Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2012 2:26 am

Fri Jul 06, 2012 11:27 pm #21

Burlington has regularly beat A teams
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2012 2:24 am

Sat Jul 07, 2012 12:25 am #22

Mimico 2 just won a C tournament and yet they're in D...
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2004 2:15 pm

Mon Jul 09, 2012 4:58 pm #23

This is a very level-headed comment from a guy who remembers Cawthra, Clarkson, Erindale, etc! So do I. The old system (what we called the "All Ontarios") certainly had its downside in that many teams were quickly eliminated and you felt less a part of a bigger event. I also now coach and prefer the 3-game minimum pool/festival approach. The young kids revel in the event more. Yes, it is not perfect and could be improved but some of the cynical and harsh remarks before we even get started (it happens every year) are not good for the game.
its 2012 now and trust me when I started up the Caledon Bandits in 1984 ratings were an issue then as they are now. Never a year goes by that a team doesn't slide into a spot that they don't belong in even though all the teams rankings go through their own organization, their Zone, and the ratings committee via OLA. Not sure why it happens but somehow every year it does. One problem at least at the zone level I see is when team scores go through nobody may knows what the circumstances are of the game. For example lets say the Shelburne Midgets are a "C" rated team and are beaten twice by Midland 7-4 and 7-3 who are a "D" rated. Without the gamesheets you may not know that perhaps the Shelburne team only had 8 runners for both those games or that they may have had a Bantam goalie fill in or something there of during both of those losses. Does this mean that Midland should be "C" and Shelburne "D" based on the scores alone? You need the whole story and that is what goes missing in alot in some of these scores. The positive thing is doesn't happen near as much as it use to so were getting better but not perfect yet. By the way our season has got much shorter when I was a PeeWee player I was playing for the Provincial "A" final against Peterboro at Huron Park in Mississauga in September. All the championships games for each age group and division would would be going all weekend long. ie: tyke A, then B then C , Novice A then B etc etc That would be great to see again but killing 2 weekends would probably not go over well these days with parents. It would be fun to watch one championship game after another!
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 3:32 am

Tue Jul 10, 2012 4:08 am #24

Couldn't agree more Barry. The OLA needs to grow some gonads and straighten out this rating crap once and for all. Set out a STRICT criteria for ALL teams to follow to be rated and enforce it. No ifs,no ands,no buts,no maybes. Yes,I mean ALL teams. I don't care whether you play your games at the corner of Yonge and Bloor or in the bush of northern Ontario. These are the requirements for rating or you play "A" and attend the qualifiers or you don't go to Provincials. Your choice. No more sandbagging,no more excuses. The OLA also needs to step up and accomodate teams in the division they are rated. No more of this crap of letting teams play "B" because they don't want to pay to play 'A' or the excuse that the host center doesn't want to have to handle over 8 or 12 teams at the qualifiers. If they are rated "A" they play "A" and either the host center accepts them or they don't host. Let's get it sorted out. Same rules for everybody.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: Sat May 22, 2010 2:43 pm

Tue Jul 10, 2012 11:48 pm #25

I see where your coming from.

I can Only picture this game.

(20th) Mimico #2 vs. (68th) Akwesasne
or
(23rd) St Catharines vs (59th) Kahnawake

then again "C" & "D" don't matter as tho it seems. just throw all 48 teams in a Hat & Draw names...
The point is clear

The OLA is killing C level LAX and below (especially in small centres)
The appeal process is abismal and being held on July 1 is just the OLA's way of saying "dont bother"

We have been consistently over ranked the past 3 years running
How do I keep a kid that loves the game playing when he hasn't even had a close game in provies let alone a win in 3 yeas straight?
(no Im not talking about my son here........he fortunately has had at least one decent provincial experience in his 5 yrs of LAX)

I have watched the numbers decline in my centre consistantly over the past 5 years and this year putting a team on the floor was even a challenge

thanks for letting me vent

705Sniper
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2004 12:23 am

Wed Jul 11, 2012 8:20 pm #26

Couldn't agree more Barry. The OLA needs to grow some gonads and straighten out this rating crap once and for all. Set out a STRICT criteria for ALL teams to follow to be rated and enforce it. No ifs,no ands,no buts,no maybes. Yes,I mean ALL teams. I don't care whether you play your games at the corner of Yonge and Bloor or in the bush of northern Ontario. These are the requirements for rating or you play "A" and attend the qualifiers or you don't go to Provincials. Your choice. No more sandbagging,no more excuses. The OLA also needs to step up and accomodate teams in the division they are rated. No more of this crap of letting teams play "B" because they don't want to pay to play 'A' or the excuse that the host center doesn't want to have to handle over 8 or 12 teams at the qualifiers. If they are rated "A" they play "A" and either the host center accepts them or they don't host. Let's get it sorted out. Same rules for everybody.
Wow!

Finally someone who is willing to lay it on the line....

They should have set numbers in divisions

A 16
B 16
C 16
D 16

No whishy washy depends on what teams are where....and who you like and don't like!

Teams who don't or can't play the number of required games...need or have to play tournaments or be placed high....not low....

You want to keep players playing the game...but going every year to play sandbagging teams, and losing 3 straight.....why would kids continue to play!

Quote
Like
Share

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 1:12 am

Tue Jul 17, 2012 2:24 pm #27

Peterborough actually has beaten other teams that are ranked A such as Oakville and Centre Wellington. Six Nations shouldnt be B. They lost 12-1 and 10-2 to Burlington, also in B.
Nepean tykes beet Peterbourough 15-3 and are a strong B team how does Peterbourough end up in A?
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 10:39 pm

Thu Jul 19, 2012 11:23 pm #28

Wow!

Finally someone who is willing to lay it on the line....

They should have set numbers in divisions

A 16
B 16
C 16
D 16

No whishy washy depends on what teams are where....and who you like and don't like!

Teams who don't or can't play the number of required games...need or have to play tournaments or be placed high....not low....

You want to keep players playing the game...but going every year to play sandbagging teams, and losing 3 straight.....why would kids continue to play!
we keep going on and on and on about those poor little guys in c or d that lose three straight because they are 8 teams in a but if there is 16 teams in a the teams 12-16 are going to get the butt handed to them in qualies not for 3 games but 8-10 and maybe 5-6 where they are competitive its getting ridiculous everybody here has a bias either way the small town people seem to be the loudest. They say that they want fair rankings so automatically want 16 a teams it makes no sense strengths change every year. One team might lose 5-6 players one year so they go from 1-15 they stil need to play a i dont think so, Anyways the provincials i had the most fun with wasnt even one of the years i won it was when as whitby 3 we got ranked b and our only win of provies came when we beat whitby 2 we didnt care we had fun. Kids dont give a damn they ust want to play but its the parents who keep causing problems ive always said if the games where played without parents in the stands coaches on the bench or refs on the floor it would be the most sportmanlike cleanest game of lacrosse in the world
Quote
Like
Share