've ever heard of. |
|
|
|
in_the_know
985 Posts |
Posted - 06/09/2014 : 13:57:16
|
What Jacjacatk said is typically correct in that this only applies if you all shared common opponents in pool. I can only assume you guys were in the 18u bracket because that's the only one that fits your description. If so, then you all had different opponents in pool play which will typically negate the head-to-head tie break (in almost all organizations) although this isn't clearly stated in their rules. Neither of the two academy teams played one another in pool, which you played both. Also, both of the academy teams played another opponent that you didn't play in pool. Effectively, the three teams tied only shared one common opponent in pool play which, ironically enough, they both beat and was your only loss.
This is a fairly commonly accepted tie-break. Triple Crown uses the exact same method, although they do a better job of describing it in their rules (the following is directly from TC website)
"Note: When 3 or more teams are tied and there is not a common opponent amongst all tied teams, run differential is the first tie breaker."
So they make it clear that in the same case you describe, you skip HTH and move to run differential.
Right or wrong, this is typically the practice and it just happens to look as though some favoritism was shown to the host teams when, in fact, it doesn't appear that's what happened. |
|
|
|
mikepayne
173 Posts |
Posted - 06/09/2014 : 16:12:22
|
| and that is why his handle is "in the know". |
|
|
|
a1prog
164 Posts |
Posted - 06/09/2014 : 17:26:32
|
| If all 3 three teams played each other then you would be correct. But if the other two teams didnt play each other then you cant use H-H because the common opponents aren't the same. And at that point then they made a decision in accordance with their rules which as I remember would be the standard practice. I had never heard of the 643 group pulling a fast one so this surprises me. As for PG, those at large bids in the big tourneys come thru a process that only a rocket scientist can understand and at time it has favored the hosting folks from ECB. |
|
|
|
Critical Mass
277 Posts |
Posted - 06/09/2014 : 18:15:42
|
Talked to Pralgo.
We had 6 teams in our pool and did not play all of them so the H to H rule didn't apply. If only the rule had that stipulation prior, it would have avoided the fallout. They are changing it moving forward. Danny is a class guy and the way it fell, we just lost out on a technicality...should have won the last game and played better baseball. Thanks for the responses. |
|
|
|
bballman
1432 Posts |
Posted - 06/09/2014 : 23:33:50
|
Not to be negative, but this is a good lesson in not publicly bashing some one or some organization before finding out all the facts or talking to the source first. It doesn't just apply to this one situation - and I'm not just picking on you CM - but to things in life in general. I've seen it happen in other threads, on other boards and personally from people. It's best to look for an answer first, complain publicly second. I'm glad you publicly corrected your initial response CM, but maybe it shouldn't have been stated that the academy was dishonest, guilty of nepotism and having already decided to never enter one of their tournaments again.
Sorry, had to say something. |
|
|
|
Critical Mass
277 Posts |
Posted - 06/10/2014 : 20:27:00
|
| if i post it, i'm culpable. Was i angry...sure, was it the smartest thing i've done...probably not. I posted this and then talked to a personal friend who knows Danny.....and they recommended i call him. Glad i did. It's all cleared up. Point taken bballman...you have a few more posts under your belt, respect. |
|
|
|
bballman
1432 Posts |
Posted - 06/10/2014 : 22:01:07
|
| No problem CM. I've always known Danny to be a stand up guy as well. Glad you worked it out. |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
"Rules interpretation" leads to #1 seed gone
