jonriv wrote:This thread has taken some interesting twist and has provide some interesting ideas.
The first thing I would like to suggest is that we drop the "inferior team" argument. Although by excluding many of the players that may or may not be excluded by ASA's new policy may produce a team that my not be as good as it could be- the team will still be far superior that it's opponents.
The real arguments are these:
1) Does ASA have the legal right to impose these rules?
2) Should ASA impose these rules?
I think the answer to question 1 is probably yes(unfortunately)
The answer to question 2 is HELL NO.
It was dumb on many fronts for ASA's decision. Bad PR, poor sportsmanship and making a selection process that is so exclusive it excludes possible candidate even from ASA registered teams. Dumb, Dumb, Dumb......
but, i would like to know how many HB posters have emailed the guy from ASA? How many cared about NSA, PONY, USSSA etc prior to this??
I like the idea of basing invitations on college coach recommendation. They get to see all of the top players and certainly could supply an ample number of quite qualified candidates. Poll 100 college coaches and ask for their top 5- pitchers, catchers, infield and outfield- pretty sure we could find a team from that.
As far as PGF forming an all-star to compete- do they have the financial ability to field and send a junior team. Does the ISF allow for two teams(or a way to usurp a team) from the same country?- Perhaps a team from the Republic of California or the Republic of Texas? Anyone know what ISF's policies are.
Also- why would the USOC even care about softball now- since it is not an olympic sport.
ASA needs to change their policy and have one that opens invites to a greater pool of qualified players
You cannot drop the argument that it will create an inferior team. That is basis why ASA looks stupid and will be the undoing of ASA being involved in these decisions. Pulling that off the table will lead them to the predicted posts of surprise, where they claim "no one let them know they were not happy", or "ASA thought they were doing what was best". You are not helping ASA that much with this this twisty spinny approach.
Your last statement is the relevant statement, except I would change it in one way. Whomever runs the JNT better do it in a way that results in the best possible team, or they should be very happy when someone else steps in runs it in a fashion that results in the best possible team. Period, end of story.