|
Post by mflema on Feb 5, 2007 15:29:11 GMT -8
Craig: I have been looking in the Operating Manual and it does not say it has to be the team with the least players returning. I wish it did. But it doesn't. But it only makes sense to use the team with the least amount of players to be disrupted. Do you think this is a case of getting rid of a manager? Because if that is the case, it should of be done again like the Operating Manual suggested. If the President did not want a certain manager back, don't nominate him. The only reason I got back involved back into LL was Chris Essary. I liked his way of standing up for what he believed in. He was the second LL president I had known to just not nominate a manager to come back. This way was the cleanest and nicest way. Yes, the manager was hot, and yes, Chris took all kind of crap. But he did it for the best of the players. My husband did the same thing, and yes we took a lot of crap. Still taking the crap and pot shots like Keith's comment above. I am the person who is concerned with reducing NS because of my grandson not making the majors. Duh, I couldn't figure out he was talking about me. I sure hope that the kids are the ones who are not hurt in any way in this reduction of teams. That is what has to be.
Mel
|
|
|
Post by crash23 on Feb 5, 2007 15:34:07 GMT -8
Thanks for the clarification. I thougt I read it somewhere... but disrupting the fewest kids makes the most sense.
I can't imagine why they'd want to get rid of Dwayne (Phiilies manager). Everyone I know speaks highly of him. He's great with the kids.
|
|
|
Post by lboullion on Feb 5, 2007 22:00:59 GMT -8
Dwanye has managed the Phillies for at least 3 years maybe longer. The problem comes from how the President of the League and Dwanye get a-long. They don't. It stems from the suspension issue last year when Dwanye told the President to get off the field becuse he didnt belong there. Bob took that very personal and has been "out to get" Dwanye ever since. They have never agreeed on anything. Sounds stupid, I agree but too many situations and things have happened to prove this to be true.
Now mathmaticallly the Phillies had a 20% chance of being eliminated. Not good odds. If you follow the typical (but not mandated) rules for disolving a team.... Phillies would have been tied for second to last to be dissolved. They had 6 returning players.
Now if you go by returning managers or most experience, Phillies would have been last to be dissolved. Add to this that the Dodgers manager volunteered his team to be dissolved and it was not honored and you have an overwhelming probability that the decision to eliminate the Phillies was decided before the "blind draw" that no one is talking about either!!
Now throw in the fact that (at least it sounds like it) the Giants were dissolved because they volunteered too. That was accepted but not the Dodger's offer.
Now what do I know because I was not there, but there are people here who can varify this or unvarify so let's hear it.
Add to that the word from Phillies players (the kids) that said they heard Dwanye wasn't going to be allowed to coach again next season. This was said last year in July. Of course it wasn't a big deal then, but now it's true.
All this talk about what's best for the kids, Dwanye always put the kids first.
Dwanye just wasn't able to conform and agree with everything that was happening. For speaking out and having an opinion you get axed. I truley felt Dwanye was what LL needed in a coach. Patience, Knowledge, Experience, People Skills, Dedication, Great with Players.
Now wouldn't he be allowed to take over a team who has a first year manager. Do Coaches have Seniority Rights? He has been managing three years. There are 2 new managers. SInce his team is dissolved, can't he take over. SInce the players get to stay in the league, what's the rule with the head manager?
L Boullion
|
|
|
Post by trevor9 on Feb 6, 2007 15:33:29 GMT -8
Now that the dust has settled from the Phillies retraction, let's look at the winners and losers of the out come. The Dodgers still need more help.....The Orioles will have to take two Phillies and nothing else, which I hope people will not think Dykzuel is screwing the O's by not building for the future. He said he wanted two 10's to balance the roster....that won't happen now. The A's will benefit the most because they will grab a good Phillie and then slide up to the 2 spot. The Red Sox will be fine as well. I would like to thank Randy for being a class act throughout this whole ordeal, he issued an apology to the teams affected which btw was one of his teams. I know the families and kids are sickened by this and your kind words helped ease their pain. Duane and Lance will be missed as well, they have been nothing but positive with not just my son but all the kids out there. It's sad that LL has lost a great role model in Duane. I guess we'll have more time to b.s. watching the games from lawn chairs. I'll be heckeling Cumberland from 200 feet since he drafted Trevor......I still won't buy a red belt for him, the Cubs wear blue you jack@ss.
|
|
|
Post by mflema on Feb 6, 2007 18:56:50 GMT -8
The only place that talks about Tenure or Senority of Managers is the FAQ and it just says there is no such thing. I finally got my e-rule book, which is not the best buy in the world, but it is cool to look up things. The e-rule book is only good until 12/31/07 and then becomes unusable. The disk has on it the Operating Manual, the Rule Book in English, Spanish and French, and A Year in Hometown Little League. They also have the Softball Rule Book. They also have the Challenger Leagues rule book there. So maybe it isn't such a bad buy for 10 bucks, but you have to have the disk in your computer and you can not print anything out. For fear of you printing out 118 pages of rules instead of paying a dollar for the rule book. But like I said, it is cool to find everything. Mel
|
|