Time Line - 2010‎ > ‎Change Log‎ > ‎

The ASA has started discipline proceedings against the CASA Board of Directors

posted Dec 29, 2010 5:47 PM by Tyler Durden

Specifically;

You are hereby accused of a breech of the ASA By-Laws, Article 32 and ASA Rules and Regulations 9 section C subsection (d) and are required to attend an ASA Discipline Committee Hearing to review these allegations.

For those not familiar

Article 32:
A member's affiliates, registrants, leagues, clubs, players, referees or officials shall not refer disputes with the Association or any other soccer association to a court of law but shall be required to submit any disagreements to the jurisdiction of the Association.

The particular action before the courts that CASA participated in is 1003-11792. In this action the Applicants sought an injunction against the current ASA Board to:
  • Allow EDSA members to participate in all Provincial ASA major (Adult) soccer league games
  • that member players of CASA and Sunny South be permitted to participate in minor (youth) soccer Provincial competitions
  • to return to the host districts all Provincial competitions
  • prohibit both boards from threatening referees
  • require that all registered referees be permitted to officiate at all games under the authority of the ASA
  • that all members who had contributed association fees to a trust account be declared in good standing.
  • prohibit either board from preventing teams from qualifying for National Competitions
At the time the above action was filed the question of who was the rightful ASA board was under question. How can Article 32 be applied when the action was initiated against 'both' boards.


Rule 9 C(d)
Committed any act or made any statement either verbally or in writing, or been responsible for conduct, continuing misconduct or any other matter which, in the opinion of the Association, is considered to be ungentlemanly, insulting or improper behaviour or likely to bring the game into disrepute.

'Bring the game into disrepute' ... this is so subjective as to be meaningless.   Who decides  'proper' behaviour?

Does standing up for your own membership bring the game into disrepute?
Does standing up for referees constitute an act of disrepute?


The timing of these hearings is a little suspicious as well, is the current ASA Board attempting to intimidate the rest of the membership? Are they trying to suspend or sanction members so that they cannot vote at an upcoming Special General Meeting?



Added 2010.12.28 - ASA Notice of Disciplinary Hearing