When Fair Play points hurt a team
Moderators: Mitch Hawker, east hockey, karl(east)
When Fair Play points hurt a team
In the District 9 PeeWee A tournament, having more fair play points has put teams at a disadvantage. The league has two divisions an east with 7 members and a west with 5 members. The seeds are based on how well one does in the division. Because of the imbalance the last team in the east is moved to the west and positioned based on points. In this case Red Wing is moved to the west and reseeded into fourth place giving it a home game against Rochester Gold which finished four points ahead of them. Red Wing actually has a better record than both Rochester Gold and Austin, but lost nearly half of their fair play points. If the fair play points were not taken into account, Austin would have a home game against Red Wing. Red Wing has been awarded a home game through losing fair play points.
See http://www.mndistrict9hockey.com/page/s ... 2010-2011- for details.
I agree that the last place team should be moved over is better than dropping the team and giving a team a bye. And using the points gathered through the rest of the season is the best way to reseed. But the last place team from the division should never be given a home game against a team that fared better than it in its own division. I would suggest that the reseeded team would not get a home game. This suggestion, however, has fallen on deaf ears.
See http://www.mndistrict9hockey.com/page/s ... 2010-2011- for details.
I agree that the last place team should be moved over is better than dropping the team and giving a team a bye. And using the points gathered through the rest of the season is the best way to reseed. But the last place team from the division should never be given a home game against a team that fared better than it in its own division. I would suggest that the reseeded team would not get a home game. This suggestion, however, has fallen on deaf ears.
-
- Posts: 30
- Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2011 7:54 am
Luverne is in district 4. There are only three PeeWee A teams in that district. The teams play in districts 5 or 9 for league play, but come back for the district tournament.D6Rocks wrote:The only thing I see wrong with this, is.
Where did Luverne go??
Where did Roch Red come from?
Rochester has 3 Peewee A teams?
Rochester Red is the PeeWee A team. The gold and black teams are PeeWee A2. If Rochester was still in district 8, they would be classified as B1 teams, but to be competitive with the other teams in their division, they are classified as PeeWee A. The Rochester Red team played in the Maroon and Gold because it would be unfair to have the A2 teams play them. They needed to be in a district tournament to have a chance at the state tournament.
-
- Posts: 475
- Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 3:50 pm
Maroon and Gold ? is that some sort of league ? read post on here about Bantams but not Peewee's.klulus wrote:Luverne is in district 4. There are only three PeeWee A teams in that district. The teams play in districts 5 or 9 for league play, but come back for the district tournament.D6Rocks wrote:The only thing I see wrong with this, is.
Where did Luverne go??
Where did Roch Red come from?
Rochester has 3 Peewee A teams?
Rochester Red is the PeeWee A team. The gold and black teams are PeeWee A2. If Rochester was still in district 8, they would be classified as B1 teams, but to be competitive with the other teams in their division, they are classified as PeeWee A. The Rochester Red team played in the Maroon and Gold because it would be unfair to have the A2 teams play them. They needed to be in a district tournament to have a chance at the state tournament.

-
- Posts: 45
- Joined: Fri Nov 13, 2009 9:46 am
Look at D10, PWA - Elk River is now tied for #1 when it should have been locked in. Irondale lost their chance at playoffs from the FP points.
My only beef with it is the lack of inconsistencies in the refs. Some allow it to get a little chippy, others don't allow anything to fly by. Hard for the kids to know what they can or can't do in a game. The D10 refs were some of the worst I've seen in years, others were great. Luck of the draw I guess.
My only beef with it is the lack of inconsistencies in the refs. Some allow it to get a little chippy, others don't allow anything to fly by. Hard for the kids to know what they can or can't do in a game. The D10 refs were some of the worst I've seen in years, others were great. Luck of the draw I guess.
-
- Posts: 658
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 8:49 am
I've seen a FPP lost for 2 Too Many Men minors and a 10 minute for a kid chewing his mouthguard. They should be awarded at the refs disgression after the game. If the fans, coaches and players were well behaved and "fair" they get their point.
Sounds ridiculous? They are at the ref's disgression now!
Sounds ridiculous? They are at the ref's disgression now!
-
- Posts: 658
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 8:49 am
jack: Was 2 years ago, not sure if was disputed or not. But you get my point.
The FPP seems a noble concept, but the application is foolish. A too many men (Bench minor) is far different that a Bench minor for a coach berating a ref? A two handed slash is different than a trip for a kid stepping on a players stick? An elbow to the head is different than a delay of game? And the rash of penalties late in a blow out game should be looked at differently.
The 2 and 10 "check from behind" is often miscalled. Home refs like cross-checking or boarding instead. Dangerous and deliberate check from behind should be a 5:00 and game/match, but rarely are called as such.
The FPP gives a warm fuzzy to many, but is a rather silly way to "clean up the game".
The FPP seems a noble concept, but the application is foolish. A too many men (Bench minor) is far different that a Bench minor for a coach berating a ref? A two handed slash is different than a trip for a kid stepping on a players stick? An elbow to the head is different than a delay of game? And the rash of penalties late in a blow out game should be looked at differently.
The 2 and 10 "check from behind" is often miscalled. Home refs like cross-checking or boarding instead. Dangerous and deliberate check from behind should be a 5:00 and game/match, but rarely are called as such.
The FPP gives a warm fuzzy to many, but is a rather silly way to "clean up the game".
-
- Posts: 369
- Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2010 8:17 am
A penalty is a penalty--whether it's called or not, the Coach can't allow the chippy players to continue to play that way. Throwing a deliberate elbow, because the ref's aren't calling them is no way to be having your kids play. It's the coaches responsibility to keep the players under control as much as it is the ref's to be whistling the infractions consistantly. This is the perfect scenerio that gives the USAH the ammo they need to push forward the idea to eliminate checking at the PW levelGoalie Dude wrote:Look at D10, PWA - Elk River is now tied for #1 when it should have been locked in. Irondale lost their chance at playoffs from the FP points.
My only beef with it is the lack of inconsistencies in the refs. Some allow it to get a little chippy, others don't allow anything to fly by. Hard for the kids to know what they can or can't do in a game. The D10 refs were some of the worst I've seen in years, others were great. Luck of the draw I guess.