Topic: Nassau County Championship Abomination

Then Rose better get off her butt and make it clear exactly which rules are being followed, and then maybe test the coaches prior to the season.

icoach - guess what? instead of trying to say that I cant comprehend simple things why dont you get your facts straight? obviously as former gns coach you would have all those opinions. im NOT a lawyer, im just pointing out the obvious and my obvious was 100% factual especially since gns didnt pay you, they just had you on their side all along.

guess what? LIKE I SAID EARLIER in both forums, NCAA rules did not apply Saturday, and if you think they did then ask ahletic directors and get back to me.  

also, your forum inputs are not consistent and you sound like a hypocrite so just stop.

im not against gns fencers like i also noted earlier i think GC and GNS have hardworking fencers and I wish them all luck. stop tryin to give a million excuses for something everyone else in the world can see obviously except you and gns coaches. if its everyone against 3, most likely its your point of views in flaw not the other hundreds. (again, common sense)

The issue of the roster not being handed in at Thursday's coaching meeting was brought up, and resolved. Teams are to check in their team the morning of the tournament, and hand in their final rosters.  

The issue of GNS's technical #1 fencing in the #2 slot and vice versa, is not and was not an issue. Multiple other teams made the same type of changes at the tournament.  It is part of the format, and every coach was made aware of the pros and cons of making those type of changes, and that it is at their sole discretion. 

The NO individuals tournament is being worked on by myself, Section VIII, and some other coaches with a tentative date of 2/24.  I do not agree with not fencing the individuals after the team round, but that is the decision that was made.  In the long run, I don't think it really makes a difference, as long as it is done.

The issue of GNS/Cliff Fishler's "attempt" to cheat is bogus.  I am unaware if it was brought up before the bout started or before Mr. Hong left the strip.  Was the complaint an afterthought?  I am unsure.  What I do know is that the Head of Referees (Brian Libert) who was refereeing that bout did not see the action as an attempt to cheat.  So, no matter what anyone else thinks, there was no penalty given. Personally I think the suggestion of an "attempt" to cheat is absurd.  As a coach, I never would have made that suggestion based off of the circumstances especially about a team who as always had the respect of their peers (remember, GNS was given the team sportsmanship award in 2008, and GC was awarded it this year.  I believe both teams show outstanding sportsmanship, and people should be ashamed to think that members of either team would try and "cheat" the other).

The debate on who is going to the LICs was apparently addressed at the tournament.  I am told that Interim President, Mike Kreidman of GC stated that both GNS and GC had a tied margin of victory between their 2 dual season meets, so it was decided that they would fence-off.  I am truly unaware of who made the final decision or how it was made.  I was NOT involved in that process.  I was under the impression that the fence-off was being to completion as each round during the day was.  Another coach I spoke with was under the same impression, but then all of a sudden we were told it was just the A fencers.  Again,  I do not know who made this final decision.  I was told it was Mike Kreidman, but I have no facts to support that statement.  Honestly, as teams started complaining, leaving, and arguing about what should be done, the bout committee, officials, and coaches were very overwhelmed.  Everyone was trying to be efficient, but at that point there was some chaos and unclear decisions were made.  I believe that GNS defeated GC by a larger margin of victory during the season.  Again, I am told that Mike Kreidman stated they have even margins of victory and that is why they had to fence off.  So, if in fact GNS had a larger margin of victory or vice versa, that would have decided the winner and a fence-off would have never ensued.  Either way, those were the decisions that were made, and the results that were reported at the conclusion of the day, so I am told, were not protested.  I believe a protest must be filed immediately (the same day as the event).  I am told by the section that none was filed, the results stand, and GNS fenced Ward Melville tonight.  If the Garden City coaches feel that there was an injustice, they should have filed a protest.  I find it hard to see how Mike could file a protest, considering I believe that he made the decision on how to come up with the results.  Again, this is only my understanding of what happened.

The other referees were great.  The venue was great.  The kids were great.  I honestly believe the tournament was a success with some obvious glitches.  Those who ran a tournament of this size should be praised for their hard work and efforts.  Honestly, if you have never run a tournament yourself, keep your mouth shut.  It is extremely difficult to do, and over all, a good job was done.  It would have been nice if more coaches were helpful instead of only complaining and working against everyone else.

 I hope that some of you who will always be looking for some way to complain, will finally look at the big picture.  We are here to promote the growth of our athletes and our sport.  Unfortunately, the behavior of many coaches and parents was the disgrace to the county, not the tournament or the athletes.  The coaches association, under my direction, as President, for the past 3.5 years has done nothing but try and foster the growth and quality of fencing in Nassau County.  We have tried to do what is best for the sport and athletes, and I am personally offended when someone makes the opposite statement.  As a former coach, I know that I have always tried to put my students before anything else.  I have worked extremely hard to help Nassau County grow to where it is.  I have spend hundreds of hours and thousands of my own dollars to give the best program to the students, and I am extremely insulted and offended in some of the statements that were made.  If you think change needs to be made, take your coaching courses and apply for a job.

 Congratulations to ALL of the teams, coaches and athletes on your achievements throughout this season.  I am so very proud of all you have done.  Seniors, good luck in all that you do.  Those fencers who will return next season, I'll see you then!

I really don;t want to waste any more time with this.  At the first coaches meeting of the season, the coaches were given a handbook of rules and guidelines.  The coaches were told that we were following the NCAA rules, and to make that change in their handbooks.  So, as agreed at the first coaches meeting, we were to follow NCAA rules this season.  There was not a single athletic director at that coaches meeting, so they would not necessarily know entirely what was discussed or voted on.  You can say whatever you want with my connection to GNS as a former coach, but I believe most people who know me feel I am fair and not biased.  I have refereed a number of matches this season, and that issue was not ever a concern.  If people thought that, I am sure I would not have been requested to referee at Saturday's tournament.  I don't need to make an excuse, and it's not everyone against 3.  I don't know who you have spoken with that don't agree with me, but I have spoken multiple other coaches in the county and, they agree with me that this argument is absurd.  During my time as President of the Coaches Association, I cannot remember an instance in recent memory that I did not have more than half of the coaches agree with me for every proposal I have made.  I will not "argue" with you any further, since I have stated my position on these issues, there is nothing further to discuss.  Thanks and have a great day!      

Unfortunately, Rose made a handbook for the coaches, and it was distributed at the first coaches meeting of the season.  It was reviewed by everyone in attendance, and the amendment from USFA rules to NCAA rules was made.  As President of the association at the time I believe this change was very clear.  Sorry of there was some confusion. 

The final results are NOT how the margin of victory is calculated.  It is what the two team's scores are when the first team earns the 14th victory. (i.e. If team A had beaten team B 14-13, but when they scored the 14th win, the team B only had 5 wins, team A may have made substitutions and team B may have won the next 8 bouts.  The final score is 14-13, but the margin of victory was 14 to 5). 

To clear things up, I am a foilist on Great Neck North.  You've probably seen me being that obnoxious fencer screaming loudly; if not I guess I should've screamed louder for you.  Let's be serious, the tournament did not run smoothly and there was flaws with the system, but with all do respect let's all just grow up.  There is so much garbage written here.  Blaming coaches, parents, seriously, this is ridiculous.  I barely got through the first few posts.  So long and quite pointless.  Let's not cry over spilled milk.  Am i upset that there was no individuals?  You better believe it; I'm furious.  A tournament like the one we had with no individual tournament is a complete waste of a day for the weaker teams with strong individual fencers.  There's reason to be upset, yes, but not this upset to the point where there are 3 pages of long responses openly desperaging coaches and dedicated parents.  In all honesty, it's a new system and you can't really blame the coaches.  So to all you parents, and kids who think they have something to talk about, just chill.  Understand that this is a HIGH SCHOOL tournament.  You want to see " more real", then fence outside and go watch those tournaments.  Layoff on the coaches and just work to improve on next year's season.  No point in complaining about something that's already happened.

By the way, as a memeber of the Great Neck North Fencing team, to shut you all up who are complaining about DR. Levi; I enjoyed his company and I appreciated him dedicating his time to us.  Who are you people to complain and say he is a burden?  Oh and also he's a DOCTOR, how is he underqualified in first aid?  Think about that just a bit. 

I agree with iCoach on several accounts of this whole tournament - a tremendous amount of energy and planning went into facilitating the sheet immensity of this tournament, from securing the equipment to the food, even to the projector setup (which was intended to keep the fans abreast of the action/scores and facilitate transitions between rounds).  It's upsetting to see how people are so quick to to complain.  To that end, planning only goes so far.  There were several unforseen "glitches" the day of the tournament - at one point, we had to switch the two computers in the center (one which was hooked up to the screen displaying scores and team matchups) to utilize Excel.  Later on, we provided the bout committee access to a second computer, which they busily used (along with two CSH athetes who generously volunteered to assist) for the rest of the day and after everyone else went home - because there was a problem with the original software intended for use during this tournament. 

 At this point, and after the fact, it's useless to continue complaining about something we can't go back and fix.  As the GNS athlete said, we need to now look towards next year, applaud the things that went right, and fix the things that went wrong.  Controversies aside, the fence-off between two very talented teams really livened up the fans, providing some intense action, and a great way to send off our two winning teams.  Congratulations to all of our teams!

No one was "quick to complain."  The format did not work.  The execution did not work.  It may well have been very hard work by all involved, but that doesn't change the fact that it did not work.  The change of format served no purpose and made left almost everyone except a small group of very young coaches miserable.

Are these very young coaches mature enough to admit that this was a fiasco.  So far, they are not.  They just keep insisting that it was a few "glitches" and making inane excuses.  Instead of thinking only about yourselves while paying lip service to the students who suffered for your vanity, look to the future and consider how to avoid another fiasco.  The answer is not to deny that this was a disaster or insist that you were right all along and it just requires more tweaking.  Think of the students instead of yourselves.

No GNS won 15-12. Get your facts right. GC beat GNS 14-13. Correction to the Correction.

K- just so you know, NO ONE is allowed near the strips unless they are a paid employee of the district for that particular team (coach and assistant coaches), a referee (employee of Section VIII), or a school district employee of that school district (janitor).  While Mr. Levi volunteers his valuable time and expertise to help the GNN team, the mere fact that he is not an employee of the above, and a parent of a fencer, makes his presence aviolation of several policies, both fencing and the school district. By way of example, if Sari's blade broke, and hit Dr. Levi's eye, there would be HUGE problems for the School District and Section VIII.  The schools insurance and rider do not cover "spectators" at the strip.

Nobody is discounting Mr. Levi's intentions, but it is patently offensive for him to stand next to Sari, or any other fencer at the strip, unless ALL fencing parents have the same priveledge. Its as simple as just following the rules.  He didn't, and by default, GNN didn't either, especially when the Jericho coach stopped the bout and complainied about it.  At that moment, Mr. Levi (who knows the rules) should have quietly submitted to the prtest, and leave the strip. the referee should have asked him to leave the strip as well, and if not, a GNN school adinistrator should have told him to leave he strip.  Instad, he stood there defiantly, and there is yet another unmanaged problem.

These young coaches are not the issue, I saw the cold spring harbor and jericho coaches apologizing to the competitors and other coaches that got screwed. It is the coaches who think that they invented fencing and are above the law that are the issue. 

It would have been really nice if the coaches had made this public knowledge, or at least shared it with the other coaches in a legible form. Too bad that all this guess work had to be factored in because no one wants to do the job they agreed to. 

What exactly do you mean by we were trying to protect ourselves?

"To all those who are complaining about the format.  Suffolk used this format and has for years.  They were able to have their team and individual in one day and were out of there before 6 pm.  It seems to me that some were determined to have this fail from the getgo perhaps because it wasn't their idea or first choice.  Walking into that gym Saturday morning, the hostility was palpable.  There is plenty of blame to spread around.  When we are finished spreading, it is time to move on."

No one sabotaged the format.  The only way to move forward is to learn from experience.  Otherwise, we will continue to have the same problems again, which is just foolish.  The fact that Suffolk used this format offers absolutely no rationale for why anyone else should use it.  Maybe Suffolk would do better to change formats, even though Suffolk has fewer teams which is why it didn't take as long. 

The question many of us asked is what benefit this new format offered.  We explained the problems it created, but the advocates of the new format offered only two reasons why the format should change.  The first reason is that Suffolks does it, which is no more a reason at all for us to change than for Suffolk to change. It isn't a reason at all. The second reason was that it showed which team has the greatest "depth", which aside from being too vague to be meaningful, is already covered to the extent it can be by the outcome of the season itself.

On the other hand, every reason raised against this format came to pass.  Not because anyone caused it to fail, but because it failed under its own weight.  It's not because people are against change, but because change for its own sake isn't a good thing.  If it offers no benefit, then there is no reason to change.  Maybe change is needed, but that doesn't mean that this is the right change to make. 

Consider this: What chance did Hewlett have of changing the outcome under this format?  Zero.  So what purpose was served for Hewlett?  None.  But Hewlett was way behind, you say, so that doesn't count.  Wrong, but even if we accept that, what about Oyster Bay?  They were third in the season, and had a deficit of 10 points to make up to beat GNS and GC for the championship.  Now OB beat both GNS and GC on Saturday.  Everybody keeps forgetting this little detail.  OB beat the two "top teams" in the first two rounds, raising a bit of a problem with the integrity of the tournament.  But it became clear that the only way that OB could make up the 10 point deficit was not merely to win, but for the teams ahead of them to crash and burn, suffering massive losses that would make up for the 10 point deficit.  The exercise was pointless, and this became clear midway through the competition.  At that point, the fallacy of this format should have been clear to everyone, except of course the most zealous advocates who refuse to admit that it doesn't make sense.

We all want to move on.  We all want to do the best for the fencers.  Each time someone cries that they are for the fencers and that anyone who disagrees isn't, they lose their credibility.  The question remains whether this format works, notwithstanding a secondary problem with the execution of the format.  This does not mean that we should not consider other formats, or that we should never change.  It does mean that the coaches need to get beyond their love of their own idea and see this in the cold light of day.  We move forward by recognizing and correcting the mistakes of the past.  We cannot move forward by continuing to ignore that this year was a fiasco and pretending that it was wonderful, except for a few little glitches. 

The fencers are always wonderful.  The format and execution was not.  As long as coaches refuse to realize that they aren't fooling anyone, and that as much as we may appreciate their efforts as coaches, that doesn't mean that they can trivialize the problems and lead our fencers into another fiasco next year because they remain enthralled with their own ideas.  There is absolutely no benefit to this format as was made absolutely clear this year.  Even if the execution is perfect next year, the format still offers no benefit.  If change is what's needed, then this format is not the solution.  Once everyone gets this, we can move on.  If not, we just repeat the same mistakes next time, with the same excuses and faliures.  To repeat the same mistakes is unacceptable.

Once again I was not at the Nassau County tourny, I am just giving proper information. 

The argument above is that "the format failed under it's own weight."  The problem with that argument is that if it has been successfull for over 50 years in both Suffolk county and the IFA.  It is not a problem with the format, just those running it.  I am not claiming sabotage or anything else, just defending that the format is NOT flawed.

Now, the Nassau version of the IFA format included a weighting system that is not in the Suffolk version or the original format.  So in Nassau version for example, Hewlet comes in with a severe deficit.  In the original format they would have the same chance as everyone else.  Giving anyone a chance to win a Championship.  During the long history of the tournament in Suffolk, there has been many teams that were ranked 1st, including undefeateded teams, which ended up not winning the the County Tournament.  "Parry Repost" is right with his analysis of THIS version of the IFA format.  I do not know why the weigting system was put in place.

As for the change, the previous system that Nassau had, was two days of playoffs and one day for the individuals.  All formats have their pro's and con's.  The season is very short and with fencing growing it is very very difficult to fit in all the meets (especially with weather related issues).  So having a three day to the county tournament is very difficult.  That format also excludes teams from the getgo. 

The Nassau individual tournament was a full day with 24 competitors per weapon per gender.  Except for the additional day there is nothing wrong with this tournament either.  There were some problems in the past which are being worked out; the coaches this year, quite rightly agreed to have an open system of records.  Although difficult for some, they had to produce and submit their legible scoresheets for calculation of individual records.  This was an obvious and good decision by the Nassau association and will produce a fair examination of the competitors.

FYI:  Suffolk chooses it's representative to the LI championship by their league dual meet season.  Although it has never happened it is quite possible that the Suffolk county Champs are not the one to fence in the LI Champs.  The rationale for that is that the LI championship is a dual meet and they want to put the best dual meet team in that spot.  But this also allows for a co-county champs without any kind of additional tie breaker.  If there is a tie to the dual meet season, Suffolk looks at the head to head score (margin of victory at 14) between the two champs, if that is a tie they go down the list to the next best teams margin of victory etc.. 

I was entertained however, by an anonymous poster complaining aggressively about anonymity.  I am sorry that there were so many problems at the champioship; it might just be growing pains.  On the positive side, I heard that an individual final will be held on the 24th.  Good luck to all the competitors.