Message board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 3 members: TABLE SETTER 11, TD51, TT Man; 150 anonymousDetails for team1st
Real name:
Location:
,
Division:
Messages posted by team1st »Message board home »Start a new discussion
| April 10, 2019 team1st | Topic: Tournaments Discussion: SW LVSSA Championships April 23-25, 65-Major Division Shouldn’t Tworks just play 60 Major Plus? Wasn’t SSUSA already giving Tworks Major Plus opponents 5 runs in 2018? |
| June 6, 2017 team1st | Topic: General and miscellaneous Discussion: DARK CLOUDS IN 65 MAJOR PLUS Dear Dave, I’m sorry. After sleeping on it, I believe the seeding issue was an honest error and you fixed it. I believe our differences in recollection is likely due to my sensitivity to DR’s position with SSUSA and the ball issue. I truly respect you and admire all you do for all us old ballplayers. Thank you. You have always been and I suspect you always will be an honest and more than competent representative of SSUSA. Again, I’m sorry. We would never have had this discussion without the ball issue. I pray we can get back to our previous respectful and friendly relationship. Regarding the balls. If DR made an honest mistake and those balls were inadvertently brought to the first elimination bracket game, were they also used during the prior seeding games? I suspect it is very possible no one knows, not even DR. I’m certain DR feels horrible about handing those balls to the umpire. I wish him well and we need to move on. I believe we’ve all learned some valuable lessons and can make positive changes. Personally, I remember now why I don’t use the message board and why we should talk person to person rather than air differences here. I vote we abolish this thread, is that the right term? God Bless |
| June 5, 2017 team1st | Topic: General and miscellaneous Discussion: DARK CLOUDS IN 65 MAJOR PLUS Dear Dave, I have not questioned the integrity of SSUSA in general. In fact, as far as I am aware, SSUSA as an organization has always handled rule violations with ultimate integrity. The current issue relates specifically to two Tournament Directors, you and DR. DD, myself or any other ballplayer has every right to examine the facts regarding last week’s Rock-N-Reno. Many also believe SSUSA Executives should also examine the facts regarding the ball swap and seeding issues and make its own internal evaluation. As a retired CPA and Fraud Investigator and Auditor, I’ve had decades of experience studying deceit and dishonesty. Often the first reaction of a perpetrator is “It was a mistake or it was an accident.” The next response is often to verbally attack the messenger personally. That’s what I see in your post attacking me and others’ posts attacking DD. In my studies and examinations, I’ve learned guilt can be very painful. Please let’s all agree to keep our discourse on topic, professional and courteous. You distract from the serious ball and seeding issues with other issues. Let’s address the issues individually. First, despite your attempt to do so, the teams, players and managers I play ball with have absolutely nothing to do with my examining these issues. I play with the teams I play with because I have unequivocal confidence in their integrity and ethics. Specifically, since you brought them up, the quality and character of the players and manager on the Omen team is phenomenal. They are the finest teammates and quality individuals I could ever expect to be associated with in my life. I am truly honored and blessed to be associated with them. I am certain many, if not all of them, would prefer I not address the ball and seeding issues. However, my conscience and internal nature is to address inequity and deceit head on. I find I sleep better. Second, the balls: It doesn’t matter what ball we use as long as we all use the same ball. Violations should be punished at the same level of icing balls and altered bats. Third, seeding: Questions: 1) Since the inception of the two seeding game format, isn’t the runs allowed tie breaker rule applied in virtually every large SSUSA tournament? Answer: Yes. 2) Shouldn’t every Director be very familiar with this rule? Answer: Yes. FYI, Corky was familiar with the rule when I asked him before I spoke to you. I believe he spoke to you before I got to speak to you. 3) Didn’t you tell me face to face that you were certain the runs allowed tie breaker was applied to all seeding games, not just the games between the tied teams? Answer: Yes. 4) Even after I read the SSUSA rule to you stating that only games between the tied teams are used, didn’t you just smile and insist Timberworks would still be the number one seed? Answer: Yes. 5) Didn’t you then state it was too late to change the seeding because it was already written on the board, even though the game times were 30 minutes away? Answer: Yes. 5) Is it true that you didn’t even need to look in the SSUSA rule book or read them on my phone when you finally capitulated that Timberworks had not earned the number one seed and you would “fix it”? Answer: Yes. This seems to indicate you already knew the correct rule and you knew that Timberworks had not earned the number one seed. Yet, you wanted to leave them in that spot. I don’t know what’s in your heart. I’ve always assumed the best of you and I’ve never been disappointed. However, any objective reasonable person looking at the above facts and the fact that the Timberworks' manager is also a SSUSA Tournament Director can only assume there is an appearance of a conflict of interest and favoritism towards the Timberworks' manager. That said, no one is proposing punishment nor changing the seeding rule. I’m politely asking you be a little more sensitive to the issue of the appearance of a conflict of interest, especially regarding the Timberworks' manager who is also a SSUSA Tournament Director. There is only one reason this issue has been raised at all. That is the discussion regarding the illegal balls also concerns that same Timberworks' manager. Fourth, and least important, the batter’s box: I saw numerous complaints from many teams in the tournament regarding the batter’s box. While the boxes are a little different on each field, they were generally an inch or more short. Not a big issue until you recognize the box is not far enough forward of the plate. The game is changed when you increase the number of dead ball outs per game. It was not good for the game. In 45 years of softball, I’ve never seen so many dead ball outs. I talked to one player who had been called out 6 times. It was less of an issue later in the tournament due to batter’s adjustments and good umpire judgement. It was odd that SSUSA chose to advice their umpires to aggressively call the out of the batter’s box dead ball outs in this tournament when everyone knows it is a continual issue on these fields. SSUSA can resolve this issue in a number of ways. My suggestion is to switch to an angled mat aligned with the back sides of the plate. Extend the length of the mat a little. If the pitch hits the plate, it is a ball. This also has the safety advantage of moving the batter a little further from the pitcher. To my knowledge no one is asking for any punishment other than the appropriate penalty to the Timberworks' manager/SSUSA Tournament Director for providing illegal balls to the umpire. I believe we can all agree the appearance of fairness, ethics, and integrity in the game is critically important. God Bless |
| June 4, 2017 team1st | Topic: General and miscellaneous Discussion: DARK CLOUDS IN 65 MAJOR PLUS I’ve never posted on this message board before. May never again. Just not my thing. But others have asked me to look at this discussion. It is admirable that Timberworks teammates speak up to defend their manager and sponsor. I’m sure they want to believe in and support him. I have great respect for them. I’ve been proud to be the teammate of many of them for decades. One at least 30 years. I’ve had many wonderful softball experiences with many of them and certainly respect them. They are an excellent team. They do not need unfair advantages to win a softball tournament. Now, let’s look at the facts in this case unemotionally and objectively. The Timberworks manager is an experienced SSUSA Tournament Director. I personally played for him for years. He may have known exactly what he was doing when those balls were entered into the game or he may have just made an honest “mistake”. Regardless, it is really NOT relevant that he did it intentionally or unintentionally. Intent is not relevant in court in defense of an automobile driving infraction and it is not relevant here. Maybe the umpire should have noticed the illegal ball. But as a registered experienced SSUSA umpire myself, I know that up until now the emphasis has been on ensuring that teams hit the balls with their name on it and not those of the opposing team. To my knowledge, there has never been a strong emphasis on the brand name. I’m sure that will change now. Per the SSUSA post, it is the manager’s responsibility to ONLY have tournament softballs in the dugout. It is the manager’s responsibility to use ONLY those balls given in the half-box to him upon checking in his team. There is no doubt that the Timberworks manager knows this policy extremely well. I’m certain he would be quite upset if an opposing manager broke this policy or a manager broke this policy when he was the Director. I can’t help but wonder if the Rock was used in Timberworks' prior seeding games. It is absolutely NOT the opposing team’s responsibility to inspect the balls given to them by the umpire. To claim that it is, is a copout and a distraction. It is SOLELY the manager’s responsibility. If the wrong ball is entered, he is SOLELY responsible, NOT the other team and NOT the umpire. The penalty for this offense is totally inadequate. One out? If SSUSA rules say the penalty is one out, that penalty should be increased immediately. Timberworks should have forfeited that game for entering the Rocks into the game regardless of whether it was an accident or not. What is to stop the next team from perpetrating this same infraction in the future? One out? The appearance of integrity, ethics, fairness, and sportsmanship must be protected. They are critical to the camaraderie and future of the game we love. Additionally, was it also an “accident” that in this same tournament, Timberworks was initially given the number one seed in the elimination bracket when they did not earn the number one seed? Was it also an “accident” that when it was repeatedly brought to the attention of the appropriate 65 Major Plus Tournament Directors, they didn’t have to look up the runs allowed tie breaker rule being only from games between the tied teams? At first, they insisted it was all seeding games. Then, they insisted it was too late to change the seeding, although it was still 30 minutes before elimination bracket game times. Then, they reluctantly, upon repeated inquiry, just “fixed it”. Since the change to only two seeding games, the runs allowed tie breaker is a very common occurrence in every SSUSA major tournament. Every Tournament Director has seen it used many times. It is absolutely totally unreasonable to believe the Timberworks’ manager did not know they had not earned the number one seed. I played for the Timberworks' manager for years. The Timberworks' manager is very sharp in this regard. There is no doubt in my mind. He knew they had not earned the number one seed. He either chose to ignore the “mistake” or he may have even helped apply the runs allowed tie breaker rule. There is no way to positively identify if these two separate incidents in the same tournament involving the Timberworks' manager are really coincidental “accidents” or “mistakes”. It’s remotely possible. Or, maybe, just sometimes, if it walks like duck and quacks like a duck, it just really might be a duck. The appearance of integrity and ethics and the appearance of a lack of favoritism are just as important as reality to many of us and our continued participation in senior softball. In my opinion in order to ensure the appearance of integrity and ethics, SSUSA should do two things. First, immediately increase the penalty for entering the wrong ball into the game in the future. Second, the Timberworks' manager should not be assigned as a SSUSA Tournament Director for a minimum of one year. Yes, my longtime dear friends, with all due respect to your manager and SSUSA, I sadly agree with DD. And, he positively has every right to address the question of the appearance of your manager’s ethics and integrity. SSUSA should not just blindly defend its employee, who in this case is the Timberworks' manager. Love you all and God Bless |
