well the field was too narrow...but then it got wider...or is it just sloppy paperwork...either way it's a mess... http://www.phillysoccernews.com/teams/noreasters2.php?article_id=10255
First, if they claim that they never got a handbook, let me help: http://www.ussoccer.com/about/governance/bylaws.aspx . The Policy handbook says: U.S. Open Cup Stadium Requirements - All Open Cup Matches from Round 3 to the Final must guarantee: - A playing surface of at least 68 yds by 110 yds Smooth, flat, and level playing surface with natural grass (yes, the "natural grass" clause if frequently waived; see the last bullet point on the page) Last year's Policy book lists this page's title as "2001 U.S. Open Cup Stadium Requirements," so this has been in the rules since at least then. By the way, the Policy Ademendments PDF from the same USSF page has an edit changing "Round 3" to "Round 1" Now, I do have a big beef with the line in the Philly article saying, "I think they were hoping we would lose (to Pittsburgh)," said Holloway of the federation, "That would make the problem go away." Sorry, you don't say that without hard evidence. This is frequently called "comments detrimental to the game" by the pro leagues, and would result in fines. At this level, though, they should get a formal reprimand from the Federation.
Philadelphia Union have just graciously agreed to donate a portion of the ticket revenue to the Ocean City Nor’easters, from tickets sold to Ocean City Nor’easters fans for the US Open Cup match at PPL Park on May 28, 2013. The Ocean City Nor’easters would like to thank the Philadelphia Union for their support and we encourage all Ocean City fans to attend this historic game.
So... US Soccer isn't telling these teams their venue applications don't qualify? They're just going on with the draws without letting teams know their applications were rejected, and why? I wonder if this is related to why so many PDL clubs "won" their coin flips.
Oooh, love a conspiracy theory. How would they be "related," exactly? And which teams were involved in coin flips (hint: not all of them) and which ones were bogus? Just curious.
OK, here's the relationship: This story demonstrates that US Soccer does a poor job of communicating the venue requirements, the rejection of hosting applications, and the reason for the rejections. To me, it's likely that some of those PDL hostings in the Cup were the result of a small, correctable issue on the hosting application that US Soccer never mentioned to the teams. In th Nor’easters's case, they were willing to re-draw the field lines, but because US Soceer didn't even give them the courtesy of saying, "hey, your field's too small, that's why we're rejecting this application." the Nor’easters never got that chance. Instead, US Soccer seemingly just awarded hosting to the Islanders with no explanation - leading everyone to believe the NOs had lost a coin flip, when instead there was no coin flip. But I don't think it's a conspiracy, I think this more a case of US Soccer just being really bad at running a 64+-team tournament and communicating rules to teams.
A lack of professionalism in US soccer (the whole thing, not just the USSF)? You don't say..... Shocked - SHOCKED - to find gambling in this establishment.
Too many people seem to confuse mistakes with corruption. Cabals creating outcomes at the ends of long, involved conspiracy plans aren't as prevalent as they would have you believe. It's also possible that there are NPSL teams that would have to be shown that the fleshy bits at the back there are their own asses.