BallReviews
General Category => Miscellaneous => Topic started by: johnfoe on March 17, 2014, 11:21:24 PM
-
Looking for some opinions for this scenario.
Had a league just end on Sunday March 16th. The previous final date for positioning to determine the league winner was on March 2nd.
The winning team was told on March 16th that all of their wins were forfeited because it came to light that one of the members on that team that bowled each week was not a member of a 3rd party organization that they say the league requires.
It turns out that members across other teams were not members of that 3rd party organization. So as such all prizes have been halted pending further review of rules.
Is this allowed by USBC rules to have a team forfeit wins that happened weeks ago? Is there not a statute of limitations?
The closest thing I can see is rule 119 which suggests there is at the very least a 15 day statute:
Written protests are filed with a league officer and shall be filed within 15 days of the series being bowled.
I can't see anywhere in the USBC rules does it say that a league can make up their own statute of limitations. Let me know your thoughts.
-
I could write a book with some of the crazy ass league rules I've seen over the years.
-
Yeah no doubt about that, but aren't there some rules that simply can't be changed if they want to be USBC?
Obviously the rule book leaves some options for league discretion for some items, but there must be some limits. It doesn't seem that rule 119 allows for any "options".
Just like rules regarding "illegal pinfall" can't be changed.
-
The key statement for invalidating your entire argument is this:
The winning team was told on March 16th that all of their wins were forfeited because it came to light that one of the members on that team that bowled each week was not a member of a 3rd party organization that they say the league requires.
It turns out that members across other teams were not members of that 3rd party organization. So as such all prizes have been halted pending further review of rules
Simply put, the team cheated. Does it actually matter WHEN they got caught? I highly doubt that USBC has a time limit on someone getting caught cheating.
-
Although NOT in a bowling league, how many times have we heard in high school sports or college sports that the team used an illegal player had to forfeit any wins that the player participated in the game, regardless for how long the participation was for. I know of several and I am sure some quick Google searches can also bring up the same results. Many of the times this is not found until late in the year, or years down the road and the wins are still stripped from the team.
Although I agree that the timing is peculiar, rules are rules and are there for reasons like this.
-
To further Wowzer point, look at USC with Reggie Bush, they forfeited wins years after he left and a National Championship....look at Penn State with the Joe Paterno scandal, same thing.
As Milo said, apparently the rules of the league state everyone must belong to this organization. If you don't, you shouldn't be allowed in the league. In this case, there seems to be multiple people on multiple teams breaking this rule. I am just glad I am not a member of this league, as I think the resolution will be very hard to come to.
-
Yeah it is quite a fallout. It is quite a scandal since now it is known that people have been in it for years without the 3rd party membership and it appears that it was only enforced this year as a team won that had an ineligible bowler.
In this case the league rules would be needed to really decide anything further as rule 119 does state that league rules can forfeit all games if power to do so is allowed in the league rules.
Not saying it is right on what happened, but want to make sure everything is done properly to the rules. That way nothing can be said as all the logic being used isn't opinion, but follows the rules set forth.
-
Johnfoe
At this point, if the league rules specifically state that teams should forfeit all wins if using an ineligible bowler, I see no other course of action but for the league to make every game an ineligible bowler particpated in, for every team, to become a forfeit. If this does not occur, I would believe the league officers are not following league rules and the league could be sued/disciplined/ something occur because now there is a known issue with some bowlers and if they do not act upon it, that is grounds for removal, etc.
I think the only logical thing to do is to make every team forfeit all wins when using an ineligible bowler and calculate new league standings.
Sorry
-
So, if this team finished last would it matter? Or better yet, why wasn't this addressed during the season by league officials. Bad league management and sore losers maybe?
-
This would appear to be the closest rules for this.
103b. Duties
NOTE: When a team and/or individual is found to be ineligible under league or USBC rules, the game
shall be forfeited unless there is a decision to declare the game null and void. In the latter case,
a decision shall also be made as to whether the game shall be rebowled.
Commonly Asked Questions – Rule 103b.
103b/1 When games bowled are protested, what decisions may the board make?
The board should first determine if the protest was filed within the time limits prescribed in
Rule 119. If the protest is timely, the board can by majority vote declare game(s):
a. Forfeited: If a rule was violated.
b. Null and void and rebowled: If a rule was violated, but was not complied with due to
misinformation or mitigating circumstances. If games are declared null and void, the board
should make another decision as to whether the games should be rebowled.
c. Stand as bowled: If it is found there is no cause for action.
Rule 119 - Protest/Appeal Procedures
The league board of directors shall first decide on all protests as stated in Rule 103b. Protests are
decided by the league official/supervisor in Youth leagues that do not have a board.
a. Protests:
1. Written protests are filed with a league officer and shall be filed within 15 days of the series
being bowled except:
a) A protest resulting from competition in the final two weeks of a league schedule shall be filed
within 72 hours of the final date of the league schedule or the end of a segment if the league
bowls a split season.
b) A protest involving league roll-off or playoff games shall be filed within 72 hours.
Commonly Asked Questions – Rule 119.
119/2 When a team uses an ineligible player, can a league officer declare games forfeited?
Yes, league officers have authority to take action regarding games bowled by an ineligible
player if detected within the time frames stated in Rule 119. If action is not taken within the
time period, the games stand. League officials have the power to enforce league rules and to
declare game(s) forfeited. If an officer fails to act, or a league member decides to challenge the
officer’s decision, a written protest would have to be filed in accordance with Rule 119.
-
Based on Aloarjr810's write up, it seems like only scores bowled within the last 15 days can be subjected to forfeiture. This should apply to all teams in the league that are found to have an ineligible player.
-
Based on Aloarjr810's write up, it seems like only scores bowled within the last 15 days can be subjected to forfeiture. This should apply to all teams in the league that are found to have an ineligible player.
I agree
Given the way the rule reads, I'd say at most maybe they could declare the last 1 or 2 weeks forfeit depending on when a protest was filed.
It is quite a scandal since now it is known that people have been in it for years without the 3rd party membership and it appears that it was only enforced this year as a team won that had an ineligible bowler.
I seem to remember something about that if a league had a rule and it could be shown they never enforced it.
They couldn't just up and start enforcing it, but I'm not sure about that it was long while back.
It sounds like the league has been ignoring the rule for a long time, probably so they could get the league and teams filled out.
In This situation they really need to consult the usbc rules dept.
This sounds like it was brought up because of some sour grapes griping going on.
-
I disagree with Aloarjr810 and spmcgivern on this one. Yes that is the rule(s) in the USBC Rulebook, but the league can supercede those rules with ones of it's own. If their rules state you must belong to this organization in order to be a member in good standing and it doesn't state there is a time limit on when this can be enforced then they can go back over the entire season and forfeit games of teams with illegal bowlers. It would all depend on what the league rule specifically states.
Now, I would tend to agree with Aloarjr810's second point. If they knowingly left people bowl in the league without being members of this organization in the past, then they can't enforce it just this year, even if they do so to every team that was illegal. My guess is they overlooked one or two people in the past in order to fill the league and over time these one or two grew into more. Or they just decided it was too much work to verify that everyone was a member and took the team captains' word that their bowlers were members. Either way, as I said, this is gonna be a mess and one I am glad I am not a part of. The best answer, to me anyway, sound like to just let it go for this year and start next year off with a clean slate and make sure all league members meet the eligibility requirements.
-
I disagree with Aloarjr810 and spmcgivern on this one.
I don't see what your disagreeing with here
Yes that is the rule(s) in the USBC Rulebook, but the league can supercede those rules with ones of it's own. If their rules state you must belong to this organization in order to be a member in good standing
Yes a league rule can supercede USBC rule (Though not all)
As for having rule that you have to belong to certain organization.
Sure they can do that, it's called a "closed league", But the quoted rules above have nothing to do with that.
The rules quoted are dealing with the time limit on filing a protest.
and it doesn't state there is a time limit on when this can be enforced then they can go back over the entire season and forfeit games of teams with illegal bowlers.
No, If the league rules don't state or address time limits on protests, then the USBC rules would apply.
So given the the way the usbc rules read, it is unlikely they can go back and make the teams forfeit games back to the beginning of the season.
It would all depend on what the league rule specifically states.
Yes, it would all depend on just what is wrote in the league rules.
(Though I find it unlikely the league addressed time limits on protests in the rules, a lot of leagues never think about it.)
-
Simple solution to this problem. Pass out the league rules (2 copies) to every team at the beginning of the year. Have everyone on the team place their signature on the rules. Return one of the signed copies back to the secretary.
-
I can see where Jorge is coming from. But I guess this is why lawyer speak can be overly complicated. The league has a rule. This rule seems okay and logical. But do the league rules state anything about protests? If not, then the USBC rule would apply. This is how I would approach the issue if it was my team. Then again, I would like to think I was abiding by the rules the whole time.