I've heard of this a couple of times as well...but to my knowledge never at a NAH event so I didn't include it. should behavior outside of NAH tournaments be included in our application to play tournaments? those of us that can't go to Canada can still play in the NAH despite an entire country thinking we're a liability hahaha. background screening...
what's a bannable offense according to the NAH ruleset?
?
can someone point me to where in any literature the NAH is given the power to ban/exclude players? I find it hard to believe we would leave it up to the tournament organizer to decide who should attend, or the registration site or the host club...wouldn't that make it an invitational. I only know of a few players that have physically attacked other players and they still play at NAH events...can someone tell me who decides and how!
banning a player from participation - i'd say if you organize a tournament then you have final say- that's just the reality of our current situation. until the NAH starts bankrolling tournaments or having organizers legally agree to a certain set of conditions then decisions like this are ultimately up to the tournament organizer.
i'm not saying that's the ideal way of handling things, but for now this is where we're at...
are you saying the NAH should have the power to ban/exclude players?
Did you get banned Jason? Why are you asking?
I didn't get banned...but my team did from the southeast qualifier because of a dislike of/fear of jared's behavior despite him never having assaulted anybody. so I'm just curious as to who decides these things for future reference.
The organizer answers to no one at this point...couldn't someone just arbitrarily ban players on "personal grounds"? I'm not sure what would even be a bannable offense...assaulting someone?
Of course the final authority rests with the organizer of the tournament. They're the ones with their names on the insurance forms. The organizer is the one who has 'splaining to do if some hot head creates a dangerous environment for everyone else.
If I knew someone played like Ty Cobb - goes in cleats up, either trying to hurt people or accomplishing the same through recklessness - I'd probably ban them from whatever tournament I organize.
tournament organizers have final say, period...what are the guidelines for deeming a player a liability? it can't be just arbitrary, right?
If people ask you to leave the party then you leave the party. If the home owner has to do the asking the you beg forgiveness on the way out.
I'm curious to know if / who claimed "NAH authority?"
southeast organizers...I'm not arguing for an overturn of their decision just trying to figure out who is making these decisions and how these decisions are being made. I don't feel NAH events should be invitationals except geographically.
dealing with Jared and the SEQ has been the responsibility of SEQ organizers.
Our authority comes from "being willing to throw the tournament" and not through NAH.
Jared got in fights at 5 of the last 5 tournaments he went to.
After trying to reach out to Jared about this and having our concerns reinforced,
we decided it was not worth the risk to have his first return to polo be at the SEQ this year.
When Jared is ready to come back to polo, I think everyone will be excited to talk to him about this stuff. We are all reachable via email and facebook, and we play regularly in both Fort Lauderdale and Miami.
...Now, the bigger question is, "what protocol should there be for making/enforcing decisions about players being too much of a liability at tournaments? at pickup? at NAH qualifiers?"
has there been any precedent set for this in other regions?
has there been any precedent set for this in other regions?
talking to Jason, it seems like there has been (or at least could have been)
a fight is when a punch is thrown...not arguing. i have yet to hear of jared punching anyone at a tournament. he's gotten hit with a helmet and punched/shoved by someone smaller than him and did not retaliate. so currently arguing with people is enough to get banned?
eh, the point is that if someone is verbally abusive enough to provoke physical violence, then they should be less verbally abusive. I didn't witness anything besides the Rory incident, but I'd imagine that these folks didn't attack Jared for no reason.
Spitting on someone is assault in all 50 states.
First, I'm not speaking on behalf of NAH,this is simply a personal opinion, however an organizer of an NAH event should have the power to act on what they believe could become a safety issue of said event. With that being said, they should not be able to ban a player on personal grounds or on events that did not take place at an NAH event. The example here is when Chris Simpson got punched at pick up. If an organizer of an NAH event feels like a player should be banned from playing in a sanctioned tournament they should have to petition NAH and explain why this player should be excluded from said event. I agree with you Jason NAH events are not invitationals, there is a registration process and as long as the protocol for registration was followed... I'm curious if Jared is banned for being dick of the week on the Robbie Boards show.
NAH tournament committee's response should be interesting.
Until the NAH starts paying for the injury/liability insurance at these tournaments, there is no way they can compel the tournament organizer to let anyone play whom the organizer thinks is dangerous.
What constitutes dangerous? someone with a criminal record? fought at a non-NAH tournament? fought at pickup? abrasive personalities? Illegal substance convictions?
I'm not a tournament organizer. NAH can try to give rough guidelines, but it's the organizers who will make the call, based on whatever personal criteria they think is relevant.
you know you're talking about an invitational, right? these qualifiers were created to end the invitational aspect and foster competitiveness over hanging out with your bro's. your talent should be what's important not your people skills.
No, I'm not talking exclusively about invitationals. I am referring to the fact that organizer liability supersedes the will of any governing body, whether it is ESPI or NA's. Until the governing body is willing to assume that liability, this will always be the case.
In this future this notion may have to be considered in the bidding process by cities who wish to host NAH tournaments. If you're not comfortable hosting a bunch of rowdy assholes, then you don't get awarded the tournament.
coach, always so rational...
exactly, how can we can ban people for their behavior outside of NAH events? who decides what's unacceptable and how much of your life outside of the NAH gets judged?
I think it's pretty clear, the people who decide are the people who are potentially held liable. It is arbitrary, but they are doing this on their own dime and their own risk. It certainly does leave open potential for someone to be banned for personal reasons.
As ddub said, the important question is "what protocol should there be for making/enforcing decisions about players being too much of a liability at tournaments? at pickup? at NAH qualifiers?"
However the reality of it is, as long as the responsibility to host is local, this type of decision will be local, and it's likely that the criteria of this type of decision will be at least somewhat arbitrary. Unless of course you have some better alternate idea, in which case I'm sure everyone would love to hear it.
That is, as long as you don't start making 90 threads all about the same thing when the issue is already being civilly discussed in threads you've already made. That type of thing really makes people just not care what you have to say.
I know of one instance where someone got knocked out at a NAH event and the offensive player still continues to play at any tourney he wants. This is a precedent that has been set. Therefore, Being that I have NEVER assualted anyone with physical violence, I should be allowed to play. The FACTS are there. All of your opinions are null and void. They mean nothing and honestly, I do not care. I WILL play polo, and you will be hard pressed to stop me.
Well, we see your attitude has gotten better at least.
All I can think of when I read his post is this photo.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| somebody-stop-me-5675_preview.jpg | 29.74 KB |
How can you say my opinion is null and void?
I got eleven x2's. The facts are there.
i was hoping for an official response from our elected nah representation.
i vehemently disagree with the exclusion of any player in any nah qualifer with out a reasonable explanation of the grounds of the exclusion. simply stating he's a dick, im paying the insurance bill and this is out of pocket blah blah blah is bull shit.
@ secondary alex what insurance company are you using cause i've never been able to find anything available but third party liability. no players covered ever as far as i can find. having a x 11 thing that is now not available is another source of argument.
@ everyone this is not your tournament when it comes to nah events they are "our" tournaments. thats why this whole joint started in the first place.
@ seq organizers if nah is behind you then i will support it (thats why we voted in reps) however i dont feel because "we are willing to throw this tourney" is a valid excuse to justify your authority? again this is our thing! put that crap on nah for putting the cart before the horse. ( a thread for future deletion)
there is so much more but im afraid i might cry in front of pieter and pieters girlfriend hates it when i cry in front of pieter
bullshit, what has NAH done to provide any input that would trump the opinion and belief of local organizers. $ talks.
Lazy answer fails to account for thousands, maybe tens of thousands of hours put into bike polo by NAH volunteers over the past couple of years. That's money, or capital at least. At this point in the sport's development, it's more like "effort talks", cause nobody has any $ and yet things still get done. Just not exactly what Dillman would do.
Lazy answer fails to account for thousands, maybe tens of thousands of hours put into bike polo by NAH volunteers over the past couple of years. That's money, or capital at least. At this point in the sport's development, it's more like "effort talks", cause nobody has any $ and yet things still get done. Just not exactly what Dillman would do.
While also failing to distinguish the amount of 'capital' polo people, NAH or not, have put in over the past couple years. Now I'm (nor most other people) no elected official but I'd like to think the time, energy, thought, money, blah blah blah I've put (we've) in and will or would be putting in to host any sort of tournament would allow me (and us) the ability to tell one person or another to fuck right off.
wow, cool tourney, bro...I wonder who's "invited"? dedication, skill and team chemistry should get you to the NAs not f-ing politics! (comment censored to appease current administration)
That would be a good point if not for the fact that pretty much EVERYONE has put their time in. What makes you think that your time is so much more important? The process exists for a reason, cowboy. Telling people to "fuck right off" sounds great and all, but it's no way to build much of anything. Can't say I agree with everything NAH does. Still need to have them around calling the shots.
My only point in all of this is local tournament organizer should have the final say on most of the tournament. (Than maybe there could be a appeal or something.) I think in this current situation if the polo world was outraged maybe some people would be willing to change their mind. You're incorrectly reading what I'm saying and arguing things I'm not. I actually like you believe no ones time matter more than others so why should an nah member be able to tell a local organizer they must allow a player?
A Canadian coming down on the side of law and order, but...
If it's a qualifier or NAs, then it has to be consistent in order to be fair. The only way to do that is to have a governing body (who is not an "NAH member", but rather the whole organization of elected representatives) make a blanket policy. This is a basic thing in all other organized sports I can think of, don't see why it should be any different here.
X2
liability doesn't cover individual players
NAH sanctioned tournaments are not invitational
apparently the SEQ organizers have NAH support...ruling has been made but how and why exactly?
I share your frustration...I don't like where this kind of clandestine beauracracy has our sport heading...fines for arbitrarily inappropriate outfits, language, behavior, etc...or applications to play tournaments including our public records?!?! don't throw a NAH tournament if you aren't willing to host NAH players...throw an invitational, period.
There is NO SIDE to their argument. You can not ban somone based on opinion. It is no less of a "liability" than HALF of bike polo players out there. What about convicted felons, people who have actually assaulted other people, tax evaders, DUI offenders, child molesters, alcoholics, drug addicts, murderers, and so on. If you want to fucking ban me. You better start getting background checks on all other mother fuckers in this "sport" because I am clean as a fucking whistle. I am not going to stand for this. I won't have my polo civil liberties infringed upon in MY OWN FUCKING TOWN. Danny is from Tallahasse, Kei is from Georgia, and whoever the fuck is throwing this tournement I don't even know. I started Bike polo in south Florida, Therefore, there would BE no tournement down here had the events that I personally put into motion years ago never happens. SUCK ON THAT BIG FAT DICK YOU PASSIVE AGGRESSIVE NO LIFE HAVING HIPSTER BEER GUZZLING MIDDLE AGED FUCKING NOBODIES.
(ps. i'm not even mad, i just like spitting like a sailor in public forum) hahahahahahahahahahha
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=disease%20spread%20by%20saliva&so...
Now stop fucking wasting everyones fucking time Man the fuck up to what you have done , take a fucking year out and come back the man I know and love.
jared, bitches are gonna be bitches forever.
This is not actually true. ..................You can't fix stoopid .Now dat word
Wow , that's the most clear ,concise comment I have ever seen you post ......evvvva.
At last articulatiracy from Daniel, phew! This really is next level shit.
shut up, ya'old sonnavvabitch!
And yeah i may be at beer point, but at least it aint game over for me yet.
(read this with a skip in your step and a pounding in your chest . I love my 292 pounds of polo)
Wow , that's the most clear ,concise comment I have ever seen you post ......evvvva.
At last articulatiracy from Daniel, phew! This really is next level shit.
I don't know why, this whole board brings some fuckin' highly constructive stuffs this last months... (thread about rules with menace, this, etc...).
This is great.
(stream of consciousness judge at risk)
train wreck everyone wants to see the gore now the kinetics done - ripped its flesh apart another heavy machine rests for scrap thats killed all it will pillory the guy that works to keep this idea flow identifis with that somehow if a body catcha body comin through the rye? hold on let live maybe there's fame that'll last through internets that's it does a culture last I didn't read catcher at school supposed to kipped the whole thing didn't matter read it when posted by poo read it too
I just want to say that the apology is cool. I hope we can keep this thing together. POLO IS FUCKING FUN.
Here's some refs. Happy to share more. I read Catcher in the Rye last year because it was posted in a shit fest train wreck LOBP thread. Great read. I hope that polo survives is my basic point. I mainly love it. Seriously. And thanks for asking so nicely.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_humiliation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comin%27_Thro%27_the_Rye
Don't forget off the court fluid exchanges!
Minneapolis Bike Polo dot Com