NEFA DISCussion

So we can avoid some issues that arose last year towards the end of the season, I would like to get discussion on this topic now.

Here is an example.

This weekend Burgess travels to Borderland, both team's will have their woman present. However Burgess is likely to have somewhere between 15-16 of their roster and Borderland will have 12-14, according to pre-challenge discussions.

I want to get a consensus on how women will be treated during the season this year. I don't want to see another situation like the end of the season last year, where 2 of my players were forced not to qualify, b/c one team decided to sit 2 of their remaining players instead of putting a mixed group out on the course vs. a male/male combo.

Thoughts? I will be treating Sarah as a TEAM MEMBER this year, as I did last year, against Maine she played mixed with Kary Buckley against Dore/Conant.

Thoughts? Concerns? Please chime in.

Thank god for this forum this year as well. We can avoid alot of the venom that was sprayed around last year.

Our female player (Kylie Hoke) is treated just like any other member of the team. I always make a point to discuss the plan for each team's female player before the match so there isn't any funny business we have had challenges where we agreed that the ladies play each other in match play. Girl vs guy, girl vs girl all fine with me as long as everyone knows the plan.

As far as the numbers question. Does everyone who is at the challenge and able to play have to play, I really think they should unless numbers don't work out (odd number of players one team with more than the other)? The min number is 8. What I'm getting at is.... say a team is up 16-0 (or whatever score it may be) after singles, can that team then only put out 4 doubles teams for the doubles round insuring a win by limiting the ammnt of pts the other team can win in the doubles round.

If the teams agree to play the women against each other for singles before the challenge, then I think that should be what goes down at the challenge. For doubles, anything goes in terms of pairings. If there are different numbers of players, I think that also needs to be discussed before the matches begin. If the team with the fewer number of players brings an odd number, one person should sit so that the teams are even. Then the singles and doubles will be worth the same.

Matt DeAngelis wrote:If the teams agree to play the women against each other for singles before the challenge, then I think that should be what goes down at the challenge. For doubles, anything goes in terms of pairings. If there are different numbers of players, I think that also needs to be discussed before the matches begin. If the team with the fewer number of players brings an odd number, one person should sit so that the teams are even. Then the singles and doubles will be worth the same.

I agree with this 100%.

I think Girl v. Girl in singles is implied.

Just one other thing, I think it should be referred to as Girl on Girl as opposed to Girl vs Girl.

Matt DeAngelis wrote:Just one other thing, I think it should be referred to as Girl on Girl as opposed to Girl vs Girl.

And Borderland will do the thing I wanted to avoid.. Nice.

I agree the team with fewer players should not be allowed to sit players. Not in singles and not in doubles -- except in the case of an odd number of players in doubles where 1 player must sit (or, if agreed, play singles for 1 point).

For example, a team bringing 11 players should not be allowed to play 11 in singles and only 8 in doubles.

While players may "volunteer" to sit for the "good of the team", we're really all involved because we want to play.

The team bringing the most players should not be penalized and need to sit even more players than were forced to sit in the first round.

============

I'm surprised this even needs to be discussed, but if others do not agree, please advise.

Question: Team A has more players than Team B, but both teams bring their female players.

Team A needs to sit player(s). Can they elect to sit their female player during singles? Doubles?

I'd like to think that everyone from Team A would get to play at least 1 round, but the players that sit each round is an open decision.

Yeah you can sit the woman. I think the common thought is the two woman play against each other in singles, and anything goes in doubles. Ultimately it's up to each captain as there's no rule or anything telling you how to play your players.

So does the BLAND2 team need to add a female prior to playing?

stevend wrote:So does the BLAND2 team need to add a female prior to playing?

me thinks it is/was Lee Hovestadt...

Lee is on our team...however due to prior constraints was unable to play this past weekend and cannot play this upcoming one either. It is a situation I am trying hard to fix, looking for an alternate female for the team.

My question is, does the one female player need to play in at least three matches to qualify for finals? Or is it a combination of female players? Obviously I would prefer the former, but wondering as I am getting closer to our second of five matches. Not trying to squirm out...just trying to make the best of a sticky situation.

It seems as though there was no answer to the penalty, besides not having a full roster...how is this going to affect my team as we move forward, say...finals??

It's the combo of woman that need to play in 3 different challenges.

The penalty will be a few strokes or something. We'll discuss it if it comes up.

Todd Lapham wrote:It's the combo of woman that need to play in 3 different challenges.

The penalty will be a few strokes or something. We'll discuss it if it comes up.

When I suggested additional (off roster) women be allowed, I was still thinking every player (including women) need to make 3 challenges to qualify for Finals.

Are you saying you could play 3 different women in 3 challenges, no woman in 2 challenges, and still "qualify" any of those 3 women? That's a pretty low bar.

Not quite. If you play a woman 3 times, then any woman could play a round at finals, not all of them.

So play 3 different women in 3 of 5 challenges and qualify to play any woman in Finals? Does anyone have Des Reading's phone number? ; )

I realize it's already mid season, but every player (woman included) should need to play in 3 challenges to qualify for finals.

I thought the extra (off-roster) women were simply meant to fill in the gaps if the primary roster woman could not make it.

From what I've seen so far, most teams' primary/roster woman will make a minimum 3 challenges anyway.

Haha I have her number, Burgess is rolling with Liz Carr.

I meant any of the woman that have played in a challenge.

I got the Clemson connection, another Sarah.... Stanhope.

I keep seeing challenges that have no girl on girl action. I thought it was made pretty clear that we all had to have a girl at the challenges.
I am calling [bleep] here, and I ain't too happy. I say we make the penalty severe and retroactive. Like forfeits for anyone not bringing at least one girl to every challenge. Or no invite to finals, or both!

How say you captains and commish?

I say no penalty.

Some teams had a tough enough time getting 1 woman.

Now, trying to tell that 1 women to be at every challenge?

yeah, no.

Thats a cop out. Any team that needs a girl let me know and you will have one at your next challenge. The rule is already in place, we are now in the penalty phase of the discussion.

they'd be willing to travel 3 hours to play with a bunch of dudes they don't know

Girl must be there or you take an auto loss IMO

unless both teams have no girl there

It was made a rule but never discussed on what happens if no girl...so kinda hard to say that now...

Sarah Alves is treated like any other player on my team.

She'll play in 3 challenges this year, whether or not the other team has a girl present.

Why don't teams treat their women in the same fashion? I don't get it.

After making EVERY challenge this year, our lady cannot make Finals on 4/9.

Can we reschedule Finals? ; )