When two teams can advance to next round by just a draw....

[EvilGoalie 21]

Player choices...
(1) play hard in the heat to try to score on a meaningless game ...
(2) save energy for elimination match to move further ahead in a national finals series.

Those are more likely team level considerations. And at the team level there is no reason for them to be mutually exclusive as you suggest. You can play for the win while still positioning the roster for next game. Happens all the time.

 

[GLangevinito]

FRISCO, TEXAS (July 30, 2016)

— US Youth Soccer takes the issues of fair play and respect for the game very seriously. Following the July 28 game between Carlsbad Elite 97/98 (CA-S) and Ambassadors FC (OH-N), the National Championship Series (NCS) Committee of US Youth Soccer met on Thursday evening to examine the conduct of the coaches and teams, and has reached a determination based on the evidence presented and reviewed.

After meeting with both teams, the Committee found the teams were disrespectful to the game, the competition and US Youth Soccer. The integrity of the National Championships Series Competition is predicated on fair play and sportsmanship by all participants and those ideals were compromised.

Upon completion of a thorough investigation, including interviews with the teams in question and game officials, the NCS Committee did not find sufficient evidence of collusion. However, it determined the coaches may have had a material effect on the outcome of the match. Disciplinary action and monetary fines have been assessed to both teams.

While it supports the disciplinary process of the National Championship Series, the US Youth Soccer Board of Directors is also investigating this matter to determine whether potential violations of US Youth Soccer bylaws occurred, or if the actions of the coaches were adverse to the best interests of soccer or US Youth Soccer.

While each team worked hard on the first two days of play to put themselves in a position to advance, we believe the strategy of the coaches in this game failed their players, the competition and the principles of sportsmanship and fair play.

I think the "match fixing is perfectly fine" crowd here is in the minority.

Along the same lines, I once watched a U10 boys match at a tournament. It was a tight match, tied, and parents were going crazy on the sidelines. One team scored, and that team's goalkeeper fielded a corner kick shortly after and then fell down and did a Neymar quad-roll grabbing his ankle. Play was stopped, the coach went out, the trainer went out. No attempt was made to stand or get up off the field. Parents were yelling "stay down", and I thought his ankle might be broken. He was down for 15 minutes, which was the majority of the half. Ref was forced to blow the final whistle, as the next game needed to kick off. Goalkeeper leapt to his feet and joined his teammates to celebrate the win, causing absolute mayhem on the sidelines. Security was called, accusations were made, and the team was disqualified. Was that against the rules of soccer? Probably not. Was it unethical and unsportsmanlike? Absolutely.

 

[EvilGoalie 21]

You are competing to win the tournament. Geezzz!!! Can't believe how square you guys are.

Depending on the philosophy of play that may not be the sole, or even the primary, objective for a team within a tournament.

 

[MacDre]

I think the "match fixing is perfectly fine" crowd here is in the minority.

Along the same lines, I once watched a U10 boys match at a tournament. It was a tight match, tied, and parents were going crazy on the sidelines. One team scored, and that team's goalkeeper fielded a corner kick shortly after and then fell down and did a Neymar quad-roll grabbing his ankle. Play was stopped, the coach went out, the trainer went out. No attempt was made to stand or get up off the field. Parents were yelling "stay down", and I thought his ankle might be broken. He was down for 15 minutes, which was the majority of the half. Ref was forced to blow the final whistle, as the next game needed to kick off. Goalkeeper leapt to his feet and joined his teammates to celebrate the win, causing absolute mayhem on the sidelines. Security was called, accusations were made, and the team was disqualified. Was that against the rules of soccer? Probably not. Was it unethical and unsportsmanlike? Absolutely.

This witch hunt is becoming un American because the finding of “disrespect” is ethnocentric and violates due process because the decision is unfair. The decision is unfair because the committee did not find collusion or any violations of their regulations and they just made up this disrespect of the game bullshit. Really?

What type of kangaroo court just makes up a catch all disrespect clause to force their warped ideology on others. This decision is very disturbing and clearly unconstitutional.

In terms of your ethnocentric Neymar comment, do you also think professional/tactical fouls are unethical and unsportsmanlike? Please elaborate.

 

[espola]

This witch hunt is becoming un American because the finding of “disrespect” is ethnocentric and violates due process because the decision is unfair. The decision is unfair because the committee did not find collusion or any violations of their regulations and they just made up this disrespect of the game bullshit. Really?

What type of kangaroo court just makes up a catch all disrespect clause to force their warped ideology on others. This decision is very disturbing and clearly unconstitutional.

In terms of your ethnocentric Neymar comment, do you also think professional/tactical fouls are unethical and unsportsmanlike? Please elaborate.

Speaking of unethical -- I have stopped watching the Copa America games because of the fake or exaggerated fouls and injuries.

 

[dad4]

This witch hunt is becoming un American because the finding of “disrespect” is ethnocentric and violates due process because the decision is unfair. The decision is unfair because the committee did not find collusion or any violations of their regulations and they just made up this disrespect of the game bullshit. Really?

What type of kangaroo court just makes up a catch all disrespect clause to force their warped ideology on others. This decision is very disturbing and clearly unconstitutional.

In terms of your ethnocentric Neymar comment, do you also think professional/tactical fouls are unethical and unsportsmanlike? Please elaborate.

Ethnocentric? Unconstitutional?

You've gone loopy.

The better question is whether it is possible to write a set of rules where this happens less often. "Top two advance" seems to lead to this kind of thing in game 3. Especially when the top 2 seeds meet in the 3rd game.

 

[MacDre]

Ethnocentric? Unconstitutional?

You've gone loopy.

The better question is whether it is possible to write a set of rules where this happens less often. "Top two advance" seems to lead to this kind of thing in game 3. Especially when the top 2 seeds meet in the 3rd game.

Yes, ethnocentric because I think there are different cultural approaches to the game of soccer and I think it’s problematic for a group to attempt to codify their cultural norms into an international game. There is more than one way to skin a cat. Different cultures approach and solve problems differently. Difference should be celebrated not silenced.

Yes, unconstitutional because there was no collusion or violation of the rules but a fine for disrespect was issued. I think it’s unfair, ethnocentric, and unconstitutional to find a legitimate cultural approach to soccer disrespectful and issue a fine.

I think the rules are fine the way they are because they allow diversity of opinion and develop all involved by exposure to different ways of doing things.

 

[Kicker4Life]

If your team wins their games, you won’t have to worry about needed help to advance….problem solved!

 

[dad4]

Yes, ethnocentric because I think there are different cultural approaches to the game of soccer and I think it’s problematic for a group to attempt to codify their cultural norms into an international game. There is more than one way to skin a cat. Different cultures approach and solve problems differently. Difference should be celebrated not silenced.

Yes, unconstitutional because there was no collusion or violation of the rules but a fine for disrespect was issued. I think it’s unfair, ethnocentric, and unconstitutional to find a legitimate cultural approach to soccer disrespectful and issue a fine.

I think the rules are fine the way they are because they allow diversity of opinion and develop all involved by exposure to different ways of doing things.

You always end up with competing social conventions within sport. Argentina occasionally does play England. The game will have hard fouls and flops, often on the same play.

The referee needs to decide which, if any, to penalize. And a Russian referee team might have a different opinion than a team from Uruguay. So what? It's just sport, not "cultural imperialism".

 

[GLangevinito]

Yes, unconstitutional because there was no collusion or violation of the rules but a fine for disrespect was issued. I think it’s unfair, ethnocentric, and unconstitutional to find a legitimate cultural approach to soccer disrespectful and issue a fine.

You are clearly trolling at this point, but what clause of the Constitution do you think was violated by that statement?

 

[MacDre]

You are clearly trolling at this point, but what clause of the Constitution do you think was violated by that statement?

Due process requires fairness. Fining someone for disrespect after finding that there’s no collusion or rule violation is unfair.

 

[EvilGoalie 21]

what clause of the Constitution do you think was violated?

I think in article 8 cruel and unusual punishment clauses there is something like "the freedom to flop or otherwise performs acts of simulation in sporting contest or during other such diversions shall remain unbooked and unabridged."

Nonetheless, readers familiar with Monty Python might do well to remember the outcome when Nietzsche chose to argue with Confucius about free will on the pitch.

 

[dad4]

Due process requires fairness. Fining someone for disrespect after finding that there’s no collusion or rule violation is unfair.

Its not just due process. I think it's a clear violation of the seventh and eight amendments. No jury trial and cruel and unusual punishment.

Bonus points if you can work a third amendment violation into it.

 

[Emma]

Those are more likely team level considerations. And at the team level there is no reason for them to be mutually exclusive as you suggest. You can play for the win while still positioning the roster for next game. Happens all the time.

Absolutely, but not in this case. It's July in Frisco, Texas and they just had an injury. Devil is in the details. It's definitely not unethical to preserve your body in July Frisco, TX heat to compete at an elimination round when your team has already competed extremely well and earned the right to relax during this currently game condition.

 

[Emma]

1. You compete. I can't believe you think either option is ethical.

See - you made a choice. Great for you. The girls chose option 2. Options and having differences of opinions. It's ok - not unethical or unconstitutional. Just different.

 

[Kicker4Life]

Absolutely, but not in this case. It's July in Frisco, Texas and they just had an injury. Devil is in the details. It's definitely not unethical to preserve your body in July Frisco, TX heat to compete at an elimination round when your team has already competed extremely well and earned the right to relax during this currently game condition.

Yes, and they actually WON the right to do so.

 

[Emma]

I think the "match fixing is perfectly fine" crowd here is in the minority.

Along the same lines, I once watched a U10 boys match at a tournament. It was a tight match, tied, and parents were going crazy on the sidelines. One team scored, and that team's goalkeeper fielded a corner kick shortly after and then fell down and did a Neymar quad-roll grabbing his ankle. Play was stopped, the coach went out, the trainer went out. No attempt was made to stand or get up off the field. Parents were yelling "stay down", and I thought his ankle might be broken. He was down for 15 minutes, which was the majority of the half. Ref was forced to blow the final whistle, as the next game needed to kick off. Goalkeeper leapt to his feet and joined his teammates to celebrate the win, causing absolute mayhem on the sidelines. Security was called, accusations were made, and the team was disqualified. Was that against the rules of soccer? Probably not. Was it unethical and unsportsmanlike? Absolutely.

Actually - that's a ref problem. Ref should have had coach removed player so game can continue. 15 minutes in a tournament game for U10 is at least 25% of match time. They received disqualification because it was against the rules and unethical. This is completely different from a team who has already won their previous 2 games and guaranteed a spot in the elimination round. Your comparing apples to oranges.

 

[Grace T.]

Actually - that's a ref problem. Ref should have had coach removed player so game can continue. 15 minutes in a tournament game for U10 is at least 25% of match time. They received disqualification because it was against the rules and unethical. This is completely different from a team who has already won their previous 2 games and guaranteed a spot in the elimination round. Your comparing apples to oranges.

The question of whether something violates that the rules and whether something is unethical are technically 2 different things.

I agree they are apples to oranges, but this is NOT a ref problem. The ref can't order a coach to remove the player. If there's a suspicion that the player may have broken an ankle, the ref can't administer medical treatment by having the player removed. The coach can volunteer to remove the player (if he can be carried) but the ref can't order the coach to remove the player if there's a fear of serious injury (otherwise if there's any complication that's on the ref, who isn't qualified to determine how and when an injured player should be removed for fear of further aggravating the injury). The proper procedure if the player cannot move off and the coach will not move the player off is to call for an ambulance to treat and remove the player.

Since the game ended, there's not much the referee can do once the 3 whistles are blown other than note it in the match report. Since it is a violation of the rules (faking injury) disqualification is the proper remedy in response to this situation. This is an example of something which is both a violation of the rules and unethical. The "match fixing" situation was apparently not in violation of the tournament rules (there is an argument this fits in under the vague "disrespect of the game" rules, but it's hard to disqualify a team under such a vague standard, but the argument is whether it SHOULD be a violation) and there is an argument over whether it is or isn't ethical.

 

[Emma]

Depending on the philosophy of play that may not be the sole, or even the primary, objective for a team within a tournament.

This is for the national title. I can't imagine going there just to play 3 great games. When you fly out to a national tournament to compete for a national title, the objective is to win the tournament. It's very rare that philosophy of play differs when competing for a National Championship Title.

 

[EvilGoalie 21]

This is for the national title. I can't imagine going there just to play 3 great games.

Yes, I think its been well established at that point that whatever this particular game was, it was in a very important tournament played under brutal conditions. People are different. I, for one, can readily imagine a situation in which a team gets the opportunity to play in a national venue, enjoys three games against really good teams from across the country, plays each one as a real match despite the elements or whatever particulars, and comes away satisfied. In the case that many are focusing on here, it sounds like one of the first three games probably wasn't so great, acquiring some kind of asterisk. If it's in a big venue, that kind of asterisk can evidently linger for some time.

It's very rare that philosophy of play differs when competing for a National Championship Title.

To me there are three basic situations. One, each team feels sufficiently motivated to try and score against the other and will play, even if conservatively, to achieve that result. Doesn't have to be full out but there is intent. Two, one team plays for the win, even if consertatively, while the other seeks to hold them off to achieve a scoreless draw. There is still active agency. Three, neither team even tries to really play because the situation in the tournament dictates that it is not necessary and they can get away with it. The game, in their view, is meaningless. I have only seen situation 3 myself a few times, mostly at Ulittle but another example recently in a pretty high level tournament at BU17. So to my knowledge situation 3 it is fortunately rare, even though the circumstances in which could occur are not necessarily uncommon. However, if I understand you correctly, you are saying that a philosophy of play that embraces situation 3 is all well and good-perhaps even astute-if a trophy-particularly a national title-lies at the end.

 

[GLangevinito]

Actually - that's a ref problem. Ref should have had coach removed player so game can continue. 15 minutes in a tournament game for U10 is at least 25% of match time. They received disqualification because it was against the rules and unethical. This is completely different from a team who has already won their previous 2 games and guaranteed a spot in the elimination round. Your comparing apples to oranges.

They were 25 minute halves so it was more than half of the 2nd half, which I suppose isn't as bad as 90% of the game in the Carlsbad example. And the "injury" was not against the rules, unless the tournament had a catchall anti-cheating provision.

In both examples, teams stopped playing the match in order to preserve a result. In both examples, a team was robbed of an opportunity because the game was not played as intended and agreed. Because Carlsbad wouldn't directly benefit doesn't make it ethical, it just makes their decision stupid.