Weigh in on Rules Question

[Unregistered]

The posted rules were not complete and accurate as to allow the reader to properly interpret them.
The rules should have been copied directly from the USYSA National website. It is quite clear.

I will agree that it totally sucks for Bend.

Looks like I missed all the fireworks being in meetings all day. How the heck did they squeeze out Bend? That's pretty wild. What is the rule issue? They won the head to head or did they forfeit that somehow? Big change.

[Unregistered]

Looks like I missed all the fireworks being in meetings all day. How the heck did they squeeze out Bend? That's pretty wild. What is the rule issue? They won the head to head or did they forfeit that somehow? Big change.

forget it I just found the answer. That's harsh on Bend girls. Did they file a formal protest? The problem in most of these cases is that the club DOC is afraid of the league so they won't raise too much of a stink. It's really up to the parents to protest.

[Unregistered]

forget it I just found the answer. That's harsh on Bend girls. Did they file a formal protest? The problem in most of these cases is that the club DOC is afraid of the league so they won't raise too much of a stink. It's really up to the parents to protest.

Enough protesting, enough murmuring about conspiracies. The earlier statement is exactly right OYSA would have been better off to paste the rule exactly from the national website, but it is the same rule.

With two teams tied
1)head to head
2)most wins
3)Goal Diff
4)Goals Against

With more than two teams Eliminate (1). This means eliminate.

In a three way tie team A beats team B beats team C beats team A. If you eliminate Team A you eliminate both team C's win, and team B's loss. The tie break process is designed so one team gets removed per step. In the example of returning to head to head in the two team tie, the earlier elimination of team three will directly eliminate two teams. That is why in a three or more team tie you eliminate head to head for the whole consideration. I feel very bad for the Bend Players, but too claim that things are manipulated is disingenuous.

[Unregistered]

Enough protesting, enough murmuring about conspiracies. The earlier statement is exactly right OYSA would have been better off to paste the rule exactly from the national website, but it is the same rule.

With two teams tied
1)head to head
2)most wins
3)Goal Diff
4)Goals Against

With more than two teams Eliminate (1). This means eliminate.

In a three way tie team A beats team B beats team C beats team A. If you eliminate Team A you eliminate both team C's win, and team B's loss. The tie break process is designed so one team gets removed per step. In the example of returning to head to head in the two team tie, the earlier elimination of team three will directly eliminate two teams. That is why in a three or more team tie you eliminate head to head for the whole consideration. I feel very bad for the Bend Players, but too claim that things are manipulated is disingenuous.

You have to use the rule from the State Cup website, not any other that was supposed to be up there.

Nobody thinks it was nefarious, just incorrectly applied.

If you lined up 30 very knowledgable soccer people and showed them this without any attachment to the teams, I bet that 29 or more of them would apply the two way tie breaker starting with (a).

That's my just my opinion clearly. Nobody besides OYSA that I've talked to sees it the way they do. Anecdotal evidence is all I have. But it is also logical and they way all the tournaments I have ever been involved with are administered.

If we used Washington Rules Bend would advance. Again, not applicable but they spell it out better.

[Unregistered]

You have to use the rule from the State Cup website, not any other that was supposed to be up there.

Nobody thinks it was nefarious, just incorrectly applied.

If you lined up 30 very knowledgable soccer people and showed them this without any attachment to the teams, I bet that 29 or more of them would apply the two way tie breaker starting with (a).

That's my just my opinion clearly. Nobody besides OYSA that I've talked to sees it the way they do. Anecdotal evidence is all I have. But it is also logical and they way all the tournaments I have ever been involved with are administered.

If we used Washington Rules Bend would advance. Again, not applicable but they spell it out better.

Hey I get it… i have a kid as well and we have all had the experience of being in a tight tournament and hoping there is some gap we can find in the rules that gets us through. The unfortunate part is that doesn't work here. Protesting and Boycotting, etc is overdone. Bend Allowed one more goal than either of the other teams. Once you start breaking the original tie you cannot add new criteria so you have Games won (all three tie), Goal Differential (WS takes first), and Goals Against (Bend takes third).

Fortunately these girls are young, they will have other opportunities unless as parents we complain so loud that they lose faith...

[Unregistered]

Hey I get it… i have a kid as well and we have all had the experience of being in a tight tournament and hoping there is some gap we can find in the rules that gets us through. The unfortunate part is that doesn't work here. Protesting and Boycotting, etc is overdone. Bend Allowed one more goal than either of the other teams. Once you start breaking the original tie you cannot add new criteria so you have Games won (all three tie), Goal Differential (WS takes first), and Goals Against (Bend takes third).

Fortunately these girls are young, they will have other opportunities unless as parents we complain so loud that they lose faith...

You have to follow the rules. Your criteria don't follow the rules, not even the ones that OYSA is using. They don't say continue or use certain criteria, they say restart. Break first tie and then restart to break the two way tie.

It's seems super clear. I'm not even with Bend or OYSA for that matter. I just hate to see them get unfairly bounced. If you follow the rules step by step they should have advanced, in my opinion. YMMV

[Unregistered]

You have to follow the rules. Your criteria don't follow the rules, not even the ones that OYSA is using. They don't say continue or use certain criteria, they say restart. Break first tie and then restart to break the two way tie.

It's seems super clear. I'm not even with Bend or OYSA for that matter. I just hate to see them get unfairly bounced. If you follow the rules step by step they should have advanced, in my opinion. YMMV

What you don't get is when you restart you are ADDING a criteria back. If you do your first elimination (Head to Head is removed) then you go back to the beginning (head to head still removed, on the second pass Eastside and Bend are tied on everything until you get to goals against at which point Bend is eliminated. I don't have a dog in the fight here, but I think we have a one-sided argument going on, not seeking to find truth, but seeking to get their team through. I REALLY COULD'NT CARE LESS IF IT WAS BEND OR EASTSIDE.

YMMV

WTE+1 IS THAT

[Unregistered]

what you don't get is when you restart you are adding a criteria back. If you do your first elimination (head to head is removed) then you go back to the beginning (head to head still removed, on the second pass eastside and bend are tied on everything until you get to goals against at which point bend is eliminated. I don't have a dog in the fight here, but i think we have a one-sided argument going on, not seeking to find truth, but seeking to get their team through. I really could'nt care less if it was bend or eastside.

Wte+1 is that

btw e+1=f for the math challenged

[Unregistered]

What you don't get is when you restart you are ADDING a criteria back. If you do your first elimination (Head to Head is removed) then you go back to the beginning (head to head still removed, on the second pass Eastside and Bend are tied on everything until you get to goals against at which point Bend is eliminated. I don't have a dog in the fight here, but I think we have a one-sided argument going on, not seeking to find truth, but seeking to get their team through. I REALLY COULD'NT CARE LESS IF IT WAS BEND OR EASTSIDE.

WTE+1 IS THAT

I'm not bend or even OYSA. I'm very happy about that right now.

You're saying you don't use the head to head in a two way tie? The rules are pretty clear you restart the process after resolving the three way tie. At that point you have a two way tie.

Not that it matters, but look at the wash state cup rules. There rules are very specific version of essentially the same tie breaker and use my interpretation. Again, not applicable but it's interesting to read.

Ymmv = your mileage may vary.

I have a strong opinion that Bend got screwed here. The Timbers are saying that the are following region IV rules not the state cup rules posted. I have a problem with that.

[Unregistered]

Ok, first off, I have absolutely no dog in this fight as I know absolutely nobody from either of these teams.
So, from what I'm reading on here it sounds like the Region IV rules are different from the other rules (State Cup, National, etc) in that they "permanently" eliminate the head-to-head tiebreaker when 3 teams are tied (i.e. they don't restart the tie-breaking process back at point "A" with head-to-head after the first team moves on). My question is "why not?". I mean c'mon, what better tie-breaker is there when you only have 2 teams remaining??? Who cares about goal differential or anything else if you already have a head-to-head winner! Obviously the team that wins a head-to-head should always advance if you're down to 2 teams! Every single sport I can think of uses head-to-head as the #1 tie breaker with 2 teams.

I have no problem with this decision if they're supposed to be following Region IV rules and that's how they're written (I know that point is also being debated regarding what rules were really in effect).

But, big picture, my opinion is that all the rules should be the rewritten to be consistent that any tie-breaker that gets to the point of only 2 team remaining should certainly use head-to-head as the first criteria. Region IV needs to change their 3 way tie-breaker rules!

[Unregistered]

Ok, first off, I have absolutely no dog in this fight as I know absolutely nobody from either of these teams.
So, from what I'm reading on here it sounds like the Region IV rules are different from the other rules (State Cup, National, etc) in that they "permanently" eliminate the head-to-head tiebreaker when 3 teams are tied (i.e. they don't restart the tie-breaking process back at point "A" with head-to-head after the first team moves on). My question is "why not?". I mean c'mon, what better tie-breaker is there when you only have 2 teams remaining??? Who cares about goal differential or anything else if you already have a head-to-head winner! Obviously the team that wins a head-to-head should always advance if you're down to 2 teams! Every single sport I can think of uses head-to-head as the #1 tie breaker with 2 teams.

I have no problem with this decision if they're supposed to be following Region IV rules and that's how they're written (I know that point is also being debated regarding what rules were really in effect).

But, big picture, my opinion is that all the rules should be the rewritten to be consistent that any tie-breaker that gets to the point of only 2 team remaining should certainly use head-to-head as the first criteria. Region IV needs to change their 3 way tie-breaker rules!

Hard to argue with this.

At a minimum they need to rewrite their rules which should take a reasonably knowledgeable person 20 mins.

I do think they are replying on the wrong rules. The restart provision is at the beginning. Logic would make me go back to that point for the restart.