2010
Bench Warmer
Posts: 3
|
Post by 2010 on Feb 7, 2007 18:53:10 GMT -6
What about Sam Houston? Hardly seems fair for them to be knocked out of the playoffs by a team that wasn't eligible to begin with.
|
|
|
|
Post by tsumi77 on Feb 7, 2007 18:57:46 GMT -6
What about Sam Houston? Hardly seems fair for them to be knocked out of the playoffs by a team that wasn't eligible to begin with. ... according an article in the newspaper, Sam Houston would actually play against ASH! Now, let's wait and see what the LHSAA is going to do... |
|
|
|
Post by theotherforward10 on Feb 7, 2007 20:07:40 GMT -6
very sorry to hear that STM
|
|
|
|
Post by lecoq1532 on Feb 7, 2007 20:13:39 GMT -6
I guess STM will just have to take down the rest of the state in D1 this coming year...should be pretty easy...
|
|
|
|
Post by soccerjunqie on Feb 7, 2007 20:40:20 GMT -6
I guess STM will just have to take down the rest of the state in D1 this coming year...should be pretty easy... Lecoq, The sadiest part is that #14 can't do another cartwheel. He was getting so good at it. I know by the finals he would have his legs straight. |
|
esungoal4
Starter
Clear eyes, full hearts, CAN"T LOSE!
Posts: 88
|
Post by esungoal4 on Feb 7, 2007 20:43:46 GMT -6
im sorry to hear this about STM i was rootin for them all the way, but i feel that ASH will got cocky from this "win" and lose soon. honestly they dont deserve it because STM would have beaten them
|
|
|
|
Post by theotherforward6 on Feb 7, 2007 21:10:59 GMT -6
ASH was not cocky. Sorry STM guys, thats gotta suck, but wasnt sure that yall would of beat us because with our A game on our possesion and passing is great and woulda played our hearts out, sorry though.
|
|
|
|
Post by happyjack on Feb 7, 2007 21:49:59 GMT -6
3rd year in a row that a team was declared ineligible due to a coach or player. everyone on this board knows this happens, and that lhsaa is unbending on this policy. coaches and ADs who don't verify this information are to blame, not the lhsaa for enforcing their rules. this is a very black and white rule - use an ineligible and forfeit every match they participated in. why people want to continue to shoot the messenger is beyond me.
|
|
|
|
Post by thugbehram on Feb 7, 2007 22:07:37 GMT -6
This year STM, last Lafayette, and the year before ?.
I know my freshman year (senior now) Covington was forced to forfeit its district matches.
Sorry to hear about it all though...
|
|
|
|
Post by 13thtrojan on Feb 7, 2007 22:17:33 GMT -6
I am sorry that this happened to STM. I was looking forward to playing a quality team that, if we got the win, would have been an excellent motivator. I know the rule doesn't seem fair to all those players who did what they were supposed to, and it probably isn't. STM is a very good program that will probably be near or at the top of Division I in a couple of years though. So good luck next year.
|
|
|
|
Post by MOM #1 Fan on Feb 7, 2007 22:31:54 GMT -6
My heart breaks for the boys of STM. I cannot say how sorry I am for them enough. The anger and hurt is still in the air the tears are not yet dry but they will hold their head high and come back to play another year.
I know how hard it must be to feel so betrayed by one of your own. What your teammate did was horrible. The fact that the administration did not have a FOLLOW UP in place to double check is horrible. The coach is not a faculty member so it was up to the A.D. to double check what the coach was given.
WHY as a rule of thumb don't Schools double check grades before PLAYOFF GAMES.. ITS ONLY 22 kids on a Soccer Team. it wouldn't have taken more than 1 hr so little time for so many dreams to be shattered. Cougars your in our thoughts and prayers.
|
|
|
|
Post by reccos55 on Feb 7, 2007 23:27:23 GMT -6
if the player from STM was not a big factor for their team, why would he try to make a fake report card just to play while knowing the consequences? apparently the other STM players didn't know he was doing it or else they wouldn't have let him do it. i feel sorry for STM but they have to be upset at that teammate for screwing all of them over. below a 1.5 is pretty terrible btw and he probably wasn't smart enought to make a good enough fake one.
|
|
|
|
Post by LafayetteDad on Feb 8, 2007 6:51:40 GMT -6
www.theadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070208/COLUMNISTS12/70207060/1006/SPORTSPrepBlog by Kevin Foote STM soccer ruling tough to swallow Kevin Foote kfoote@theadvertiser.com It’s definitely high on the list of the least favorite stories you ever have to cover or write as a sports writer. It’s just not fun when a team apparently well on its way to earning a realistic chance at a state championship gets derailed because of an unintentional LHSAA rules violation. It’s just not fun when a team apparently well on its way to earning a realistic chance at a state championship gets derailed because of an unintentional LHSAA rules violation. That’s what happened with St. Thomas More’s boys soccer team Wednesday. When the violation directly leads to the team winning — like Bastrop with the star quarterback and leading rusher in football — that’s one thing. But when it’s a coach that wasn’t properly certified or a player near the end of the bench who just plays when it’s a blowout, it’s hard for parents and players to swallow. It doesn’t mean that the team was trying to cheat their way to the title, but they did technically violate the rules. A kid, just a sophomore, experiences a huge lapse in judgement by apparently altering his grades intentionally. I spoke to a parent of a player who wished to be anonymous Wednesday night who felt sorry for the kid and realized that the only way to heal is to eventually forgive, fully knowing the pain that was caused by his actions. At this early stage, that’s certainly a noble approach. No one that I spoke to Wednesday questioned the rule itself and I’m not either. But every time I hear of a similar case, I can’t help but wonder if we should send such cases before the executive committee each time. That committee would have the power to rule that if no competitive advantage has been gained that the team be allowed to continue on in the playoffs. The cynical side of me also says that if St. Thomas More wasn’t trying to be nice against Sam Houston in the first-round win and kept its first team in the entire time, the Cougars would still be alive in the playoffs. The coach may have been criticized for winning 10-0 or whatever, but he still would have had a chance to win the state title. As it stands, though, STM won’t get that opportunity. Let’s hope someone sometimes somewhere learned a valuable lesson from this and keeps me from having to write one of these kind of stories ever again.
|
|
|
|
Post by oldphart on Feb 8, 2007 8:16:41 GMT -6
The coach or the AD should check all report cards. You don't leave it to teenagers to self-report. STM has been too good at too many sports for too long for this not to be done by school officials. Can't tell me this is the first kid to fudge a report card.
I feel sorry for his teammates.
|
|
|
|
Post by chillcrunk on Feb 8, 2007 9:16:11 GMT -6
so technically STM forfeits district games played... meaning "the streak" is over?
|
|
|
|
Post by cougarfan on Feb 8, 2007 9:47:15 GMT -6
Yes - technically the streak is over. It is a bad deal for his teammates. The kid in question averaged about 5 minutes a game and only when the game was completely out of reach. He played 4 minutes against Sam Houston. The STM soccer community cannot believe that something like this could happen. WIth the resources that STM has, no one can take 10 minutes and check 20 report cards on a computer?? And why is it caught 5 weeks after report cards are issued? The kids will learn a lesson though - a small action by one person can effect the lives of many. This particular group of kids and the STM soccer community had been pointing to this season as the 'one' since they were in the 7th grade. It is ashame that one kid and a faulty administrative system can wipe out the dreams of these kids.
|
|
|
|
Post by numbertwo on Feb 8, 2007 10:06:25 GMT -6
so who "technically" wins the district now that stm had to forfeit the 4 remaining games of district play?
|
|
|
|
Post by tsumi77 on Feb 8, 2007 10:14:05 GMT -6
so who "technically" wins the district now that stm had to forfeit the 4 remaining games of district play? ... Opelousas I guess? |
|
|
|
Post by Bish on Feb 8, 2007 10:18:24 GMT -6
www.theadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070208/COLUMNISTS12/70207060/1006/SPORTSPrepBlog by Kevin Foote STM soccer ruling tough to swallow Kevin Foote kfoote@theadvertiser.com It’s definitely high on the list of the least favorite stories you ever have to cover or write as a sports writer. It’s just not fun when a team apparently well on its way to earning a realistic chance at a state championship gets derailed because of an unintentional LHSAA rules violation. It’s just not fun when a team apparently well on its way to earning a realistic chance at a state championship gets derailed because of an unintentional LHSAA rules violation. That’s what happened with St. Thomas More’s boys soccer team Wednesday. When the violation directly leads to the team winning — like Bastrop with the star quarterback and leading rusher in football — that’s one thing. But when it’s a coach that wasn’t properly certified or a player near the end of the bench who just plays when it’s a blowout, it’s hard for parents and players to swallow. It doesn’t mean that the team was trying to cheat their way to the title, but they did technically violate the rules. A kid, just a sophomore, experiences a huge lapse in judgement by apparently altering his grades intentionally. I spoke to a parent of a player who wished to be anonymous Wednesday night who felt sorry for the kid and realized that the only way to heal is to eventually forgive, fully knowing the pain that was caused by his actions. At this early stage, that’s certainly a noble approach. No one that I spoke to Wednesday questioned the rule itself and I’m not either. But every time I hear of a similar case, I can’t help but wonder if we should send such cases before the executive committee each time. That committee would have the power to rule that if no competitive advantage has been gained that the team be allowed to continue on in the playoffs. The cynical side of me also says that if St. Thomas More wasn’t trying to be nice against Sam Houston in the first-round win and kept its first team in the entire time, the Cougars would still be alive in the playoffs. The coach may have been criticized for winning 10-0 or whatever, but he still would have had a chance to win the state title. As it stands, though, STM won’t get that opportunity. Let’s hope someone sometimes somewhere learned a valuable lesson from this and keeps me from having to write one of these kind of stories ever again. What an awful article. This guy has a horrible writing style, and makes some really bonhead points. Yeah, "let's leave all our guys in the whole game and run up the score." That's a good way to get your best players hurt, idiot, especially against a team like Sam Houston. I think the LHSAA made the right call here. Last year with Lafayette, I disagree, because of the ambiguity of the rule. This is clear as day. I think the coach or AD should be fired for making such a big mistake. You can't put all the blame on the kid, because he shouldn't have been given that responsibility anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by soccermadness10 on Feb 8, 2007 10:19:26 GMT -6
anybody that blames the LHSAA must be like this kid who had below a 1.5...there is NO possible way that it is their fault at all. From what I read in our paper, the kid wasn't even an important player which makes it even worse for the other guys, but they have nobody to blame but the kid for lying. End of argument
|
|
