Club Pass Players

So whats up with the club pass system in LH.  I have heard numerous versions of this rule such as,
1) They can only play in one LH scheduled game a day....
2) The player can play any division (D1, D2, or D3). It makes no difference what division the player actually plays in as her "real" team.
3) The player can not play down a division. Ex. D1 player can not Club Pass to play for a D2 team or a D2 player can not play down to a D3 team (During league play of course)

Is there anyone out there who can shed some light on this and how it relates to Lake Highlands League play. Not ECNL, or tournaments. Strictly Lake Highlands.

http://girlsclassicleague.com/lhgclbylawsandrules/IVLHGCLPlayVer1203V13.pdf

Section G has all of the gory detail...

1 & 2 from your post are correct. 3 is incorrect.

1.  Yes, players can only play one game per day.

2.  They can play any division.  Does not matter where they play the most.

3.  Yes, they can play down divisions or up divisions.  ECNL can play D1 or D2 or D1 can play D3 if invited to do so.  

4.  Girls have to play in their age group or up.  An '00 can't play in an '01 game.  

There is lots of controversy around the rule and plenty of threads to deal with that.  The basic thought process (from a positive perspective) is that

1.  It gives kids a chance to play at a different level that may suit them better, challenge them or give them playing time.  There are kids on upper division teams that may lack playing time and can fill in on other teams to enhance their skills and get some playing time.  Likewise, there are kids that get to take shots at playing on upper level teams and seeing how they stack up.  IMO, both of those are legitimate reasons to have the Club Pass Player as this is supposed to be about the kids and their opportunities.

2.  There are tons of injuries in soccer along with lots of scheduling challenges as the girls get to Jr High and High School.  This can leave teams without adequate subs to compete which is not necessarily healthy for the teams or kids.  Pulling in players from sister teams helps solve those issues.  

Yes, it does benefit the larger clubs more as there are more opportunities.  Clearly a small club with only one team does not have the same option as a Sting or Texans.  That said, I think it is much more scary and onerous talking about it than reality.  I don't think it gets used that much and when it does, it is fairly consistent (same 1-2 girls duel rostered or constantly helping a short team).  I'm sure there is some abuse throughout the year that people can cite but it is the exception and not the rule.  State Cup is probably the one place where you will see more teams take advantage of the rule.  Even then it is not widespread.

I will agree with almost all of that except for the part about its usage. week 1 saw fairly widespread player pass usage. Boys league has seen very little usage but it's a different rule for the girls.

i am fine w pass play EXCEPT allowing upper players to play down a division. that has too much room for abuse and is against the concept of different divisions. everybody remembers when a good academy player was used as a ringer in rec right? same thing. if it is used to pull a player up thats great, not put in ringers. if a team needs players the coaches will ALWAYS try to get a ringer of they can...

"Spirit of the Rule"- that is actually how Lake Highlands refers to the Club Pass in the bylaws. LOL absolutely laughable.

Should be "Spirit of the Dollar". Money well spent for the big clubs as the independents are being sold out.

But LH, they don't want those "trashy" independent clubs up their anyways.

Rooney13 wrote:"Spirit of the Rule"-  that is actually how Lake Highlands refers to the Club Pass in the bylaws.  LOL absolutely laughable.  

Should be "Spirit of the Dollar".  Money well spent for the big clubs as the independents are being sold out.

But LH, they don't want those "trashy" independent clubs up their anyways.  

lh loves those "trashy" indies, get them a little wine and they are up for anything...  

silentparent wrote:i am fine w pass play EXCEPT allowing upper players to play down a division. that has too much room for abuse and is against the concept of different divisions. everybody remembers when a good academy player was used as a ringer in rec right? same thing. if it is used to pull a player up thats great, not put in ringers. if a team needs players the coaches will ALWAYS try to get a ringer of they can...

So if your coach ever approaches you about having your DD play on a lower division team within your club because of an injury and/or to get her some extra touches, you will refuse based on principle, correct?  

bwgophers wrote:

silentparent wrote:i am fine w pass play EXCEPT allowing upper players to play down a division. that has too much room for abuse and is against the concept of different divisions. everybody remembers when a good academy player was used as a ringer in rec right? same thing. if it is used to pull a player up thats great, not put in ringers. if a team needs players the coaches will ALWAYS try to get a ringer of they can...

So if your coach ever approaches you about having your DD play on a lower division team within your club because of an injury and/or to get her some extra touches, you will refuse based on principle, correct?  

no, but i think it is wrong and i would tell the coach...

the other reason i don't like it is that the reg players sit the bench. most clubs are going for 18 players. so if you miss 4, your other players are not good enough to make up the slack and should sit the bench so an outsider can play their minutes?

The rule is ideal for keepers and that's  where it's most likely to be used (and why bwgophers supports it...and I do to for injuries and player development). But as the other SP said....ringers will be used in various divisions and not just 'for extra touches'.

Don't agree with this rule either. It just bring the "guess player" discussion that prevails in academy to select and introduces a ton of gray areas into the strength or perceived strength of select teams.

And as others have stated, can tilt the odds to big clubs and away from the indies if and when abused. They already have an advantage, why give them more?

Because of the "spirit of the dollar"

LH catering to needs and wants of the big clubs at the expense of smaller ones

How is that? LH controls how many teams the Indy's put together? If thats the mentality, then it would seem they catered to the smaller clubs until recently? For the record, I am against it... just playing devils advocate.

Let me get this straight.  So for example in D1, the sting and fcd premier teams have say 16 elite players on each team. Every girl on those teams would be welcome anywhere.  So if those coaches wanted to, they could share their players with the struggling fcd and sting teams in the same div. to help insure their D1 spot for next year?  How is that fair to teams like Feet and Andro?  Lame.
Very lame.

SolarPower00 wrote:The rule is ideal for keepers and that's  where it's most likely to be used (and why bwgophers supports it...and I do to for injuries and player development). But as the other SP said....ringers will be used in various divisions and not just 'for extra touches'.

Who said that I supported it? I was just tweaking SP (a favorite pastime of mine   ) to see if he was willing to make a stand on his principle.

I'm not opposed to the concept, but didn't think it was necessary for LHGCL to adopt it in the manner that they did, which definitely leaves the door open at a minimum for a bunch of questions that they didn't have to answer before, and at the maximum, outright abuse of the "spirit of the rule" for the sake of competitive advantage. However, I do believe there will be less abuse than many of the other conspiracy theorists on this forum predict.

Was the system of years past that broken...... You bring your 16 and I will bring my 16 and we will see who the better team is that given day.

Now for most of the independents it is they bring their 16 you bring your 13 with 3 ringers/studs/rent-a-player/buy-a-promotion/prevent relegation players. That is what they will be used for, not to get bench players time, or possibly get a better look at fringe player. It will be used to do exactly what it was probably truly intended for.

I am sure Sting, Dallas Texans, FCD and Solar love it. Their clubs now have an unfair advantage against FWFC, Mustangs, Cosmos, Saints, Dynasty, and Fever when it comes to promotion and relegation (I am sure there are others smaller clubs but those are the ones I can think of in the 02 group).

I, for one (among many), am not in favor of this new rule.  And my DDs have played in LHGCL for a long time; all with the larger clubs.  This really isn't a necessary rule to improve the quality of the league.  If it were, I would support it.  There are other ways the league can strengthen itself, but I do not see this as one.  

The mistake LH is making is by making and open-ended rule, without real accountability. What is most laughable is the text that states a player may not play down in age group (i.e. 01 cannot play 02).  REALLY?  What a novel concept and a MUST HAVE statement.... Oh wait, hasn't it always been that way? LH BoD can't get out of their own way.

If the league genuinely wants to foster development by allowing players to play at higher level of competition, then movement should only be upward.  

And if the league genuinely wants to assist teams that may be short sided, then a value needs to be placed on that.  What is considered short sided?  The league mandates you have to field (if I recall) a minimum of 7 or there is a forfeit.  So is short-sided below that?  Is it 11? 12?  And I love the "injury, illness, or OTHER COMMITMENTS".  Coach said I could miss today because my friend is having a birthday party, so player A, B, and C are coming to fill in...they're the best defenders on our D1 team, but they need to play at a higher level so they're coming to us while I'm out eating cake. But don't tell anyone we need 1 more win to avoid relegation or to promote to the next division. It'll be our secret. Remember, I have "other commitments".

Last I checked, playing in LHGCL requires a bit of a sacrifice. And when I can't be there, it hurts my team.

Dear Teams, here's our new rule. Don't ask, don't question; figure it out on your own.  Just get your requests in by Wednesday so we can rubber stamp it.  Love, LH BoD

I agree with Mr/Mrs. Gazm.  You sign your 16 and then let's play. If we only have 11 or 12 one day because of injury or other commitments, it will be a challenge, but we'll do our best.  If you signed your players you should believe they're good enough to be on the field when called upon.

BWGophers daily prediction sure to go wrong...

The abuse of the "spirit of the rule" by passing down "ringers" from upper division teams to lower division teams will come to a screeching halt the first time a difference maker gets injured when playing down and ends up missing a game(s) for her primary team...

It would certainly take some work and, more importantly, professionalism, but I think competing coaches should have to sign off on the passing player(s). If Coach A has a genuine need or player development concern, the he/she will need to contact Coach B and get approval and the sign-off.

Most coaches in an age group are familiar with each other and most times there's a mutual respect. "Hey Coach, I'm in a bind this week due to 3 injuries and baptism. Are you ok with me having 2 to fill in. Here are the details....."

All the d2/d3 parents are super vocal about this rule because they're concerned clubs will abuse it and affect their kids' chances for promotion to a higher league. Throwing around development as a concern is smoke screen...most the comments are only focused on potential impact to who wins or loses the game.

In the context of individual players (not teams and w/l standings), if players can play up, they should also be able to play down. Though their parents aren't nearly as vocal, for every d2/d3 kid that is being sent to a higher level, a kid already there is about to lose minutes. Development is not ALWAYS about playing better comp...sometimes a kid needs to play weaker comp to build confidence, technique, slow the game down, etc.

And my read on the age group requirement was that if you had a younger player rostered up on a older team, they cannot club pass back down to their own age group...but that was me reading between lines as I couldn't see any other reason LH would need to restate an existing rule within the club pass language.

LH is full of it.... no longer concerned about the spirit of competition. Only what is best for them and the pocket book. Its a sham and so are they

scoregazam wrote:LH is full of it.... no longer concerned about the spirit of competition.  Only what is best for them and the pocket book.  Its a sham and so are they

How do you think this benefited them and their pocketbook?

If anything, it made them more busy with the flood of questions / complaints they will receive.

4-3-3 wrote:All the d2/d3 parents are super vocal about this rule because they're concerned clubs will abuse it and affect their kids' chances for promotion to a higher league. Throwing around development as a concern is smoke screen...most the comments are only focused on potential impact to who wins or loses the game.

In the context of individual players (not teams and w/l standings), if players can play up, they should also be able to play down. Though their parents aren't nearly as vocal, for every d2/d3 kid that is being sent to a higher level, a kid already there is about to lose minutes. Development is not ALWAYS about playing better comp...sometimes a kid needs to play weaker comp to build confidence, technique, slow the game down, etc.

And my read on the age group requirement was that if you had a younger player rostered up on a older team, they cannot club pass back down to their own age group...but that was me reading between lines as I couldn't see any other reason LH would need to restate an existing rule within the club pass language.

I agree with every comment in this and believe the intention of the rule is valid (I know it's hard to believe that I agree with you on something-), but this rule will be abused for the purpose of a lower team gaining credibility as a team, avoiding relegation or earning promotion, etc., and more then I think people realize. Why? because teams tend to fall apart when they get relegated and pick up stronger players when they get promoted. And a coach's ego and empty wallet will override all logical thinking as to the true intention of this rule being in place.

I mean, everyone has experience with it form the academy days when it was considered "the norm". And now at the select level teams will do it in tournaments to give the appearance that their team is better then actual league results indicated to try and attract better players. You think there are teams that don't "borrow" from their higher-level sister teams already for King Tut or Puma Cup so they can appear better then their team really is to earn that higher seed in QT? Happens all the time. Not only that, but I can see where the "can only play in one game per day" stipulation gets ignored. As several posters have said, there is no real accountability on this to the teams that do abuse the rule or disregard the stipulations surrounding it.

Get real people..................It's been going on for a while, both within the rules in tournament play and "under the radar" for league play (no, I have no hard evidence, but there's enough to suspect it). This just makes it legal for teams to do it, and they will.