fbpx

http://bestxxxhere.com dontwatchporn.pro http://www.xxxone.net dicke deutsche bbw amateur titten von jungem kerl gefickt.

RRRC Competitions Committee Notes – 7/8/2019

    1. Roll Call
      1. Young
      2. Kurylas
      3. Kolberg
      4. Fosco
      5. Dodge
      6. Tolar
      7. Leming
      8. Dale
      9. Hughes
      10. O’Gara
      11. Keuppens
      12. Watson
        1. Guests
          1. Roche
          2. DARC – Karl Tolar and  Steve Daniels
          3. Alliance – Stuart Rogers-Brown and Robert Poyser
          4. Quins –  John Dale and Elaine Vassie
          5. Reds D4 – Jeff Robertson
          6. OK United – John White and Rod Puentes
          7. Denton Women – Marie Wilson
    2. Follow ups
      1. Austin Blacks Grievance
        1. Dale: We held a special meeting on July 1, 2019 to hear this grievance. In attendance was myself, Young, Kurylas, Leming, Tolar and Watson. The committee was asked to vote on competitively sanctioning the Reds for next season, the result was a unanimous no. We did discuss that perhaps we need to revisit alternate facilities on inclement weather weekends.
      2. Promotion & Relegation
        1. WD1 – Lady Quins have appealed their relegation. Having them as part of WD1 is important to the national restructuring of that division, and they have agreed to participate in that competition already.
          1. Dale: Wendy, I do see that you have SLC on the list?
          2. Young: Yes, there are still discussions about that as CA may not have any WD1 teams. I’m pushing that we don’t have this happen but it may be mandated to us like NOLA was for the Men’s a few years back. TBD but we’re keeping travel in mind on this one.
            1. APPROVED – Quins moved back into D1
        2. MD1 – San Antonio changed its mind and now will not appeal the relegation of its top side to D2, or its second side to D3. With no new MD1 teams joining the competition, this means that the MD1 teams will have a regional playoff this year to make the match minimums. 
              1. Kolberg: I would like to suggest that the SF round is played on another weekend independent of the Championship weekend. 1v4 and 2v3. 
              2. Dale: I agree with you. 
              3. Hughes: We should shop this around to the MD1 teams and make sure they are OK with this?
              4. Kolberg: Yes, I will do it in the morning.
        3. WD2
          1. McAllen Maidens want to move up from WD3.
          2. Bay Area has appealed their relegation to WD3.
          3. Alliance may want to field a WD2 side
          4. Denton also would like to field a side, but may only have enough for 7s
          5. Grand Prairie may have enough for 7s
            1. Young: Very positive that McAllen wants to move up and excited that Bay Area has appealed. We have some interest from Alliance and Denton who may not have enough for 15s and we need to keep the TRU WD3 in play. 
            2. Dodge: Would it work if we scheduled the new teams friendlies with the WD2?
            3. Young: Yes, I absolutely think we should do that, we need to keep it as 7s or 10s and purely developmental. I think we do round robins or something like that.
            4. Marie: Hi, this is Marie from Denton women’s. I’m so excited that we will have a team again this year. If our schedules correspond with the men’s schedules, that would be really helpful. It wouldn’t have to be 7s only, it could just be developmental. 
            5. Young: Right, it doesn’t have to be 7s but really we just want teams playing matches. If they need to combine to make 15s or 10s that is perfectly fine and we want that!
            6. Dale: This will also help with referees, these can go to the new developing referees and they can get minutes too.
              1. APPROVED – McAllen moves up, Bay Area appeal accepted and they will remain in WD2. We will continue discussing options for new teams.
        4. MD2
          1. As noted above, San Antonio will not appeal the relegation of their MD2 side to MD3, or the relegation of their MD1 side to MD2.
          2. DARC is seeking voluntary relegation from MD2 to MD3, and to drop their MD4 side. 
          3. Alliance is seeking voluntary promotion from MD3 to MD2, and also wants to field MD3 and MD4 sides.
          4. The Quins want to take advantage of the repeal of the contiguous side rule and field a MD1 and MD3 side. This repeal still has not yet been finally approved, but I believe that it will be.
            1. Dale: Do we know when the contiguous sides will be approved or at least reviewed?
            2. Dodge: I believe it will be by the end of this week through my committee and then further reviewed by The Rugby Committee after that. Here is the relevant text:
              1. a. Club Divisional Status.  Only with the approval of, or at the direction from, the local Approved Governing Body, may a club field eligible teams in non-contiguous divisions.” . . .
              2. “e. Any player on a club fielding teams in non-contiguous divisions, who has played in at least 3 Qualifying Matches for the club’s Upper Division side is immediately no longer eligible to play for that club’s Lower Division side.
              3. Example: The club fields eligible teams in Division 1 and in Division 3. When a player has played in at least 3 Division I Qualifying Matches, that player is immediately no longer eligible to play for the Division 3 team.”
              4. 2019-20Proposed Elig. Rules 3.5(a) and 3.5(e)
              5. The purpose of 3.5(a) is to allow the CR Committees to ensure that the teams seeking to play in non-contiguous divisions are not doing so to obtain an unfair competitive advantage and to allow for the placement of conditions on such an exception so that a balance in the league structure can be maintained.
            3. Dodge: With teams expanding their footprint, we want to make sure that teams know there are fines and other sanctions written in our policies and procedures. We want to expansion but need to make sure that teams understand the repercussions.
            4. Tolar: This is the first I’m hearing about the 3 match requirement. Is there any wiggle there? 
            5. Dodge: I asked for an exception for RRRC and was told no. 
            6. Dale: I think there is enough matches in the fall where teams can figure out if their players are D1 caliber or not.
            7. Leming: This is a great discussion and I’m not sure we can solve it tonight. It’s hard to distinguish if players are D1 or not in the beginning of the season. 
            8. Robertson: This should apply to sides that are contiguous as well, if we have most of our players at 50% at D1 then it should be pretty much the same next year as well. I track this for our D1 side and it’s a bear, I can’t imagine doing it for multiple teams.
            9. Keuppens: What if we require a hypothetical roster of 23 and have it spot checked?
            10. Dale: What if you brought in a new athlete who hasn’t played a lot of rugby but needs the experience. They may need to play at different levels to gain that experience.
            11. Keuppens: If we ask for a roster of 15 rather than 23 would that suffice?
            12. Tolar: What if you have 10 foreign players, only 5 can be on the roster at a time. Then the 5 players have to play at a lower division. I think we should take this offline and we need to discuss this more. 
            13. Kolberg: We’re looking at this from the wrong direction. We have clubs with multiple sides but they only have 20-25 per side. Then we have forfeits like we did last year.
            14. Watson: I agree with Jeff. We want to stop forfeits.
            15. Tolar: I think the issue we’re talking about is teams loading up their early lower division matches with D1 players. So this is a different beast.
            16. Kolberg: Ok, this is two different discussions but it comes to the same result. You have to have 100 to 150 players to have multiple sides.
            17. Dodge: Let’s look at a real-life example. Why did the Quins want to move down and not be contiguous anymore?
            18. Dale: We want to move down because we don’t really have a D2 side. We have new players and players that need development, not 100 point beatings. Those type of beatings don’t help our players and we think we’ll have better development and retention in D3.
            19. Leming: I think this is a retention issue, playing in D1 last year and losing 100+ has hurt our retention. Players have lost love for the game and we want to be in D2 so we can actually compete. 
            20. Young: John, are we going to have some discussions about these issues offline?
            21. Dale: Yes, I think we can come up with some suggestions offline.
            22. Young: We need to expedite this discussion as we also need to start scheduling matches. 
              1. APPROVED – Alliance voluntary promotion to MD2 and DARC relegation to MD3. 
          5. MD3
            1. As we decided via email vote on June 16, 2019, we are applying the “last place / first place” promotion and relegation rules on a division-wide basis (rather than on a geographic subdivision basis). Also, the TRU has agreed to allow the Red River Committee to make preliminary promotion / relegation decisions applicable to MD4 (and WD3), subject to TRU Board approval. The upshot of these decisions / agreements is:
              1. Corpus Christi Crabs and Kingwood will remain in MD3. 
              2. Denton, as the MD3 club with the worst overall record, is subject to relegation from MD3 to MD4. I have not seen any appeal of this decision, but have reached out to Andrew Campbell to make sure that I didn’t miss anything.
              3. As noted above, the Quins and San Antonio will both have sides moving from MD2 to MD3, and DARC has requested voluntary relegation from MD2 to MD3.
              4. Alliance also wants to have a D3 side.
                1. Dale: I don’t know much about OK United. Sounds like they are a combined OKC/Norman team.
                2. Puentes: I think John White might be on the call as well. We’re composed of some Crusaders (18-20) and a few from Norman. These players want to play back in the TRU where it is more competitive. 
                3. Young: Administratively we are reviewing new clubs next week on the TRU call and these guys would need to move really quickly. 
                4. Puentes: Yes, we’ve received all of the requirements for applying to the TRU and we’re aware of the deadlines. We should have all of the paperwork to you ASAP. We will also have representatives at the TRU Summit and AGM as required. 
                5. Dodge: Just so everyone knows, the TRU has the say into if a new club will be admitted and our role as the competitions committee is what level they should enter into the competition. OK UNited has requested to come in at MD3.
                6. Puentes: Yes, the core of our players have been around the game for 5+ years. 
                7. Dodge: My recommendation would be to table entering OK United until the TRU has a chance to review/approve.
                8. Young: I agree. 
                9. White: I know that most of the RRRC officers are also on the TRU Board. What is the general feeling of a team coming back to the TRU?
                10. Dodge: John, like we talked about on the phone I do want to talk with KJ Abel from Frontier/Mid-America as a courtesy to make sure we’re not hurting their competition. 
                11. White: Right, in the Mid-America MD2 we were losing matches 70+ and we want to come back to MD3 in the TRU so we can be competitive. Also the TRU is very organized and we want to be back in that as well.
                12. Young: I think it’s exciting that a team from OK wants to come back to the TRU. My main concern is lack of referees and the travel required is immense. I would want to see a huge commitment around referees.
                13. Tolar: I know youth rugby is big in Yukon, how are all those HS matches covered?
                14. Puentes: Yes, there is a small group of referees that is available here. One of my main goals is to work with TRRA and to grow referees in this area. I also work with Arkansas referees and can help cover matches that way. 
                15. Young: Ok, should we talk about Denton relegation, Quins and San Antonio voluntary relegation?
                16. Dodge: Yes and we need to mention the new clubs, but again I recommend we table those until the TRU has a chance to review/approve. Also, Denton is not appealing their relegation, so no vote is needed there. So we just need to talk about Quins and San Antonio.
                17. Robertson: What if we had the Quins play in MD4 so they don’t have to worry about player eligibility? This would allow them to develop and then they could see where they wanted to be next year.
                18. Dale: My personal thought would be no as we believe we would be competitive in D3 this year. We hope to eventually have numbers to field a side in D4. For this upcoming season moving down to D3 would be the best move for us. 
                19. Dodge: I’m generally inclined to give the club difference on where they want to apply and where it’s not innapropriate from a competitive standpoint. I would be inclined to allow Quins II to play in D3.
                20. Kolberg: I second.
                21. Kolberg: I also support Alliance moving their second side into D3.
                  1. Watson: I approve.
                    1. APPROVED – Quins II and Alliance II voluntary relegation to D3.
          6. WD3
            1. San Marcos
            2. Tyler
            3. Alliance – NEW
            4. Denton – NEW
            5. Grand Prairie – NEW
              1. Young: We discussed this above a bit but wanted it reflected in the notes. We’ll determine if these teams are brought into WD2 or do we continue to have a developmental league.
          7. MD4
            1. Denton is being relegated to MD4.
            2. The Reds are requesting the addition of a MD4 side.
            3. Alliance is maintaining its MD4 side, but also playing MD3 and MD2.
            4. DARC is dropping their MD4 side.
            5. Northern Barbarians, Euless and Other Rugby Club (all NEW)
              1. Dodge: We have an agreement with the TRU to do promotion/relegation for MD4. We’ve also been doing the schedule the last few years as a courtesy because it’s easier to keep all the divisions straight. Travis has done a great job for us. I think we just need to discuss the Reds addition as well as the new clubs (granted that they are approved).
              2. Robertson: The Reds want to enter a D4 side because we want to help retention. We’re averaging 177+ players and not all of them are getting matches and so we need to have more games to keep players engaged and also find new players. We would be the only club to our knowledge in the USA that has four sides. 
              3. Dale: I’m 100% behind you on that. I’ve talked to several of your guys last year and their biggest beef was that they couldn’t get games. 
              4. Young: I move we allow the Reds to enter a team into MD4.
              5. Watson: Second.
                1. APPROVED – Reds MD4 side
          8. Posting of 2019-2020 Structures
            1. Dodge: Wendy, can you alert all of the teams of the votes we had tonight.
            2. Young: Yes and when do we want to post results?
            3. Dodge: If you can work on a draft, we can review and have it posted this week.
            4. Young: Sounds good.
      3. Non-Saturday Matches/Referee Resources
        1. Dodge: Ahead of the recent North referee course I informed all of the teams that if teams don’t have active referees on their rosters, they will be given Sunday matches. This is especially true in the North as there are only a few active referees. I’m also engaged with Tim O’Gara, the new TRRA Chair and Shawn Martin on a dual-player track incentive.
          1. Young: The next opportunity for a referee course is in Dallas, Aug 24 and Aug 25 at the TRU Summit
        2. Kolberg: I think we’ve got to come up with a way to shut these coaches up. This is driving away potential referees and active referees. We have to come up with sanctions and things to dissuade this type of abuse.
        3. Dodge: I don’t disagree but this is a bit outside of our jurisdiction. This would fall more under the TRU and the TRU DC. 
        4. Dake: We can come up with a proposal for what we would like to recommend the TRU. 
      4. New Clubs
        1. Per the last TRU Board call, new men’s clubs that are in the process of forming are:
          1. Celina Barbarians (Dallas, TX)
          2. Euless RFC (Dallas, TX)
          3. Other Rugby Club (Austin, TX)
          4. OK United (OKC / Norman)
          5. Denton W (Denton, TX)
          6. Grand Prairie W (Grand Prairie, TX)
            1. Dodge: Just wanted everyone to know about the new clubs, the TRU has to review/approve these first and then we will place them in divisions.
            2. Young: The TRU call is next Monday and we will review then!
            3. Dodge: I recommend that after the TRU call I’ll send out a revised final structure and Travis can start working on the schedule.
            4. Hughes: Yes, I can do that. 
      5. New Business
        1. None
      6. Meeting Adjourned (8:14 PM – Call time was moved up to 7pm)

 

 

          1.  

 

 

        1.  

 

 

  1.  

 

 

              1.  

 

 

          1.