Arbitrator Rules in Favor of US Youth Soccer and MYSA
On Monday, the arbitrator assigned to the complicated grievance filed by US Club Soccer, American Youth Soccer Organization (AYSO) and three of its associated clubs, ruled in favor of US Youth Soccer and five of their state organizations.
The grievance, which was filed in August and reported here, challenged what the filing parties felt were discriminatory practices in treating US Club Soccer teams differently than teams from USYS state associations on issues that include: denial of insurance coverage for USYS teams attending a US Club Soccer sanctioned tournament; denial of a team’s use of their USYS player cards, rosters, etc. when attending a US Club Soccer sanctioned tournament; and charging US Club Soccer teams an extra insurance fee for playing in a USYS sanctioned tournament.
The decision stated: “The Arbitrator finds nothing in the USSF bylaws, policies, or resolutions to support the proposition that Organization Members must afford the same benefits to their players or teams when participating in another organization’s activities as apply when the player or team is playing within their own organization.”
MYSA has recently agreed to sanction all 2010 National Sports Center (NSC) Tournaments but for one in which NSC did not request sanctioning. This olive branch extended by both the NSC and MYSA made part of the decision “inapplicable” according to a statement by the Wisconsin Youth Soccer Association (WYSA):
A number of the claims alleged in the grievance also focused on events related to the 2009 USA Cup at the National Sports Center in Blaine, Minnesota, and actions of the Minnesota Youth Soccer Association, the North Dakota Youth Soccer Association, and the Wisconsin Youth Soccer Association. The arbitrator made certain rulings that only applied if the 2010 USA Cup is not sanctioned by a US Youth Soccer State Association, but since the 2010 USA Cup applied for and was approved by the MYSA, those provisions of the arbitrator’s order are inapplicable. At the same time, the arbitrator specifically held that US Club Soccer and AYSO had not proven that Wisconsin’s, Minnesota’s or North Dakota’s policies violated any applicable Federation rules, and the challenges to the policies of those State Associations were all denied.
The Arbitrator did take exception with a statement in a letter from WYSA president Peter Mariahazy. The ruling stated that the Wisconsin Youth Soccer executive should issue a communication to its members clarifying the decisions ruled on by the arbitrator. According to an apology letter posted yesterday by Mariahazy, he had sent an email to the organization’s members last July which stated several inaccuracies. Mariahazy had said that its member clubs could not participate in the Schwan’s USA Cup, which was not true. “It is important for WYSA to make it clear to all of its members that they are completely free to participate in any games, events or activities,” said Mariahazy in his apology letter. “The policies and insurance policies of WYSA do not have the intent or the effect of prohibiting any WYSA teams from participating in any non-US Youth Soccer activities.”
Madison Soccer Central is reporting that a spokesperson for US Club Soccer issued a statement to its members in which it said it was “generally disappointed” with the decision and that the group was considering appealing the decision to the U.S. Soccer Federation Board of Directors, which it has the right to do within 10 days.
“We want to emphasize that US Club Soccer will continue to follow the (principles) on which it was founded, which include allowing youth soccer players and their clubs to compete freely and easily in any USSF-sanctioned open competition with full membership rights and insurance coverage,” the US Club Soccer statement concluded. “We are disappointed that USYS and some of its state associations continue to feel that the best way to ‘compete’ is to make playing soccer more difficult and more expensive for youth soccer players. We commend the USYS states that have not employed such tactics, and will continue to lobby the USSF and the other states to do the right thing.”
Candace Daley, Executive Director MYSA, talked to IMS on Wednesday but said she preferred to not make a comment about the ruling at this time. She did state that she would be meeting with President Bob Poretti last night and a statement will be issued to its members and posted on the MYSA website on Thursday.
Steven Olson, COO of the NSC, also declined comment at this time but said he may have a comment in the near future. Olson did optimistically reemphasize that MYSA has agreed to sanction the Schawn’s USA Cup for 2010.
Comments are closed.
Thankfully, common sense prevailed on the part of the arbitrator. The grievance itself made several false claims, and was a desperate attempt to change rules through a complaint process instead of through normal governing.
I’m even more thankful that common sense is prevailing by MYSA and NSC working together again for the betterment of soccer in the state.
Right now USYS has the upper hand since they are more established in the US, but I predict that US Club will grow in popularity and won’t have to deal with USYS red tape anymore.
This all originally rooted from scheduling conflicts between MYSA and the NSC during the USA Cup and Minnesota State Tournament. It just grew into this “You can’t tell me what to do” attitude on both parts when the groups couldn’t come to an agreement. Was the arbitrator correct, yes, however the NSC is right to point out that this will have a negative on youth player development as it will become far to expensive for parents/guardians to afford insurance for multiple leagues and tournaments. I might just put my kids in the hispanic rec leagues that are cheaper and quickly are becoming larger and more competitive in my area. Best of all, they are ran by people who actually played the game.
You guys don’t think that MYSA’s attitude of the last 2 years towards NSC had anything to do with the Thunder’s relationship with NSC and the Thunder Academy? It had EVERYTHING to do with that. It closed eyes and ears at MYSA to logic and possible compromise. And this ALL stems back to certain MYSA leadership feeling slighted that the Thunder guys approached then-out-going state director of coaching Ian Barker and other club DOCs for insight on building MTA, rather than approaching the “knowledgeable and experienced” MYSA office staff.
MYSA did not only not support pro soccer in MN the last 2 years, they actively worked against the organization by limiting promotional efforts through MYSA membership. It was mentioned before that in time all the vindictive nonsense stemming from the state offices under the current MYSA regime would be seen through, and MYSA actions of late are testament to that fact. Hopefully the new team will help many decision makers in this state grow up… for the good of the players and the game.
Agree w/Semi as it’s not hard to connect the dots.
When the Thunder was alive and before the alliance with what was then Bangu Tsunami, MYSA was very supportive of both the professional team and NSC.
When BT became MTA and aligned with the Thunder there was little if any support (if not obstacles placed) for the professional team and NSC.
Thunder now dead – new team in place (not aligned with MTA) and suddenly MYSA has a tremendous spirit of cooperation.
Not saying MYSA was right or wrong in their decisions, but anyone could see through this smokescreen.
I am so glad they ruled this way. How arrogant is US Club Soccer to think that the USYSA should support them, when in fact they chose to do their own thing and their members do not contribute a dime to the USYSA or the MYSA. If I remember correctly, US Club soccer was founded because they didn’t like the way things were being handled by the USYSA, and now they want to have the same benefits as the teams that actually contribute. What a joke. That’s fine, go do your own thing, but then you need to actually do your OWN thing. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.
As far as the Thunder/MYSA fiasco goes, both parties are to blame. I’m not sure why everyone expected the MYSA to bend over backwards to support the Thunder when they were getting nothing in return. The MYSA’s responsibilities are to the kids that play soccer in this state. It is not their responsibility to make sure that a for-profit professional team survives. Especially when the Thunder was affiliated with an organization that predominantly supported US Club soccer and was, in essence, competing with the membership base of the MYSA. On the other hand, the MYSA could have made a better effort to mediate the matter. Obviously, having a pro team in this state is a benefit for all of us who love this sport.
I grow so unbelievably tired of all the factions that are out there and how horribly we all work together. Instead of running to US Club soccer, maybe these teams should work to try and better the organizations that are here at home working for the kids in this state. These coaches that are so concerned with Minnesota’s soccer image on a national level need to get their priorities straight. How about working to better things here at home, because 99% of the kids playing soccer in this state are not going to benefit from the fact that a few additional scouts may take a bit more interest in the “product” that this state produces. The MYSA has a responsibility to all of the kids playing soccer in this state, not just the top .1% that will get a scholarship.
It’s time that we all came together, put our differences aside, and work towards a common goal. We need to be humble, take a step back from our strong opinions, and figure out how we can best accommodate ALL of the players in this state. It’s not about the Thunder, the MYSA, the NSC, US Club Soccer or any other entity that relies on these kids in order to exist. It’s about the KIDS!
I agree with BQ that it’s nice to see a bit of cooperation between NSC and MYSA, after an embarrassing period where overgrown adult egos got in the way of their mission which is to promote and grow the game.
As far as what Ryan posted: I agree with some of it (especially the part about how “MYSA has a responsibility to all of the kids playing soccer in this state”). Remember, though, that they have a responsibility to that “top .1%” as well. All MTA was/is trying to do is provide another option for players who want to compete at the highest level possible (an option, btw, that MYSA’s own governing body — US Soccer — would like more clubs in our country to try to emulate in order to raise the level of play in our country). While MTA is not perfect by any means, MYSA seems to be obsessed with the idea of “community clubs” to the detriment of “elite” clubs. That’s a reasonable perception, at least. Either that, or they had an axe to grind with some of the individuals who were involved with running MTA. Either way, their mission of growing and improving the game seemed to take a backseat due to petty BS (and those overgrown adult egos I mentioned above).
Good point M.
I also agree with part of what Ryan says, namely the last paragraph. However, when you say the MYSA has a responsibility to the kids in this state (which I agree with 100%), then to also say that MYSA should not work to support the pro team is contradictory. Supporting professional soccer in MN IS supporting the kids. It’s about role models, inspiration and aspirations to someday play professionally regardless of the likelihood that even comes to fruition, excitement that pro soccer brings to the area, and development for both coaches and players alike who have the opportunity to watch professional soccer live.
THAT is why MYSA leadership is suspect in my eyes. They either don’t see the benefit, or they chose to ignore the benefit due to selfish, spiteful reasons (MTA). Whichever way it is, it doesn’t cast a good light on the decision makers behind this.
Hopefully we all get back to putting the kids first, after all, isn’t that what youth soccer is all about?
I am surprised. However, I think it goes to show that this is why there is a process. Quite frankly, if this matter would move on and into the courts, I would not give MYSA a chance of prevailing on the ultimate issue.
I am also shocked a decision was issued as the dispute was essentially moot with the MYSA sanacitoning-there may have been some other issues. I would like to expand on this from a legal sense, but this is not the proper forum. In the end, kids will get to play soccer—and that is what it is all about!
The fact remains that the Thunder was a for-profit entity, and although their existence was great for the youth of this state, a line has to be drawn somewhere. MYSA did NOT have an obligation or responsibility to promote that team. There are many for-profit entities in this state that are great for youth soccer players; whether it be indoor facilities, training programs, stores, clubs or whatever. But it is unrealistic to think that the MYSA should blindly support them all even though they all have their benefits when it comes to youth soccer. It’s simply not realistic.
Also, I don’t think that I implied in any way that the top .1% should not be given other options or have additional opportunities. My issue is with the coaches who believe that the only kids worth spending their time on are in that upper echelon and who believe that the other 99.9% are not worth their time. That being said, I know that the vast majority of coaches out there do not fit this description. I would be the first to admit that those individuals are few and far between. But it also seems like those individuals are the ones that tend to be the catalysts to much of the fighting that occurs in this state and I am simply tired of it. I have absolutely nothing against US Club Soccer and what it offers, but to think they are owed something by the USYSA or MYSA is simply absurd considering they give nothing back to those organizations. The membership of the MYSA is required to pay, in order to receive coverage in sanctioned events. They do so in the form of their dues paid each season. Why should US Club Soccer be given the same benefits without contributing? That simply does not make sense.
I am optimistic that the various soccer entities in this state are really beginning to work together. I am seeing it happen on numerous levels. I just hope that it continues in that direction and that everyone can keep their eye on what is truly important.
The bottom line is MYSA got very territorial when it came to the kids. I witnessed on numorous occasions local MYSA clubs not letting players go to MTA and parents not allowed to coach in a MYSA club because of a suspected affiliation with MTA. They were afraid the kids would get recruited away. Obviously, these kids wanted something more. Something that MYSA was not providing for these kids. So to say that MYSA has a responsibilty to “all” of the kids playing soccer in this state is not entirely true. Lets face it, USYS and MYSA and WYSA and whatever wants it all, the cake, the frosting, the calories and the plate too.
If that is in fact happening, then that sounds like a club issue, not so much an MYSA issue. I would absolutely not condone those types of actions. I support MTA’s mission and believe that they do a lot of good for the players that want to reach another level, however, I am not okay with one club going out of their way to pull players from another club. It is simply not ethical. If White Bear was doing that to Mahtomedi or Lakeville was doing that to Eden Prairie, nobody would believe that to be acceptable. However, for some reason, MTA gets away with it under the guise that they are the only club capable of offering a higher level of training or exposure. Let me be very clear here, I fully support MTA and what they do. I pride myself on not taking sides in this state and trying to stay as unbiased as possible. I don’t support the MYSA over the Thunder or the NSC over the MYSA or Community Clubs over Private Clubs. I am on the outside looking in and I try to stay as objective as possible. I am not affiliated in any way with any of the aformentioned entities, so I don’t have any reason what-so-ever to take sides. Nobody is without guilt, and that includes the MYSA, MTA, NSC, the Thunder, US Club Soccer, etc., etc. This, of course, includes me. I am in no way saying that I have all the answers, and obviously, these are simply my opinions for what they are worth.
Recruiting happens in youth soccer, it’s just new to Minnesota youth clubs. To say it is unethical is too harsh.
It’s the way the correctly selected player moves on that counts. If the players is selected by a small and well staffed club team that provides regional or national exposure for the developing player, then that is a win-win even for the club that originally developed and lost the player.
But, when every player is told they need to be with just one entity and they then end up playing the same other teams in the same district league as they were in before, and are being training nearly the same way for a much higher expense, then the player is not really being exposed to better competition.
Unethical probably was a poor choice of words. I guess it comes down to how the individual is selected. More and more I’ve seen the recruiting of players who are not exceptional, which leads me to believe that private clubs, not just MTA, are simply trying to pad their revenue. I’ve also witnessed exceptional players who were left out because they couldn’t afford the higher costs associated with clubs such as MTA. I know that MTA offers scholarships to some, but in my experience, those have been reserved for the truly exceptional athletes. Even when partial scholarships are offered, the fees are still generally higher than most clubs, making it difficult for many. I have had this discussion with many of my friends who coach with MTA, and they definitely disagree with me on certain aspects, but have also admitted to others. The coaches of MTA are definitely a devoted group and are great at what they do. But I also look at models like MU that have done a fantastic job of offering high level training to those within the club who would like it, while at the same time keeping their costs down. I guess the way I can best summarize my thoughts on this matter is to simply say that I believe their is a difference between recruiting and offering an alternative. I have seen many players who were getting exactly what they wanted from their existing club until they were convinced that they were missing out by someone representing a private club. That just strikes me as salesmanship and I really don’t agree that this is the way we should be going about it. There is more to youth athletics than simply securing a scholarship. If a child is happy where they are, I don’t think it is right to convince that child, or parents, that they are not achieving their full potential. Ultimately, it’s still just a game.
The biggest difference in the cost between most community clubs and clubs like MTA are the winter training expenses and travel costs associated with tournaments.
Top coaches with strong clubs and better teams all earn a fairly similar amount from what I’ve heard over the past 2-3 years. The main difference is the cost of dome time and travel compared to teams that don’t train as often or travel as extensively.
The choice comes down to the player and parent and what they want out of a team.