Taken off a team without warning

[thespellchecker]

I hear the buzz of someone's 10 year old being removed from a local "AAA" team without talking to the parents first, to add kids from his area (EP). Now what kind of coach would do that to a 10 year old, and would you want them coaching your kid or representing your "AAA" club?

In my understanding of what AAA hockey is meant to be, is this so wrong? Before anyone sounds off this is awful, you need to understand that there maybe different AAA hockey expectations out there. Perhaps the player couldn't play at his teams level. Perhaps the player slowed practice down. AAA hockey was cut-throat. Now with so many programs calling themselves AAA, the expectations of some maybe more like association hockey. I would expect a true AAA team hold a player to certain level, for the club and individual development of the other players.

[old goalie85]

Did they get $$ back ??

[HockeyDad41]

Could the parents child have some sort of legal right to have their child reinstated? When the team cashes your check isn't there some kind of contract formed? Lawyers - a little help please?

[InigoMontoya]

Could the parents child have some sort of legal right to have their child reinstated? When the team cashes your check isn't there some kind of contract formed? Lawyers - a little help please?

If this actually happened, why would a parent want to return a child to that environment.

[HockeyDad41]

Could the parents child have some sort of legal right to have their child reinstated? When the team cashes your check isn't there some kind of contract formed? Lawyers - a little help please?

If this actually happened, why would a parent want to return a child to that environment.

Good question, but let's just say they do. Is there an enforceable contract?

[jjackson]

every kid deserves a fair conversation with a coach...no matter how bad they are. Coaches have the responsibility to the kids and if one isn't good enought, they need to address it. If the coach chose this kid he needs to live with his decision. Man, this is youth hockey not the NHL. AAA or not.

[old goalie85]

The NCAA can't get rid of a kid. [ unless they flunk-out, or beak code of conduct policies] How can a youth sports team?

[InigoMontoya]

I'm still a little skeptical that a kid was just tossed off a team. Not really the MO of any team.

[muckandgrind]

Something smells fishy with this story....I don't think we're getting all the facts.

[High Off The Glass]

Could the parents child have some sort of legal right to have their child reinstated? When the team cashes your check isn't there some kind of contract formed? Lawyers - a little help please?

"legal right to have their child REINSTATED" Are you serious? It would cost at minimum double or triple to recoup your original "investment" to join the hockey club. What can of worms would a lawsuit open if suing a hockey organization because your kid gets cut was succussful. We're not getting the whole story behind the original post. Was the kid a practice player? Is he still on the team, but will now ride the bench in favor of the new add-on players? The common practice in this situation is if the kid quits, the organization keeps the money, if he is asked to leave because of a behavior problem, the orgaization keeps the money, if the orgaization deems the player can no longer play at a level consistant with the level of play of the team, he simply rides the bench and is asked to leave at the end of the season. Simply playing on a hockey team and paying for ice time does not give anyone any legal right to actually play. The actual payment of money to play on a hockey team doesn't imply a service must be, under good faith, be rendered. Unless this parent and the hockey club actually signed a document, witnessed by a third party, outlaying monetary damages if the said player is cut (or released during the season), there is absolutely no recourse for the family to recoup any monies paid to the club. AAA club hockey is a buyer beware transaction. In my opinion, if the player was asked to leave during the season based on his performance ONLY, then proper business practices would dictate that the said party reimburse the family a prorated refund, with no further damages.

[Secord sucks]

For this kid to be removed from the team leads me to believe that he was being a disruption to the coaches and players. I have seen kids that can disrupt a team just by entering the locker room.

[old goalie85]

Back to what Muck wrote about not having all the facts.

[HockeyDad41]

Could the parents child have some sort of legal right to have their child reinstated? When the team cashes your check isn't there some kind of contract formed? Lawyers - a little help please?

"legal right to have their child REINSTATED" Are you serious? It would cost at minimum double or triple to recoup your original "investment" to join the hockey club. What can of worms would a lawsuit open if suing a hockey organization because your kid gets cut was succussful. We're not getting the whole story behind the original post. Was the kid a practice player? Is he still on the team, but will now ride the bench in favor of the new add-on players? The common practice in this situation is if the kid quits, the organization keeps the money, if he is asked to leave because of a behavior problem, the orgaization keeps the money, if the orgaization deems the player can no longer play at a level consistant with the level of play of the team, he simply rides the bench and is asked to leave at the end of the season. Simply playing on a hockey team and paying for ice time does not give anyone any legal right to actually play. The actual payment of money to play on a hockey team doesn't imply a service must be, under good faith, be rendered. Unless this parent and the hockey club actually signed a document, witnessed by a third party, outlaying monetary damages if the said player is cut (or released during the season), there is absolutely no recourse for the family to recoup any monies paid to the club. AAA club hockey is a buyer beware transaction. In my opinion, if the player was asked to leave during the season based on his performance ONLY, then proper business practices would dictate that the said party reimburse the family a prorated refund, with no further damages.

I am not wondering whether it would make $en$e to bring a lawsuit. I was wondering whether or not the parent would have a decent case if they did decide to pursue one. See the difference?

[hockeyover40]

Agree, not getting all the facts. Another person taking a shot at a program without having the facts. Vulcan states one kid was removed from the program and multiple kids added from his area (EP). I read that as the only reason the kid was removed was to make room for kids from his area, not because of lack of skills or behavior problems.

Vulcan, you need to come back on the forum and back up your accusations. Because we all know how many AAA clubs are in EP. And I don't see them doing something like this.

[High Off The Glass]

Could the parents child have some sort of legal right to have their child reinstated? When the team cashes your check isn't there some kind of contract formed? Lawyers - a little help please?

"legal right to have their child REINSTATED" Are you serious? It would cost at minimum double or triple to recoup your original "investment" to join the hockey club. What can of worms would a lawsuit open if suing a hockey organization because your kid gets cut was succussful. We're not getting the whole story behind the original post. Was the kid a practice player? Is he still on the team, but will now ride the bench in favor of the new add-on players? The common practice in this situation is if the kid quits, the organization keeps the money, if he is asked to leave because of a behavior problem, the orgaization keeps the money, if the orgaization deems the player can no longer play at a level consistant with the level of play of the team, he simply rides the bench and is asked to leave at the end of the season. Simply playing on a hockey team and paying for ice time does not give anyone any legal right to actually play. The actual payment of money to play on a hockey team doesn't imply a service must be, under good faith, be rendered. Unless this parent and the hockey club actually signed a document, witnessed by a third party, outlaying monetary damages if the said player is cut (or released during the season), there is absolutely no recourse for the family to recoup any monies paid to the club. AAA club hockey is a buyer beware transaction. In my opinion, if the player was asked to leave during the season based on his performance ONLY, then proper business practices would dictate that the said party reimburse the family a prorated refund, with no further damages.

I am not wondering whether it would make $en$e to bring a lawsuit. I was wondering whether or not the parent would have a decent case if they did decide to pursue one. See the difference?

Obviously you couldn't read between the lines, so I'll put it in terms you can understand...NO!

[jjackson]

Should parents sue? no, ridiculuous. No one here knows the facts it could have been anything. There is more to the story. Be interesting to know and also who the coach/team is. Might tell us a lot. No matter what happened, no communication is gutless.

[High Off The Glass]

Could the parents child have some sort of legal right to have their child reinstated? When the team cashes your check isn't there some kind of contract formed? Lawyers - a little help please?

"legal right to have their child REINSTATED" Are you serious? It would cost at minimum double or triple to recoup your original "investment" to join the hockey club. What can of worms would a lawsuit open if suing a hockey organization because your kid gets cut was succussful. We're not getting the whole story behind the original post. Was the kid a practice player? Is he still on the team, but will now ride the bench in favor of the new add-on players? The common practice in this situation is if the kid quits, the organization keeps the money, if he is asked to leave because of a behavior problem, the orgaization keeps the money, if the orgaization deems the player can no longer play at a level consistant with the level of play of the team, he simply rides the bench and is asked to leave at the end of the season. Simply playing on a hockey team and paying for ice time does not give anyone any legal right to actually play. The actual payment of money to play on a hockey team doesn't imply a service must be, under good faith, be rendered. Unless this parent and the hockey club actually signed a document, witnessed by a third party, outlaying monetary damages if the said player is cut (or released during the season), there is absolutely no recourse for the family to recoup any monies paid to the club. AAA club hockey is a buyer beware transaction. In my opinion, if the player was asked to leave during the season based on his performance ONLY, then proper business practices would dictate that the said party reimburse the family a prorated refund, with no further damages.

I am not wondering whether it would make $en$e to bring a lawsuit. I was wondering whether or not the parent would have a decent case if they did decide to pursue one. See the difference?

Hey HD41, you don't have to clutter my inbox with PM's if you want to call me a "jerk", you can do it right here in public. I'm a big boy, I can take it (actually been called worse, if you can believe that). I was just responding to your post, sorry to hurt your feelings Hey, maybe you can bring a lawsuit? I know a good lawyer ( I work for cheap!).

[InigoMontoya]

Obviously you couldn't read between the lines, so I'll put it in terms you can understand...NO!

Are we to believe this got you called a name in private? I've worked a heck of a lot harder than that to jerk HD41s chain, and I've been left rather unsatisfied. Can any of you help me to understand why HD41 would leave me hangin' like that, when HOTG obviously put very little effort into his response.

[HockeyDad41]

"legal right to have their child REINSTATED" Are you serious? It would cost at minimum double or triple to recoup your original "investment" to join the hockey club. What can of worms would a lawsuit open if suing a hockey organization because your kid gets cut was succussful. We're not getting the whole story behind the original post. Was the kid a practice player? Is he still on the team, but will now ride the bench in favor of the new add-on players? The common practice in this situation is if the kid quits, the organization keeps the money, if he is asked to leave because of a behavior problem, the orgaization keeps the money, if the orgaization deems the player can no longer play at a level consistant with the level of play of the team, he simply rides the bench and is asked to leave at the end of the season. Simply playing on a hockey team and paying for ice time does not give anyone any legal right to actually play. The actual payment of money to play on a hockey team doesn't imply a service must be, under good faith, be rendered. Unless this parent and the hockey club actually signed a document, witnessed by a third party, outlaying monetary damages if the said player is cut (or released during the season), there is absolutely no recourse for the family to recoup any monies paid to the club. AAA club hockey is a buyer beware transaction. In my opinion, if the player was asked to leave during the season based on his performance ONLY, then proper business practices would dictate that the said party reimburse the family a prorated refund, with no further damages.

I am not wondering whether it would make $en$e to bring a lawsuit. I was wondering whether or not the parent would have a decent case if they did decide to pursue one. See the difference?

Hey HD41, you don't have to clutter my inbox with PM's if you want to call me a "jerk", you can do it right here in public. I'm a big boy, I can take it (actually been called worse, if you can believe that). I was just responding to your post, sorry to hurt your feelings Hey, maybe you can bring a lawsuit? I know a good lawyer ( I work for cheap!).

I was only wondering if there was a contract or not. Wasn't trying to start anything.

And yes I do seem to bring out the jerk in you.

[InigoMontoya]

I was only wondering if there was a contract or not. Wasn't trying to start anything.

And yes I do seem to bring out the jerk in you.

You could use a little work on your apologies.

[HockeyDad41]

I was only wondering if there was a contract or not. Wasn't trying to start anything.

And yes I do seem to bring out the jerk in you.

You could use a little work on your apologies.

It's the best I got.

[High Off The Glass]

I am not wondering whether it would make $en$e to bring a lawsuit. I was wondering whether or not the parent would have a decent case if they did decide to pursue one. See the difference?

Hey HD41, you don't have to clutter my inbox with PM's if you want to call me a "jerk", you can do it right here in public. I'm a big boy, I can take it (actually been called worse, if you can believe that). I was just responding to your post, sorry to hurt your feelings Hey, maybe you can bring a lawsuit? I know a good lawyer ( I work for cheap!).

I was only wondering if there was a contract or not. Wasn't trying to start anything.

And yes I do seem to bring out the jerk in you.

Yes, I accept your apology!

[High Off The Glass]

Obviously you couldn't read between the lines, so I'll put it in terms you can understand...NO!

Are we to believe this got you called a name in private? I've worked a heck of a lot harder than that to jerk HD41s chain, and I've been left rather unsatisfied. Can any of you help me to understand why HD41 would leave me hangin' like that, when HOTG obviously put very little effort into his response.

I just caught him on a bad day (he just had to write another check to MM), or he has PMS. IM, keep trying, your day is coming.