NT,
Sorry, the rule is:
3.08 Players participating in multiple age divisions shall not be permitted to participate on any team below the classification of the oldest team in which they participate on.
The written rule is new. However, at least some USSSA tournament directors have enforced something like this rule in the past, to avoid lower division teams temporarily bringing in players with more talent in order to win a tournament. The idea of 3.08 is that if a player is good enough to have played up a year in a higher division, then he probably is too talented to belong in a younger and lower division.
I think you'll find that Nations and Super Series (and probably others) have rules which are intended to have the same effect. Also, some TDs reclassify teams (both up and down) to promote more even competition
I expect that enforcement of 3.08 will be selective.
Thanks. I understand the rule however; I misread your original post. It is not a bad rule and on related note, I think that USSSA opened up a can of worms when last year they allowed players to be on multiple rosters within the same age class (Rule 3.11). I talked to someone at USSSA about the rule and he was supposed to call me back with some clarification but he didn't. I followed up with an e-mail and he ignored it too. Oh well.
Just don't see the "opened can of worms" with Utrips rule 3.11. Once the Spring season gets rolling, Utrip rosters eventually become locked. As a result of not locking rosters in the Fall, when one views the U-trip history, there are going to be players that end up on multiple same age teams. In the Fall, football is KING in most of the southern states. Even without all the football injurys, there has to be some latitude to be able to pick up players if one wants to be able to field a team for Fall Utrip tournaments.
After rosters are locked, having players on multiple ACTIVE rosters in same age is not possible. In the last year, Utrip has tried to prevent gaps in athlete's posted history by requiring the official birth name to be submitted, ie, no initials, nicknames, shortened first names. Utrips software is not foolproof, though... the worst one will usually encounter is some missed team history of a player from several seasons back. No big deal.
After rosters are locked, having players on multiple ACTIVE rosters in same age is not possible. In the last year, Utrip has tried to prevent gaps in athlete's posted history by requiring the official birth name to be submitted, ie, no initials, nicknames, shortened first names. Utrips software is not foolproof, though... the worst one will usually encounter is some missed team history of a player from several seasons back. No big deal.
It is only a problem if there people that are dishonest and work the system and take advantage of kids. That is not a huge problem here but there are some that do. The fall isn't really an issue because you don't even have to have a roster in the fall but why should a player appear on more than one active roster in the spring. I believe it creates more problems than it solves.
.
I only found this thread because of the acrid sulfur smell caused by all of the spent fireworks was wafting into some of the other forums.
Does the Fire Marshall know what's been going on in here?
.
I only found this thread because of the acrid sulfur smell caused by all of the spent fireworks was wafting into some of the other forums.
Does the Fire Marshall know what's been going on in here?
.