Message board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 3 members: Andy215, Hitting10th, TABLE SETTER 11; 69 anonymousDetails for gary thorsen
Real name:
Location:
,
Division:
Messages posted by gary thorsen »Message board home »Start a new discussion
| April 30, 2007 gary thorsen | Topic: Rules of the game Discussion: Steve Imlay suspension Bob the point is reinstatement Steve Imlay. He and all of the Travel Lodge players were all led to believe that our roster was legal. If there would have been any question which there wasn't of his eligibility Steve would have not been allowed to play period. Rules are made for good reasons and must be enforced. Since it seems that we are all at fault based on the SSWC ruling my vote would be to take the championship away give it to RUTH and reinstate Steve. Its only a game. |
| April 28, 2007 gary thorsen | Topic: Rules of the game Discussion: Steve Imlay suspension I played with Steve for the first time in Fort Meyers and it was clear to me that he is a individual of high integrety on and off the field. He also discussed with me the the approval he received from senior softball. He would have never played without that conversation with senior softball. We all know the story and we understand the rule. After Travel Lodge played Ruth in the championship of the winners bracket and beat them that is when the protest should have been lodged. Instead Ruth waits and lodges the protest after playing Travel Lodge 2 more times with Ruth winning the 1st game and Travel Lodge winning the IF game to win the Championship. MY QUESTIONS: 1. Ruth players know Steve why not protest immediately not till after you loose the tournament? 2. Its a fact Steve did talk to a Senior Softball Official and was in his mind given the ok to play 3. I thought the rule is suspension of the player, coach, and the stripping of the title, why did only the suspension occur? At worst its a misunderstanding reverse the suspension. Life is too short |
