Sport Today

Fellow Net Presences,
    During my recent bout of DTFS (downstate tournament fizzle
syndrome), I've learned of an ominous restriction for USAV-registered
teams.  

USA Volleyball Official 1995 Guide
  Operating Code of the United States Volleyball Association (p.49-69)
    Article X -- Player and Team Eligibility (p.59)
      D. Eligibility Requirements for USAV-Sanctioned Competitions. (p.61)
        3.  Non-Sanctioned Competition. (p.61)

           "USA Volleyball-registered players and teams competing in
            non-sanctioned open competition may __jeopardize their
            eligibility__."

      B. Definitions. (p.59-60)
        2.  Competitions.
          a.  Open Competition.

             "That between teams of dissimilar organizations; e.g.
              between a collegiate team and a YMCA team.  It may involve
              several such organizations ..."

In other words, play a friendship tournament against Podunk Community
College and you could get disqualified from USAV ...

How strictly is this rule enforced?  Is it a good thing or a bad thing?
What do you guys think of it?  (How many of you were even aware of it?)
Technically, it seems that friendship tournament sponsors aren't even
supposed to advertise their tournaments to USAV teams, since they're not
"eligible" to play.

IMHO, this rule is unnecessarily restricting.  It's reasonable for USAV
to exclude non-members from sanctioned events, but I wouldn't want USAV
to exclude its members from non-sanctioned events.  If players want to
play, they should be able to play.  Do you think that the USAV confers
such an overwhelming advantage for its members that they should have the
right to restrict our playing opportunities?  If a college gives a
scholarship to a player, or a pro team pays somebody big bucks to play,
then it would be reasonable to make the player adhere to certain
restrictions.  (USAV's medical insurance coverage is nice, but if we're
willing to forego it, we should have that option -- it goes without
saying that if we get injured in a non-sanctioned event, we won't go
crying to USAV.)

Hypothetical case: a team that currently plays USAV wishes to join a new
collegiate club conference to support the growth of collegiate men's vb.
This conference imposes a mandatory home-home conference schedule, but
makes no further demands.  Said team would also like to continue playing
in USAV-sanctioned events during the same season.  The conference has no
problems with its member teams joining USAV and playing in USAV events
(or even in other conferences!), but USAV, by item X.D.3, would not
approve of the dual membership.  Is this really in the best interests of
amateur volleyball?  It's hard enough to get collegiate club teams to
register with USAV; force them to choose between their intrastate
rivalries and USAV and they'd be that much less willing to join.

Can somebody explain the significance of this rule, and why it's in the
books?  Thanks in advance ...

Eric Wang

] Fellow Net Presences,
]     During my recent bout of DTFS (downstate tournament fizzle
] syndrome), I've learned of an ominous restriction for USAV-registered
] teams.  
]
] USA Volleyball Official 1995 Guide
]   Operating Code of the United States Volleyball Association (p.49-69)
]     Article X -- Player and Team Eligibility (p.59)
]       D. Eligibility Requirements for USAV-Sanctioned Competitions. (p.61)
]       3.  Non-Sanctioned Competition. (p.61)
]
]          "USA Volleyball-registered players and teams competing in
]           non-sanctioned open competition may __jeopardize their
]           eligibility__."
]
]       B. Definitions. (p.59-60)
]       2.  Competitions.
]         a.  Open Competition.
]
]            "That between teams of dissimilar organizations; e.g.
]             between a collegiate team and a YMCA team.  It may involve
]             several such organizations ..."
]
] In other words, play a friendship tournament against Podunk Community
] College and you could get disqualified from USAV ...
]
] How strictly is this rule enforced?  Is it a good thing or a bad thing?
] What do you guys think of it?  (How many of you were even aware of it?)
] Technically, it seems that friendship tournament sponsors aren't even
] supposed to advertise their tournaments to USAV teams, since they're not
] "eligible" to play.

I believe the local region has a lot of flexibility on this issue.

]
] IMHO, this rule is unnecessarily restricting.  It's reasonable for USAV
] to exclude non-members from sanctioned events, but I wouldn't want USAV
] to exclude its members from non-sanctioned events.  If players want to
] play, they should be able to play.  Do you think that the USAV confers
] such an overwhelming advantage for its members that they should have the
] right to restrict our playing opportunities?  If a college gives a
] scholarship to a player, or a pro team pays somebody big bucks to play,
] then it would be reasonable to make the player adhere to certain
] restrictions.  (USAV's medical insurance coverage is nice, but if we're
] willing to forego it, we should have that option -- it goes without
] saying that if we get injured in a non-sanctioned event, we won't go
] crying to USAV.)
]
[ example deleted]
]
] Can somebody explain the significance of this rule, and why it's in the
] books?  Thanks in advance ...
]
] Eric Wang

]

I think it is attempt to exert a ***hold on volleyball. In my opinion
it is a bad rule. This is going to be a very important concern for the
Badger subregion. For Junior competetion USAV sanctioning is the standard, but
for *** volleyball there are only a few sanctioned teams (in our region).
There is incentive not to sanction a team now because it prevents you from
playing in almost all local tournaments and does not work well for part time
players who are not able to play with the same team all of the time.

[Significant amount deleted]

Eric:

     It is extremely unlikely that a USA VB region would have a problem with
players playing in a nonsanctioned event.  Players and officials do take a
chance in participating in these events because they are not covered by the
USA VB insurance policy.  But realistically, no one in the region is going to
come down on your college team for participating in any other league.
     Sanctioned events are a benefit to many teams.  The hosts of these events
put in a great deal of time and effort.  Many times they make very little
money from hosting - and they definitely don't want to LOSE money when
sponsoring a tournament.  The sanction system allows the region to monitor the
number of events in a particular region on a particular date.  That way, a
tournament director can reasonably expect to get enought teams to run the
tournament.  For example, if you plan a tournament in Champaign for a
Saturday and then three other tournament crop up in Chicago on the same
weekend at the same level, your dead.  This sanctioning system is also
beneficial to the teams because they can plan ahead that a tournament will
actually take place (ie there will be enough teams).     This verbage in the
USA VB rules is designed to stop teams from putting on unsanctioned
tournaments that directly conflict with sanctioned tournaments.  I think that
you can see the logic.  The region has no problem with specific leagues that
are not open to all comers.  They do have a problem with holding a
nonsanctioned tournament directly opposite a sanctioned tournament in the same
location (at the same level) when the sanctioned tournament is not full.  
Since you run tournaments, I think that you can see the logic behind this.    
     USA VB provides a tremendous service to all the VB players in the U.S.
whether they know it or not.  Most of the people behind the scenes do
everything as volunteers.  They put in very long hours for little credit.  
They only RARELY do something that you might consider harmful to the average
club.  I have been associated with VB in this area for 22 years and in
California for 10 years before that.  I can't really recall a situation where
the region attempted to enforce a rule like this in a noncaring fashion.  

Wally

]      USA VB provides a tremendous service to all the VB players in the U.S.
] whether they know it or not.  Most of the people behind the scenes do
] everything as volunteers.  They put in very long hours for little credit.  
] They only RARELY do something that you might consider harmful to the average
] club.  I have been associated with VB in this area for 22 years and in
] California for 10 years before that.  I can't really recall a situation where
] the region attempted to enforce a rule like this in a noncaring fashion.  

I know of at least one case where a player was banned for a period of time
for playing in an event that occured a LONG way from his residence. The
enforcement in this case, as I understand it, seemed capricious.