Fan Forums
Senior B - Ontario Field Lacrosse - OLA Unofficial - Masters - Womens
OLA Info - Midget - Akwesasne - BCLA - RMLL
~ Be Nice ~
Click Here If You'd Care To Donate To The Expense Of These Sites.


2011 Tournaments - 2011 Provincials - 2011 Lacrosse Festival - 2011 Team Ontario



Comp Intro Field Coaches Clinic**Last Chance

by OJMFLL (Login kwlaxhound)

There is only one last opportunity to register for Comp Intro (Level 2) Field Coaches Clinic before the fall season starts.


Date:
Friday September 5th from 7-10 pm
Saturday September 6th from 9am - 3 pm
Cost is $225 Location: Budd Park, Kitchener

Get ready for the upcoming U16 and U19 season this fall or get your coaches ready for the Spring 2015 season.
Space is limited.

If you are interested please contact Tammy at tamster_@rogers.com no later than August 20th to register.
Comp Intro is needed for any coach in divisions U14, U15, U16, U17, U19 & SENIOR


Posted on Aug 18, 2014, 8:36 PM
from IP address 99.236.41.117


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Tryouts and new website

by OshawaU19 (Login OshawaBlueKnightsU19)

Check out our new website at www.obku19lacrosse.com and follow our twitter @OBK_U19


OSHAWA BLUE KNIGHTS U19 FIELD LACROSSE 2014 TRYOUTS


WHERE: All Tryouts Oshawa Civic Field #5

WHEN: Wed. August 20 – 7 - 9 PM

Sat. August 23 – 10 AM- 12 PM

Sun. August 24 – 10 AM – 12 PM

Wed. August 27 – 7 PM – 9 PM

COSTS: $20.00

SEASON: Starts Sunday Sept. 7 thru Sunday Oct. 26

AGE REQUIREMENTS: Born 1995 or later (EX. 1995, 1996 etc.)

NEW PLAYERS: Bring copy of Birth Certificate

LEAGUE: Ontario Junior Field Lacrosse League

www.ojmfll.org

TEAMS: Oshawa will be having two U19 Teams in OJMFLL

A Team plays in the A Division

B Team plays in the B Division

A Team selected after AUG. 27 tryout.

B Team selected after Sept. 3 tryout.


Posted on Aug 17, 2014, 6:21 PM
from IP address 174.117.69.7


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Missing Lacrosse-Garbage Can

by SJMCN (Login SJMCN)

Don't miss the fun....spots still available for garbage can lacrosse August 22 in St Catherines. 6 teams, 5 divisions, tons of fun. Register now at bhistcatharines@ballhockeyinternational.com


Posted on Aug 17, 2014, 5:13 PM
from IP address 99.239.100.7


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Final 6 - Peewee results

by BW (Login big_wooden_stick)

does anyone have a link to the results of the Peewee final 6 in Oakville ?
Thanks


Posted on Aug 16, 2014, 8:03 PM
from IP address 162.249.239.10


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Re: Final 6 - Peewee results

by shammies (Login shammies)

oakville and orangeville going for gold
peterborough and burlington playing for bronze


Posted on Aug 16, 2014, 8:11 PM
from IP address 65.95.216.229


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Oakville wins Peewee A Gold

by Oakvillelax93 (Login Oakvillelax93)

In a very good game Oakville beat Orangeville in the Gold Game.


Posted on Aug 17, 2014, 3:14 PM
from IP address 70.30.55.59


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Untitled

by lxlxlx (Login lxlxlx)

any scores from batam a yet


Posted on Aug 15, 2014, 8:42 PM
from IP address 184.147.22.59


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Bantam final 6

by oakvillelax93 (Login Oakvillelax93)

Oakville and Clarington will meet in the gold game.


Posted on Aug 16, 2014, 7:22 PM
from IP address 70.30.55.59


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Clarington wins Gold in double OT

by Oakvillelax93 (Login Oakvillelax93)

Great game which could have gone either way. 6-5 Clarington in double OT. That's Silver for Oakville in Bantam back to Back. Congrats to Clarington.


Posted on Aug 17, 2014, 3:16 PM
from IP address 70.30.55.59


Respond to this message

Return to Index


2014 HardCor Field Lacrosse Travel Team Tryouts

by HardCor Lacrosse (Login HardCorLax)

HardCor Lacrosse is pleased to announce our 2014 tryout and tournament schedule for our boy's field lacrosse travel teams.

LOCATION
River Oaks Turf Field (Oakville)

DATES
Session 1 - Sunday, September 7th
Session 2 - Sunday, September 14th

TIMES
grade 3/4 (2005-06)and 5/6 (2003-04) -11 am to 12:20 pm
grade 7/8 (2001-02) - 12:20 to 1:40 pm
grade 9/10 (1999-00) - 1:40 to 3:00 pm

COST to TRYOUT
$20.00

TOURNAMENTS
Skull and Bones - Rochester, NY - Oct. 18th or 19th
BooBash - Oxford, MI - Oct. 25th or 26th
Turkey Shoot - Ithaca, NY - Nov. 15th or 16th
John Mack Southern Tier Shootout - Feb. 7th or 8th

PROGRAM
HardCor Lacrosse is focused on providing additional opportunities for those players that have passion and want to further develop their lacrosse skills, playing experience and game awareness IQ in US tournament play.

TO REGISTER
Email hardcorlacrosse@hotmail.com - Please include the following;
1. Player's name
2. grade in Sept. 2014
3. Birthdate
4. Position
5. Shooting hand - right or left

FEES
Please see link http://www.hardcorlacrosse.com/wordpress/?page_id=525

Thank you for your interest. If you have any further questions, please email us at hardcorlacrosse@hotmail.com.



Posted on Aug 13, 2014, 11:16 PM
from IP address 24.226.99.149


Respond to this message

Return to Index

2014-15 Northern Lacrosse Tryout Dates

by Northern Lacrosse (Login NorthernCa)

Boys Grade 5/6 Tuesday Aug 19th and Aug 26th 7 pm to 8:30 pm Turf 5 Creditview - Brampton

Boys Grade 7 Monday Aug 18th and Aug 25th 7 pm to 8:30 pm Turf 5 Creditview - Brampton
Boys Grade 8 Monday Aug 18th and Aug 25th 7 pm to 8:30 pm Turf 5 Creditview - Brampton

Boys Grade 9 Wednesday Aug 13th and Aug 20th 7 pm to 8:30 pm Turf 6 Creditview - Brampton
Boys Grade 10 Wednesday Aug 13th and Aug 20th 7 pm to 8:30 pm Turf 6 Creditview - Brampton
Boys Grade 11 Wednesday Aug 13th and Aug 20th 8:30 pm to 10 pm Turf 6 Creditview - Brampton
Boys Grade 12 Wednesday Aug 13th and Aug 20th 8:30 pm to 10 pm Turf 6 Creditview - Brampton

Girls 7/8 Tuesday Aug 19th and Aug 26th 7 pm to 8:30 pm Turf 5 Creditview - Brampton
Girls 9-10 Tuesday Aug 19th and Aug 26th 7 pm to 8:30 pm Turf 5 Creditview - Brampton
Girls 11/12 Tuesday Aug 19th and Aug 26th 7 pm to 8:30 pm Turf 5 Creditview - Brampton

Visit www.northernlacrosse.ca for more info.


Posted on Aug 13, 2014, 4:29 PM
from IP address 209.29.115.170


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Bantam Final 6

by Whistlerr (Login Whistlerr)

any predictions?


Posted on Aug 11, 2014, 1:20 PM
from IP address 209.162.228.41


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Re: Bantam Final 6

by Laxitup (Login Wind13)

Who is favored?
CW seems to be the best.


Posted on Aug 11, 2014, 2:43 PM
from IP address 204.128.128.44


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: Bantam Final 6

by You Heard It Here First (Login Overspoken)

The clear favourite is Mimico. A team who has won both the Peterborough and Brampton tournaments, and has an offence that is so deadly no other team can compare to it. You heard it here first.....Mimico takes GOLD!


Posted on Aug 12, 2014, 1:01 PM
from IP address 209.146.166.138


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: Bantam Final 6

by underspoken (Login ruba535)

cant argue that at all


Posted on Aug 13, 2014, 12:31 PM
from IP address 12.32.90.76


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Where do you find the provincial scores?

by Fan (Login scarsaints)

Thanks


Posted on Aug 10, 2014, 9:31 PM
from IP address 174.91.134.204


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Re: Where do you find the provincial scores?

by TheRev (Login leelaxman)

www.ontariolacrossefestival.com


Posted on Aug 10, 2014, 10:55 PM
from IP address 184.147.123.80


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Whitby 7 Barrie 1

by therev (Login leelaxman)

Whitby2 midgets beat the Barrie Bombers this afternoon to win the Provvincial C title congrats to coach Wiswell and all the lads


Posted on Aug 10, 2014, 4:37 PM
from IP address 24.114.103.200


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Jr wall goalie stick

by Jay (Login jay16)

Anyone selling a jr wall goalie stick. Looking to pick one up for my son. He will be starting tykr next year


Posted on Aug 9, 2014, 3:43 PM
from IP address 99.224.219.150


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Re: Jr wall goalie stick

by Matt Chamois (Login Matt_Chamois)

Get him a normal head for his goalie stick. Cannot throw with those Wall sticks and he will not learn the position very well with that stick. Start him with a field goalie head and he will be able to actually pass the ball properly and will be able to move around.


Posted on Aug 11, 2014, 7:18 PM
from IP address 66.203.207.67


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: Jr wall goalie stick

by laxdad74 (Login laxdad74)

Get him the stick he is comfortable with, true they are harder to throw with but like any stick it has to be strung to fit the thrower and dowling in the shift helps weighting. He also has to practice with it will he be able to throw a 50 or 60 foot fast break pass as well, probably not but how many true good opportunities are there as long as he is consistent fro 10 to 30 feet no coach will complain. Goalies also have to get use to the stick and hold it properly to say they won't learn the position properly or move as well is untrue, good fundamentals and coaching are the big factors. At the end of the day you have to decide if the larger head (takes more of the 5 hole away) is worth losing the consistency of the fast break pass there are pros and cons to any stick choice.


Posted on Aug 11, 2014, 7:58 PM
from IP address 24.157.112.236


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Anyone have the results for Midget A provies?

by Omg (Login 13BB)



Posted on Aug 8, 2014, 8:24 PM
from IP address 99.235.193.12


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Standings

by Jasper19 (Login jasper19)

Burlington 3-0-0 6pts
Oville 2-0-1 5pts
Whitby 2-2-0 4pts
Guelph 1-1-2 4pts
Mimico 0-2-2 2pts
Brampton 0-3-1 1pts

Oville playing Burlington now


Posted on Aug 9, 2014, 12:07 PM
from IP address 24.114.81.172


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Standings before final games

by Jasper19 (Login jasper19)

Oville 3-0-1 7pts
Burlington 3-1-0 6pts
Whitby 2-2-0 4pts
Guelph 1-1-2 4pts
Mimico 0-2-2 2pts
Brampton 0-3-1 1pts

1 game left for all
Whitby vs Burlington
Guelph vs Brampton
Oville vs Mimico


Posted on Aug 9, 2014, 1:03 PM
from IP address 24.114.81.172


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Dare I say it......

by Johnny99 (Login johnnydavis)

Another 3 way tiebreaker if both Whitby and Guelph win.


Posted on Aug 9, 2014, 3:39 PM
from IP address 70.27.35.37


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Yup

by Jasper19 (Login jasper19)

Whitby beats Burlington 5-3
Guelph beats Brampton

1 Oville
2 Burlington
3 whitby
4 Guelph


Posted on Aug 9, 2014, 9:11 PM
from IP address 24.114.92.129


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Orangeville takes Midget Gold

by Johnny99 (Login johnnydavis)

Burlington silver. Whitby beat Guelph in the bronze game.


Posted on Aug 11, 2014, 10:53 PM
from IP address 70.27.35.37


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Movie Opportunity in the Hmmer - chance to make some money

by Junior C Bengals (Login white_cane)

Attention all lacrosse players between 19 and 25. Opportunity to make some money.

There is a movie filming in Hamilton and they need some lacrosse players. You need to be available August 10, 11 and either the 14th or 18th. These are paid parts.

email twinstalentagency@rogers.com for details.

The lady's name is Cindy.

good luck guys


Posted on Aug 8, 2014, 4:29 PM
from IP address 67.215.158.215


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Intermediate Provincials

by Johnny99 (Login johnnydavis)

Congratulations to the Peterborough Lakers on their Intermediate "B" Provincial championship. They were well coached and disciplined throughout the tournament. They beat London by 1 goal in the final.

Also, congratulations to Niagara on winning the "A" division championship over Milton 4-3 in the final game.

MyLax was pretty well dead on with their evaluation. Niagara and Milton were 1-2 on their rankings. Mississauga was rated third and made it to the semi finals. Toronto Beaches, who were the other semi finalist in A, were only bumped to A after an appeal. It appears the OLA got this one right as the Cambridge Chiefs were knocked down to B and were ousted in the quarter finals. MyLax was also on the mark with Peterborough as they were ranked #9 overall and second in B after Cambridge. Once again MyLax shows it's accuracy in ranking minor lacrosse.


Posted on Aug 8, 2014, 3:33 PM
from IP address 70.27.35.37


Respond to this message

Return to Index

re-post of message for comments

by Bobby Boogie (Login laxwall)

My son has been out of the minor system for six years. He played in qualifiers under both the full round robin format (13 teams in total - 6 games each weekend) and the two division 16 team format.

He has said repeatedly that the two division format lacks the intensity and true test that qualifiers should be. We went to qualifiers last year to watch and the electricity found in the building was severely lacking.

So - I propose a different model. This comes from many years running a large minor hockey tournament (64+ teams) for up to five age groups (novice - Midget).

If the OLA is determined to have 16 teams play qualifiers (and I can argue both sides of that issue) then why is the OLA stuck on the old model of only 6 teams advancing to Provincial finals. Good tournaments are best run with multiples of 2, 4 or 8. Therefore, if you don't want a full round robin in the qualifiers, have the top 4 teams (8 in total) advance to the Provincial Finals. Then you can run a cross over round robin of three games, followed by quarter-finals, semi-finals and then championship games. Forget the bronze game - nobody wants to play that game after losing a semi-final.

Format for Provincials would be as follows:

Division X (Bionda Division) - Pool A 1st and 2nd place plus Pool B 3rd and 4th place (from qualifier weekend final standings)

Division Y (Tavares Division) - Pool B 1st and 2nd place plus Pool A 3rd and 4th place (from qualifier weekend final standings)

Each division would play a round robin schedule (3 games) - teams seeded 1 - 4 after round robin.

Quarter-Finals - complete cross-over - 1st Place X vs 4th Place Y etc

Semi-Finals - winners of quarter-finals play off.

Finals - winners of semi's.

Allows for a balanced schedule by having teams in division all play at same time. Reduces scouting and eliminates whining about unequal rest.

I look forward to your input - OLA are you listening?


Posted on Aug 6, 2014, 5:00 PM
from IP address 184.144.18.54


Respond to this message

Return to Index

or …..

by qwikstic (Login qwikstic)

go back to the 13 team structure, which I don't recall any complaints about and a uniquely lacrosse format that helped to generate interest and growth in our sport.

Why/who changed a format that was working very, very well ??

Prior to six years ago I didn't realize that the minor system had actually experimented with the two systems ? I recall them going to the 13 teams at qualifiers, vs the previous 12 teams, I believe with the '98 group at Peewee. That was because, I forget which club, but had appealed to go A and were added as a 13th team, which made perfect sense, evening out the two weekends, 6 games per team. Not surprising the OLA fell into it.


Posted on Aug 7, 2014, 10:29 AM
from IP address 24.157.70.223


Respond to this message

Return to Index


format experiment

by Bobby Boogie (Login laxwall)

I know in 2005 that there was a 16 team format used but I do not remember if it was all age groups or not. I do remember that the top four in each division advanced to provincials but that was the only time I recall A qualifiers being more than the 12 or 13 team format prior to last year.

The reasoning in 2005 came from very slanted results in 2004 at the B & C levels. Two or three teams dominated at B in '04 and there was quite an uproar about those teams playing "down" so that they could win a Provincial championship. Qualifiers were expanded in '05 in response but the quality and competitiveness that a full round robin tourney creates was lost.

I personally would love to see the old format and if you talk to kids that played both - most would say the same thing. Rarely after 12 games did a team "sneak" into the Final 6. I only remember once or twice where a tie-breaker was needed to decide who played in August!


Posted on Aug 7, 2014, 6:37 PM
from IP address 184.144.18.54


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: format experiment

by Coach (Login WarlocksCoach)

Was it also 2005 that in Midget there was "B1" and "B2"? Teams that did not advance through qualifiers formed their own B1 group for provincials to decide a separate title. It would've been 2005 or 06 because I was definitely at qualifiers in Midget those years and just can't remember which year that would've been.


Posted on Aug 7, 2014, 7:30 PM
from IP address 72.38.160.90


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Clarification

by Bobby Boogie (Login laxwall)

Please do not misunderstand my previous post.

I was not discussing how to grow the game nor was I excluding other levels of lacrosse.

I was commenting specifically on discussion points that had been raised about problems (perceived or real) that people saw with 'A' qualifiers this year. I simply presented a suggestion to perhaps remove many of the concerns or questions surrounding tie-breakers and rule applications.

If you want to get into a complete "philosophical" discussion about how to grow the game - WELL that is a whole different thread/week of discussion. But while on the point - grow the grass roots system. Build house leagues. And more than anything else - make provincials (at all levels) an event for the whole family that includes things other than just lacrosse. If the kids have fun on and off the floor and the parents and siblings have opportunities to do more than spend an entire weekend (or two or three) in an arena, trust me - enthusiasm grows and that draws other people. It takes time, a consistent effort and volunteers focussed on the kids!

Have a nice weekend!


Posted on Aug 9, 2014, 7:31 AM
from IP address 184.144.18.54


Respond to this message

Return to Index


happens at the lower levels

by growth in lacrosse (Login 2001laxfan)

growth in youth lacrosse happens at the "C", "D", "E" levels, thats where the new players are at, having a bigger "A" group creates more equal competition at the lower levels, there were no blowouts in the "A" qualifiers this year so all the teams competed.

The bigger "A" group creates more equal competition at the lower levels where the growth in youth lacrosse is actually happening.

Having a small group compete for the "A" championship, with larger groups at every other level does not create growth in minor lacrosse.

I've been to "C" provincials in a 32 team group, drove 4 hours to Whitby so teams that should be playing at a higher level could beat us 15 - 1 in 3 different games and the following year we don't see any of the kids back, kids just wanted a chance to compete and didn't get that opportunity.

The last 2 seasons with equal 16 team groups in every group all of the teams in our organization compete every year, with teams at A,B,C,D levels, the level competition at every level spurs growth.

If your talking about growing youth lacrosse and the "A" group is the only group in your conversation then you are forgetting about 85% of the kids playing lacrosse.

Having a 16 team "A" group does not hurt growth in lacrosse, it gives more kids who want to compete at the highest level the opportunity, while at the same time it creates more level competition at all the other levels.


Kids don't quit lacrosse because there are 3 extra teams in the "A" group but they do quit lacrosse if they don't get a chance to compete.




Posted on Aug 8, 2014, 3:31 PM
from IP address 70.24.47.229


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Another argument for growing the game

by growth in lacrosse (Login titanz43)

This year because of the new ratings & groupings system Zone 7 had 6 teams in the "A" group at provincials and in my 6 years in youth lacrosse I'm not sure if there was 3 zone 7 teams at "A" provincials in all those years.

Zone 7 competed with all of their teams at "A" provincials in 2014 and this will help grow the game in zone 7. Windsor has a good shot at being Bantam "A" champions.

How does excluding these teams help grow the game in zone 7?

Give more opportunities for kids to compete and the game will grow, creating a system that only includes the biggest centres and creating blowouts at the lower levels does nothing to grow the game in Ontario.

If your in the "Grow the game discussion" it has to involve the teams in the B,C,D,E groups not just "A" qualifiers and the final 6


Posted on Aug 8, 2014, 10:40 PM
from IP address 70.24.47.229


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Rumour has it

by Johnny99 (Login johnnydavis)

The OLA is considering having the 16 team peewee to midget A divisions compete in exactly the same format as everyone else and doing away with qualifiers altogether. This may be a good idea given the "hatchet" job done to the original qualifier format. Maybe what is "good for the goose is good for the gander"? For those of us that have been around since the birth of the qualifiers in 1991 ,which were promoted as a way to "showcase" elite lacrosse in Ontario, realize there may have been other motives to institute the "final 6". Jim Bishop's Whitby minor dynasty was just beginning and a few of his teams were upset in the provincials by " surprise" teams that he had not seen during the season. Soon after the qualifier system was put in place. Are we witnessing the end of the "final six"?


Posted on Aug 8, 2014, 3:21 PM
from IP address 70.27.35.37


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Upsets & underdogs

by growth in lacrosse (Login 2001laxfan)

Gotta love a good upset or an underdog making a playoff run in any sport.

If the 13 team qualifier and the final 6 format is such a perfect way to grow and showcase a youth sport why is there no other comparable system in youth or adult sports?


16 team single elimination tournaments work at the highest levels in every sport, not sure how it hurts the growth of lacrosse here in Ontario when the "A" group uses the same system.

I guess, the NHL, NBA, NCAA and many others have it wrong.

Remember there is no other playoff system in sports where 13 different teams get to play each other to see who the top 6 are and then the top 6 all play each other to see who the best team is.



Posted on Aug 8, 2014, 3:39 PM
from IP address 70.24.47.229


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Tyke A Provincials

by From Small Things Big Things One Day Come (Login johnnydavis)

The quarter final match ups include,

Heavy favourite Whitby vs Clarington, Mississauga vs Oakville, KW vs Cambridge and Oshawa vs Burlington.

Quarters on now. Semi and final tomorrow.


Posted on Aug 4, 2014, 4:13 PM
from IP address 70.27.35.37


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Semi Finals

by From Small Things Big Things One Day Come (Login johnnydavis)

Whitby vs Mississauga
Oshawa vs KW


Posted on Aug 4, 2014, 6:02 PM
from IP address 70.27.35.37


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: Semi Finals

by TheRev (Login leelaxman)

Saw some Tyke A action today Whitby/Clarington Whitby/Cambridge Whitby2/Peterborough n KW/Brampton Missy/Oakville

Too bad Oshawa was playing in Bowmanville would like to see them This is wide open and didnt think Whitby is the over all heavy favourite

The Whitby games were close with Cambridge and Clarington--The Clarington game Whitby exploded for 3 or 4 quick ones and that was it. Clarington tried to slow the game down against the quicker Warriors but could only do it for the 1st period and Whitby just out ran them the rest of the game

Whitby2/Peterborough was by far the best game to watch--end to end with some very good hits laid out by both teams and really with a few breaks Peterborough could have been beat--but with a 6-3 win Peterborough were out

watching KW and Missy they are good teams and very capable of beating Whitby and Oshawa

Given the experience of Oshawa with their TykeB championship last year with mostly minors I would consider them the heavy fav



Posted on Aug 4, 2014, 10:50 PM
from IP address 184.147.123.80


Respond to this message

Return to Index


C'mon Rev

by Tougher than the rest (Login johnnydavis)

Are you a little uncomfortable with your Whitby boys being the clear favourite. Whitby beat Oshawa, 5-2, 10-5 and 7-4 in their last 3 meetings. They beat KW 11-2 in their only meeting a few weeks ago. They beat Missy 8-3 and 8-1 in their last 2 games. Whitby is clearly the favourite.


Posted on Aug 4, 2014, 11:52 PM
from IP address 70.27.35.37


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Come on johnny "shooter" Davis

by TheRev (Login leelaxman)

Just saying what I saw Zone games and tournament games are a whole lot different than the Provincials Ive coached this level alot and things can be very different with a one game in or go home. There was a Whitby team several years ago that was undefeated the whole year and lost in the Provincial final


Posted on Aug 5, 2014, 12:36 PM
from IP address 184.147.123.80


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: Semi Finals

by therev (Login leelaxman)

and oshawa1gets beat by kw 6-5 a bit of a surprise but kw is good too


Posted on Aug 5, 2014, 2:39 PM
from IP address 24.114.61.177


Respond to this message

Return to Index


tyke A Whitby 9 KW 5

by therev (Login leelaxman)

A close game 6 4 going into the third whitby scored 3 quick ones and for the 8th straight yr r tyke a champs


Posted on Aug 5, 2014, 7:11 PM
from IP address 24.114.61.177


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Not 8th in a row for Whitby Tykes

by Johnny99 (Login johnnydavis)

It was nice to see the "underdog" Whitby Warriors win the Tyke A title today. They shocked Mississauga 12-4 in the semi final then outlasted a pesky KW squad in the final.

It is not Whitby's 8th A title in a row. In 2007, the Peterborough Lakers took home the A championship. They beat Halton in the final. That year, the Whitby tykes won every game and all 4 tournaments they entered. Unfortunately, they were unable to make the tyke A Provincial final. You should remember that team, Rev.


Posted on Aug 5, 2014, 11:23 PM
from IP address 70.27.35.37


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: Not 8th in a row for Whitby Tykes

by therev (Login leelaxman)

I guess i lost count maybe wishful thinkin since i was a part of that 2007 team a good team but that tough loss vs halton still hurts


Posted on Aug 6, 2014, 9:32 AM
from IP address 24.114.61.177


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Sorry I missed you

by Johnny99 (Login johnnydavis)

I didn't get a chance to say hello at the Tyke A final game. Maybe next time, Rev. Have a great summer!


Posted on Aug 8, 2014, 3:34 PM
from IP address 70.27.35.37


Respond to this message

Return to Index


a quilifiers

by ottawa2014 (Login ottawa2014)

Is there anybody out there who can tell me the difference in the 2 formulas used to decide the top 6 in the midget ..to the top six in the pee-wee. It seems to me that 2 different formulas were used. The ola does not seem to know either!!!


Posted on Jul 31, 2014, 8:01 PM
from IP address 76.64.68.151


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Very interesting

by Point Blank (Login johnnydavis)

Could you spell out the pee wee scenario for us? We can they maybe help understand, explain or refute. I am fully aware of the Midget situation where the proper tie breaker was applied.


Posted on Jul 31, 2014, 9:26 PM
from IP address 70.27.35.37


Respond to this message

Return to Index


point blank

by ottawa2014 (Login ottawa2014)

Pee- Wee Orangeville is in with a 6-0-1 record. After that we have 3 teams tied at 5-2. Now all teams thought that the tie-breaker was between teams tied...but ola said no special rule for tiebreaker is all games played.. How ever it was not written anywhere and in the ola constitution it clearly states that the tiebreaker goes only between teams tied. Any thoughts on this?


Posted on Aug 1, 2014, 6:07 AM
from IP address 76.64.68.151


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: point blank

by bmillsap (Login milky8)

The tie breaker rules at the qualifiers clearly stated that the Goals for and against from ALL qualifier games would be used to break tie. After the math Shelburne's number was higher than Nepean's. There was no mention of head to head (Shelburne beat Nepean 5-4: first game/first weekend).


Posted on Aug 1, 2014, 7:58 AM
from IP address 184.147.9.55


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Oh boy! Here we go....(n/m)

by Point Blank (Login johnnydavis)



Posted on Aug 1, 2014, 8:12 AM
from IP address 70.27.35.37


Respond to this message

Return to Index


What was the oville-shelburne peewee score?

by laxtarget (Login laxtarget)

mylax doesn't have this score - need it to do the math? Can anyone provide?


Posted on Aug 1, 2014, 11:14 AM
from IP address 135.23.174.148


Respond to this message

Return to Index


point blank

by ottawa2014 (Login ottawa2014)

Pee- Wee Orangeville is in with a 6-0-1 record. After that we have 3 teams tied at 5-2.


Posted on Aug 1, 2014, 6:11 AM
from IP address 76.64.68.151


Respond to this message

Return to Index


point blank

by ottawa2014 (Login ottawa2014)

Pee- Wee Orangeville is in with a 6-0-1 record. After that we have 3 teams tied at 5-2.


Posted on Aug 1, 2014, 6:11 AM
from IP address 76.64.68.151


Respond to this message

Return to Index


From the OLA Constitution

by Point Blank (Login johnnydavis)

First Tie Breaker is head to head. In a 3 way tie usually each team beat each other. However, if one team beat the other two they would advance.

Second Tie Breaker is GF/GF plus GA in the games Involving the "TIED TEAMS ONLY"


Third Tie Breaker is GF/GF plus GA in ALL games.

It goes on.........but that is all you need.


Posted on Aug 1, 2014, 8:18 AM
from IP address 70.27.35.37


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Than why didn't the OLA follow the Constitution for Midget A

by Eddy50 (Login Eddy50)

St. Catharines Midget A out because the OLA skipped the Second Tie breaker rule and went to the third tie breaker rule that put them out!!


Posted on Aug 1, 2014, 10:05 AM
from IP address 72.38.5.61


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Maybe, Maybe not? Calculations shown.

by laxtarget (Login laxtarget)

When in doubt, look at the actual numbers!

Being a numbers, stats type of person I used mylax results and figured out the numbers and here is what I get for Midget (YMMV):

4 teams end up at 4-0-2. Head to head burlington and brampton are 2-0-1 for 4pts and skitts and o'ville are 0-1-2 for 2 pts. Do they move on? if so then only stkitts and oville remain tied - again, if so, then head to head stkitts and oville are tied (5-5) and GF(inter)between them is useless and it would go to the next level GF(all) where oville goes on .579 vs .574.

If you don't have the 2 teams with 4 pts head to head move on, then you would use the GF(inter) formula for all 4 teams and you would have burlington, brampton and stkitts (.454) move on and oville out with .448.

I would assume that that is how the OLA did the calculation and it would appear more or less correct though I vaguely remember this sort of thing happening in years past and being told that head to head was to be interpreted as invalid for >2 teams and that calculation was to automatically go to next level -> GF(inter).

It would be interesting to see what was on the manager's pre tournament handout provided to see if anything was to be done differently. Also it would be good to know the oville shelburne score in peewee to really see how that tie breaker was done. Can't seem to find it on mylax.





Posted on Aug 1, 2014, 11:12 AM
from IP address 135.23.174.148


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Score 3-1 Oville

by PricklyThistle (Login PricklyThistle)

According to Shelburne Vets website, the Peewee game was July 27 and score was 3-1 Orangeville.


Posted on Aug 1, 2014, 2:03 PM
from IP address 99.251.144.103


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Interesting - Qualifiers Appear to use Different Rules

by laxtarget (Login laxtarget)

Thanks to PricklyThistle we have all the numbers now.

So it appears that in Peewee, 3 teams were tied with 5 wins, head to head all teams had 2 points, 1 win each, so should go to GF(inter) formula as per Constitution -> burlington (.555) and nepean (.529) go on, shelburne (.421) goes home....BUT apparently someone has said that tie-breaking rules were specifically posted differently for Qualifiers (why...who knows). For Peewees it appears that they used the GF(all) formula and burlington (.667) and shelburne (.573)go on and nepean (.534) goes home.

Hard to argue if this procedure was posted prior to the start of the Qualifiers BUT the question that StKitts and Nepean should be asking VERY LOUDLY is why the change from the Constitution procedure. According to the rules we are all supposed to follow these 2 teams should be in the Final 6 - who made the change and for what reason?

Inquiring minds would be very interested in knowing what the justification was.



Posted on Aug 1, 2014, 2:41 PM
from IP address 135.23.174.148


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Oh boy this is really getting good! n/m

by Point Blank (Login johnnydavis)



Posted on Aug 1, 2014, 2:52 PM
from IP address 70.27.35.37


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Standings

by Lax dad (Login laxdadx3)

I think the point here is creating a standings for a GROUP of 8 teams. 1st place through 8th place.

It only makes sense that all scores are used. Not just scores from the teams tied.


Posted on Aug 1, 2014, 6:35 PM
from IP address 99.243.148.202


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Two small points

by Point Blank (Login johnnydavis)

1. It does make sense that you look at just the goal ratio between the teams that are tied. It is why head to head is the first tie breaker.

2. What makes sense to you or me has very little relevance. It is the tie breaker spelled out in the OLA constitution.


Posted on Aug 1, 2014, 8:39 PM
from IP address 70.27.35.37


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Small bone to pick on your interpretation of tie breaker rule

by Point Blank (Login johnnydavis)

If three or more teams, the first tie breaker is head to head. In this case Burlington and Brampton move on due to their superior records against the other two teams. Now, in this situation it makes no difference but St Kitts and Orangeville should move DIRECTLY to GF/GF plus GA against the teams tied(as written in the OLA constitution). I don't believe you can try to use "head to head" a second time. In this case these two tied so it doesn't matter but it does not seem right to apply head to head again.

These 8 team qualifiers are really starting to cause some headaches. I seem to recall a problem last year when the tie breaker was not done properly and a game had to be replayed. Wow, this is getting good!


Posted on Aug 1, 2014, 3:09 PM
from IP address 70.27.35.37


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Head-Head Tiebreaker

by laxtarget (Login laxtarget)

Hard to tell if the head to head was even used because going straight to GF(all) gives the same end results and the OLA never explains how or what they do. When I did up the spreadsheet I was surprised that one interpretation of the head to head process sort of led to the eventual result. There are a number of other, equally reasonable interpretations of the tie breaker rule that could be used here - no indication that anyone has ever really thought things through (surprise, surprise) or we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Still really need to see what exactly was handed out to the managers prior to Qualifiers - and hopefully get an explanation of why it was done that way.

I have always ranted at the (stupid) things the OLA does but the worst is inconsistency - if you set a procedure in the rules then F^$#$#%$ follow it - don't change just because it seems like a good idea at the time.

It should be interesting going forward if someone with stakes in the discussion pursues it - otherwise the OLA will ignore things hoping it will go away (and, unfortunately, from past, personal experience it usually does because we can only tilt at windmills so long before burning out ....sigh.....)


Posted on Aug 1, 2014, 4:55 PM
from IP address 135.23.174.148


Respond to this message

Return to Index


A different approach

by Bobby Boogie (Login laxwall)

My son has been out of the minor system for six years. He played in qualifiers under both the full round robin format (13 teams in total - 6 games each weekend) and the two division 16 team format.

He has said repeatedly that the two division format lacks the intensity and true test that qualifiers should be. We went to qualifiers last year to watch and the electricity found in the building was severely lacking.

So - I propose a different model. This comes from many years running a large minor hockey tournament (64+ teams) for up to five age groups (novice - Midget).

If the OLA is determined to have 16 teams play qualifiers (and I can argue both sides of that issue) then why is the OLA stuck on the old model of only 6 teams advancing to Provincial finals. Good tournaments are best run with multiples of 2, 4 or 8. Therefore, if you don't want a full round robin in the qualifiers, have the top 4 teams (8 in total) advance to the Provincial Finals. Then you can run a cross over round robin of three games, followed by quarter-finals, semi-finals and then championship games. Forget the bronze game - nobody wants to play that game after losing a semi-final.

Format for Provincials would be as follows:

Division X (Bionda Division) - Pool A 1st and 2nd place plus Pool B 3rd and 4th place (from qualifier weekend final standings)

Division Y (Tavares Division) - Pool B 1st and 2nd place plus Pool A 3rd and 4th place (from qualifier weekend final standings)

Each division would play a round robin schedule (3 games) - teams seeded 1 - 4 after round robin.

Quarter-Finals - complete cross-over - 1st Place X vs 4th Place Y etc

Semi-Finals - winners of quarter-finals play off.

Finals - winners of semi's.

Allows for a balanced schedule by having teams in division all play at same time. Reduces scouting and eliminates whining about unequal rest.

I look forward to your input - OLA are you listening?


Posted on Aug 6, 2014, 4:59 PM
from IP address 184.144.18.54


Respond to this message

Return to Index


2014 HardCor Lacrosse Travel Team Tryouts

by HardCor Lacrosse (Login HardCorLax)

HardCor Lacrosse is pleased to announce our 2014 tryout and tournament schedule for our boy's field lacrosse travel teams.

LOCATION
River Oaks Turf Field (Oakville)

DATES
Session 1 - Sunday, September 7th
Session 2 - Sunday, September 14th

TIMES
grade 3/4 (2005-06)and 5/6 (2003-04) -11 am to 12:20 pm
grade 7/8 (2001-02) - 12:20 to 1:40 pm
grade 9/10 (1999-00) - 1:40 to 3:00 pm

COST to TRYOUT
$20.00

TOURNAMENTS
Skull and Bones - Rochester, NY - Oct. 18th or 19th
BooBash - Oxford, MI - Oct. 25th or 26th
Turkey Shoot - Ithaca, NY - Nov. 15th or 16th
John Mack Southern Tier Shootout - Feb. 7th or 8th

PROGRAM
HardCor Lacrosse is focused on providing additional opportunities for those players that have passion and want to further develop their lacrosse skills, playing experience and game awareness IQ in US tournament play.

TO REGISTER
Email hardcorlacrosse@hotmail.com - Please include the following;
1. Player's name
2. grade in Sept. 2014
3. Birthdate
4. Position
5. Shooting hand - right or left

FEES
Please see link -http://www.hardcorlacrosse.com/wordpress/?page_id=525

Thank you for your interest. If you have any further questions, please email us at hardcorlacrosse@hotmail.com.



Posted on Jul 28, 2014, 4:16 PM
from IP address 24.226.99.149


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Midget final 6

by stkittslax99 (Login stkittslax99)

Does anybody know the final standings for midget qualifiers? Or who qualified?


Posted on Jul 28, 2014, 3:53 PM
from IP address 192.252.169.49


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Re: Midget final 6

by WhitbyLax60 (Login WhitbyLax60)

Whitby
Burlington
Orangeville
Mimico
Guelph
Brampton


Posted on Jul 28, 2014, 4:34 PM
from IP address 99.245.191.230


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: Midget final 6

by spittal (Login spittal)

How did st kitts not get in


Posted on Jul 28, 2014, 6:47 PM
from IP address 173.238.14.237


Respond to this message

Return to Index


How you ask?

by Debbie (Login GoalieMom30)

SC tied Orangeville in their final game, 5-5. There was a 4 way tie for first with Brampton, Burlington, St Cath & Orangeville with 10 points each. The OLA employed some kind of goals for/against tiebreaker for third place and Orangeville came out on top by 2/100's of a point. St Catharines was only beaten by one team (Brampton) with more wins than Orangeville (I believe) but because of the tiebreaker format, they got third.
Not a true top six, not in this new format - IMHO!!!


Posted on Jul 28, 2014, 6:58 PM
from IP address 70.49.86.28


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Bitter pill

by Rocky Ground (Login johnnydavis)

Wow, that is a real tough one for the St Catharine's team to swallow. They were one of my favourites to take the Midget A title this year. The funny thing is that St. Catharines bantam team last year came within a whisker of being eliminated at last years qualifier under a similar scenario. It would have been a shame as they went on to take the Bantam A title at the final six. Perhaps the OLA needs to address this new format. As an impartial observer, I am not convinced we are getting a true top 6 either with this 2 division format.


Posted on Jul 28, 2014, 7:51 PM
from IP address 70.27.35.37


Respond to this message

Return to Index


format suggestion

by Timber (Login teecee99)

for teams to spend 2 weekends and not play each other to decide the final six seems hard to swallow. I believe teams used to play 10 - 12 games over 2 weekends. If they want to stick with 2 pools of 8 ( 7 games each) why not have the 3rd and 4 th place teams in each pool do a cross over (keep the result of the inter-pool game). Many ways to sort the tie breaker but the main emphasis should be between the 4 teams. By adding only 4 total games a much more acceptable and exciting result could be reached. Just my 2cents....


Posted on Jul 28, 2014, 8:37 PM
from IP address 184.144.78.29


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: format suggestion

by Coach (Login WarlocksCoach)

I went to qualifiers 3 times between 04-06 and believe if memory serves we played a full round robin in 2004 of 15 games over the 2 weekends, 3 friday 3 saturday and 1-2 sunday. This may be a little on the extreme side but maybe the 10-12 game idea would give us better accuracy.


Posted on Jul 28, 2014, 8:46 PM
from IP address 72.38.160.90


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Even in OLA lacrosse

by Underdog upsets are great for sports (Login 2001laxfan)

Upsets happen in every sport that's why those teams that are not favourites show up for the game.

No sport has a playoff system where every team in the playoffs gets an opportunity to play all the other teams in the playoffs, it's impossible that's why there is no playoff system where it exists.

Upsets happen in "B", "C", "D" provincials and in NCAA basketball, the BCS bowl system in NCAA football.

this is a better system because of the upsets that happened this past weakend, "A" provincials used to be this exclusive club for deep organizations that always have 35 kids at tryouts, when the smaller orgs need to see their team to decide they might be a "B" or an "A" team.

Congrates to the Shelburne peewees for making the final 6, a centre that small does not know they are an "A" team in the pre season.

Congrates to the Windsor Bantams for going undefeated and sending a message, and the London bantams for missing the final 6 by a point and beating Mimico along the way

Zone 7 has 6 teams in the "A" group this year because of mylaxratings and they all deserve to be there, in past years zone 7 was lucky to have an "A" team at any level every other year.

If you can name another team sport that has a playoff system where every team in the playoffs gets to play each other once to see who moves onto the next round then I would love to hear it.

The final 13 system was a flawed system, probably nice to get to play everyone but a 13 team group at every level would have way too many groups at provies, 16 teams in every group is a great system that caters to every level not just the "A" level and it leaves room for underdogs to win big games.

Anyone seen that great sports movie where the favourite wins every game all along the way and then wins the championships? Neither have I.

The best sports stories are created with upsets and underdogs and now OLA minor lacrosse is getting in on the fun.

GO SHELBURNE PEEWEES AND WINDSOR BANTAMS in the "A" Ontario Lacrosse Championships


Posted on Jul 28, 2014, 9:00 PM
from IP address 70.51.245.215


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Just a few points

by StCathMom (Login GoalieMom30)

Just for the record, we (St Catharines Midgets) were not upset by anyone, nor were Orangeville ever considered underdogs. We finished the qualifiers with a 4-1-2 record. There were no real upsets in our pool. It finished with a four way tie for first. Shows you how competitive and strong these centres are. Since you can't use head to head in this type of tie, I would have thought that the fact that we had the most wins would advance us. But instead they went to the gf/ga math, and we came out on the losing end (not by a point, by 2/100'ths of one point!) of that formula.
As for your theory about this new format benefitting smaller centres, the midget final six is (if I'm not mistaken) Whitby, Burlington, Orangeville, Mimico, Guelph & Brampton. None of these centres have ever struggled with numbers as far as I can see.
Bitter pill? Absolutely. Having seen both systems played, I much prefer the play everyone once format. It was more exciting, and more upsets and collapses played out there! This new format is a cost cutting measure by the OLA, so I know they won't ever go back to the old way, but they can tweak a few things...


Posted on Jul 29, 2014, 1:56 AM
from IP address 70.49.86.28


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Tie Break Rules

by Too much time on my hands (Login St_Kitts_parent)

All four teams had 4-1-2 records. The first tie break is points earned in games between the four teams. Brampton and Burlington both had 1-0-2, records from the games played among the four teams, so they both advanced. Orangeville and St. Kitts were still tied with 0-1-2 records. The next tie break is GF% calculated from the games between the four teams. That may have decided it, I'm not going to calculate it. After that it is GF% using all games and then least penalty minutes from all games. The fact that there is a four way tie for first would suggest that there was not enough games played to decide things. I can't believe that St. Kitts wouldn't have finished in the top six if full round robin was played with all 16 teams.
Personally, I think the OLA should create format for A teams similar to AAA hockey where they have Zone teams from every area so that the places that don't have large centers can field competitive A level teams. Then have A leagues like in hockey, a league east of Toronto and a League west of Toronto. Pare down the number of teams that qualify to the provincial A level tournament to a manageable using the regular season league results or play proper play-off series between teams from each league to narrow things down. The lower ranked teams in the current tournament usually get smoked every game the way things were before last year, being the 13th ranked team in the A qualifiers meant that you were in for a long two weeks of getting killed and going 0-12 at qualifiers. The way things are, a team from one pool gets in with a 4-2-1 record over a team with a 4-1-2 record from the other. All four teams that tied first in St. Kitts pool would probably beat Mimico most (if not all) of the time. As it is the #1 team from the regular season in My Lax rankings is out and 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 11 are in.


Posted on Jul 29, 2014, 8:26 AM
from IP address 216.234.54.250


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: Tie Break Rules

by yourstruly (Login ruba535)

Mimico did not let in more than 3 goals in any game in qualifiers. (FUN FACT)


Posted on Jul 29, 2014, 10:01 AM
from IP address 12.32.90.76


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Take A Step Back

by B.M (Login btownsniper)

The fact of the matter is every team knew the rules and format going into the Qualifiers, you are only complaining after because this new format didn't work out in your teams favour. If your kid's team were to have benefited from this Tie Break Format, there would be no subject for discussion. The fact that you decide to point out Mimico is laughable. I had the privilege of watching a few of their games these past two weekends and there is no doubt in my mind that these guys deserve to be in the Final 6. They are a well coached team whose defensive game is one of the best I have seen at the Midget level in quite some time. Not to mention their goalie is probably one of the best playing at the Midget age. Both of Mimico's losses at Qualifiers were both 3-2, having only allowed 13 goals against over their 7 game schedule, the best of any of the 16 teams. It really doesn't matter how well you did during the season as every team experiences player losses to either Field Lacrosse Showcases or Injuries throughout the season. What matters at the end of the day is if your team decides to show up at Qualifiers. Would you say that my kids team Brampton doesn't deserve to be at Final Six because they dropped a game to Beaches 8-7 (14th Ranked Team) or that Guelph should have been knocked out because of their 7-2 loss to Whitby....obviously not. Take a step back and keep your comments to yourself as every team who has qualified for Final 6 deserves to be there. This is Qualifiers and upsets happen all of the time!

Lets go Brampton!!!!!


Posted on Jul 29, 2014, 10:17 AM
from IP address 209.146.166.138


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: Take a Step Back

by StCathMom (Login GoalieMom30)

I think everyone's comments and replies support my original point, that this 2 pool format is not without it's flaws, and at least the old way produced a more likely TOP SIX instead of a final six. Every team that's going to Windsor played a good solid qualifier and deserves to be going. We are sitting on the sidelines instead of going because of a mathematical elimination and yes, this is a bitter pill simply because it was a sucky sucky way to end a minor lacrosse career. That's all I am saying. ... so everyone relax, and enjoy the rest of the summer! See you next year in the Junior circuits happy.gif
PEACE! LOVE! LAX!


Posted on Jul 29, 2014, 10:44 AM
from IP address 70.49.86.28


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: Even in OLA lacrosse

by yourstruly (Login ruba535)

Windsor did not go undefeated in bantam, they lost to Mimico


Posted on Jul 29, 2014, 9:58 AM
from IP address 12.32.90.76


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Not !!!

by qwikstic (Login qwikstic)

This is NOT a better system for "A" at Peewee, Bantam, Midget imvho ! and I'll use this example as one very good reason, (and I'm not from St. Kitt's). Some of the best lacrosse of the season, at any level, happened during the two weekend, 13 game round robins. I would also argue some of the biggest upsets occurred during this format which is what you are basing your argument on and subjective at best.

Movies have nothing to do with the argument, just lots of fluff. No shortage in your post. Congrats to Shelburne or Windsor if they deserve to be one of the 13 teams. I know clearly that Windsor (Bantam) would have been one of the 13, as they earned it. Determining the 13 teams might need some fine tuning, and/or discussion, but the 13 team round format is by far the superior format for showcasing and growing our sport.

Regards,
rtk



Posted on Jul 29, 2014, 10:46 AM
from IP address 24.157.70.223


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: Not !!!

by B.M (Login btownsniper)

Don't get me wrong, I agree that the 13 Game round robin format at Qualifiers is far better than the two groups of 8. It gives everyone a chance to play everyone, instead of just playing the teams in your grouping. The fact of the matter is this is not the case now and you have to play with the cards that you're dealt...every team knew what they had to do to make Final 6. I find it funny how people on this forum are able to say certain teams would have been in the Final 6 if the old format were to have been in place, as this is all just speculation. All you are doing is playing out scenarios in your head that simply do not exist. No one knows how any team would have done if the old format were to have still been in place. Taking shots at other teams just because of their ranking going into Qualifiers is just not fair to those teams, as every year, new format or old, there is always a dark horse or two who manage to sneak in. Lets not forget that the MyLaxRanking is just a mathematical formula which I personally think does not depict the true ranking of a team. The Brampton Midget team being ranked 10th going into Qualifiers is definitely not a true depiction of how good that team actually is.


Posted on Jul 29, 2014, 11:15 AM
from IP address 209.146.166.138


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: Not !!!

by qwikstic (Login qwikstic)

I agree with what you are saying. My response was to "2001laxfan"


Posted on Jul 29, 2014, 11:30 AM
from IP address 24.157.70.223


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Fall Field Registration

by Field Lax (Login dugoutfan)

KWMLA will be holding their

Fall Field Registration July 30 from 5-8pm at Albert McCormick Arena

U13 (2002, 2003, 2004) $150
U16 (1999, 2000, 2001) $175
U19 (1995,1996,1997,1998) $200


More information and tryouts can be found at


www.kwminorlacrosse.com


Posted on Jul 28, 2014, 2:43 PM
from IP address 174.88.149.20


Respond to this message

Return to Index

KWMLA Fall Field Registration

by Field Lax (Login dugoutfan)


KWMLA will be holding their

Fall Field Registration July 30 from 5-8pm at Albert McCormick Arena

U13 (2002, 2003, 2004) $150
U16 (1999, 2000, 2001) $175
U19 (1995,1996,1997,1998) $200


More information and tryouts can be found at


www.kwminorlacrosse.com


Posted on Jul 28, 2014, 2:44 PM
from IP address 174.88.149.20


Respond to this message

Return to Index


HARDCOR LACROSSE CLINICS/LEAGUES - FALL 2014

by HardCor Lacrosse (Login HardCorLax)

HardCor Lacrosse Fall 2014 Programs, run by Troy Cordingley, Head Coach of the Buffalo Bandits of the National Lacrosse League, are now open for registration. Please visit www.HardCorLacrosse.com for details and info on all of our leagues and clinics (below);

LEAGUES
HardCor Field Lacrosse League - Sept. 6 to Nov. 1
HardCor Box Lacrosse League - Nov. 16 to Mar. 22

CLINICS
Skill Development Mondays - Oct. 6 to Dec. 15
Skill Development Thurs. - Oct. 9 to Dec. 11
High Performance Elite (Peewee - 6pm) and (Bantam/Midget - 7pm) - Sundays Oct. 5 to Dec. 6
Chicks-Sticks (girls field lax) U9, U11 and U13 Saturdays Oct. 19 to Dec. 7
High Performance Chicks-Sticks (girls field lax) U15 and U19 Oct. 5 to Dec. 14


The mission of HardCor Lacrosse is to elevate each players maximum potential by delivering the most comprehensive and dynamic lacrosse experience. Through high level coaching, HardCor Lacrosse is fully committed to preparing each individual player, beginner or experienced, to improve their performance, knowledge and passion for the game. HardCor Lacrosse strongly emphasizes hard work, team first attitude, intensity and fun in a well organized, fast-paced and positive environment. HardCor Lacrosse wants every player to leave leagues/clinics/camps with a memorable experience while fostering a life-long enjoyment for the game of lacrosse.

REGISTRATION IS NOW OPEN ONLINE - www.HardCorLacrosse.com



Posted on Jul 28, 2014, 2:31 PM
from IP address 24.226.99.149


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Peewee B Provincials

by laxdad19 (Login laxdad19)

Does anyone have any predicitions for the Peewee B Provincials this week? Based on MyLax rankings it is up for grabs as a lot of teams have won against higher ranked teams. Guelph looks like they are on a roll right now, but you can't count out Centre Wellington, Owen Sound, Newmarket or Oakville 2.


Posted on Jul 28, 2014, 12:46 PM
from IP address 64.109.211.198


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Congrats

by Oldlaxr (Login rrspman)

To all teams in all divisions

Hamilton beat Guelph in B

Good Effort - team was barley put together and there 1 team competed in qualies
Not often you get team competing successfully in A & B

(Bantams watch out for Oakville 2 teams in A Qualies - Second team will be tough to beat next year - Unless Troy blows a voice box happy.gif


Posted on Aug 4, 2014, 2:20 PM
from IP address 24.150.57.73


Respond to this message

Return to Index


facts

by laxdad74 (Login laxdad74)

Not sure we're you got your facts but that was Hamiltons #1 teamm they didn't have a team at qualifiers,they weren't thrown together and they were rated"A" until final ratings were released.


Posted on Aug 5, 2014, 12:54 AM
from IP address 24.157.112.236


Respond to this message

Return to Index


"A" Provicials

by Laxitup (Login Wind13)

Does anyone know who are the top 6 moving on in each division?

Thanks!


Posted on Jul 28, 2014, 10:09 AM
from IP address 204.128.128.44


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Novice

by Dave Fowlie (Login fowlerdogs)

I noticed that the Milton Novice Team some how made it all the way to "D ranking" for the provincials after they played Teir 1 all season. I am not tying to complain but thsi does't seem right to me. Thats a big drop.


Posted on Jul 28, 2014, 12:59 AM
from IP address 69.17.172.158


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Final 6 - Peewee

by bowen23 (Login Bowen23)

3 from each pool moved on here are final 6

Peterborough 14 points
Orangeville 13 points
Oakville 12 points
Burlington 10 points
Shelburne 10 points
Mimico 8points


Posted on Jul 27, 2014, 5:45 PM
from IP address 204.187.140.30


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Re: Final 6 - Peewee

by Stkittslax99 (Login stkittslax99)

I can't believe Nepean didn't get in with a 5-2 record. That would really suck.


Posted on Jul 27, 2014, 11:51 PM
from IP address 192.252.169.49


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Whitby Centre well bantam

by TheRev (Login leelaxman)

Whitby wins big LG game 6-3 over undefeated X Centre well move on to provincials


Posted on Jul 27, 2014, 12:43 PM
from IP address 24.114.60.218


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Bantam "C" Provincials

by LAXMOM00 (Login LAXMOM00)

'To anyone who has watched Bantam "C" lacrosse this year:

Who our the favourites this year?
Are their any "star" players', unfortunately on a "C" lacrosse team?
Lastly, any darkhorses, or long shots to winning Bantam "C" ?

Thank you for your time and thoughts! I'm a mother from Brantford and I'm curious on what's going to happen this year.


Posted on Jul 27, 2014, 11:42 AM
from IP address 173.238.63.238


Respond to this message

Return to Index

re: Bantam C Provincials

by Brantford Mommy (Login LAXMOM00)

I am going to be honest and a little biased by saying brantford is going to make it to the semi finals this year.


Posted on Jul 27, 2014, 2:43 PM
from IP address 173.238.63.238


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Brantford ???

by LAXER101 (Login Laxer131)

Come on now, Brantford winning "C". That's highly unlikely. Keep a close eye on Nations 2, might have the best goalie.


Posted on Jul 28, 2014, 12:23 PM
from IP address 184.144.70.147


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: Bantam "C" Provincials

by PCO6 (Login PCO6)

There are lots of "star" players on 'C' teams. Don't worry "Mom" they'll make it to Junior if they're any good.


Posted on Jul 28, 2014, 12:19 AM
from IP address 99.250.85.124


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Predictions

by LAXER101 (Login Laxer131)

1. Uxbridge
2. Oakville 3
3. Whitby 2
4. Toronto Stars

Those are my predictions, Toronto Beaches also has an epic collapse haah

My sleeper pick is Cornwall or Sudbury

And watch out for #5 on burlington


Posted on Jul 28, 2014, 9:21 AM
from IP address 184.144.70.147


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Predictions

by LAXMOM00 (Login LAXMOM00)

That's rediculous, Brantford tied Uxbridge, they ain't that good silly boy


Posted on Jul 28, 2014, 4:08 PM
from IP address 173.238.63.238


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Close

by Oldlaxr (Login rrspman)

Beaches won
Uxbridge made Semi's
Whitby 2 (hard to tell - Quarters maybe)
Oakville 3

Sleepers where in bed

Congrats to all teams that competed - tough road to make to finals


Posted on Aug 4, 2014, 2:16 PM
from IP address 24.150.57.73


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: Bantam "C" Provincials

by The Mouth of the North (Login MouthoftheNorth)

Two cents on the teams that I've seen this year:

Barrie 1 - extremely balanced team that was ranked "B" for much of the year. They should go deep.
Clarington 2 - very well coached with an excellent goalie. Can get rattled, though.
Missisauga 1 - could be a tough run for them, I'm afraid.
Welland - could be the team to beat, very talented.
Toronto Stars 1 - seem to struggle in games against weaker opponents, but could be a darkhorse.
Whitby 2 - excellent team
Sudbury - big, physical team that takes foolish penalties. Can intimidate smaller opponents.
St. Catharines 2 - great defensive team, not a lot of scoring. Good coaching.


Posted on Jul 29, 2014, 12:15 PM
from IP address 50.101.107.27


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re:Bantam "C" Provinvials

by LAXMOM00 (Login LAXMOM00)

Where you from that you have seen all these teams play? just curious.

I appreciate the information, i did not really get a chance to watch toronto stars, whitby 2, Clarington and Barrie. Why do these four teams impress you the most, do they have stand out players, or just a great team all together.

From my perspective uxbridge, us (Brantford), West durham, and Oakville 3 can compete with anyone. Going to be a very interesting week. I was hoping to hear more feedback lol


Posted on Jul 29, 2014, 5:26 PM
from IP address 173.238.63.238


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: Re:Bantam "C" Provinvials

by LAXER101 (Login Laxer131)

The mouth of the north


Posted on Jul 30, 2014, 8:05 AM
from IP address 184.144.70.147


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: Re:Bantam "C" Provinvials

by The Mouth of the North (Login MouthoftheNorth)

I live in Zone 4 and saw most of these teams in local tournaments. It wasn't that those four impressed me the most, I was just sharing my observations of the teams that I personally saw play this year.

Uxbridge had a very solid "C" team in Bantam last year, I'm not surprised that they are again tough to beat. West Durham dominated PeeWee "D" two years ago - if it is roughly the same group of players, they should do well in "C" this year. Oakville teams always seem to be competitive, even their "3" teams.


Posted on Jul 30, 2014, 3:15 PM
from IP address 50.101.107.27


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Bantam "C" Provincials

by Lax (Login LAXMOM00)

thanks you, and good luck


Posted on Jul 30, 2014, 4:51 PM
from IP address 173.238.63.238


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Beaches

by Laxdude4 (Login Laxer131)

Beaches are taking it all


Posted on Jul 30, 2014, 10:03 AM
from IP address 184.144.70.147


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: Bantam "C" Provincials

by laxfan1000000000000000000000 (Login darla6969)

Barrie should still be in B as they came close to winning the Guelph tourney against shelbourne who were A
Welland haven't seen play but hear they can run with the group
Stars are darkhorse but take stupid penalties at bad times. Coaches are fools too.
Beaches, depends which team shows up
Clarington again undisciplined. Lost in zones I believe to Whitby
Whitby same team that won Peewee A last year.
Oakville darkhorse as well..depends on depth of goaltending.

El predicto is saying Barrie, Whitby, Welland, Beaches advancing with a Barrie Whitby final.


Posted on Jul 31, 2014, 5:32 PM
from IP address 99.243.80.198


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Bantam Scores

by TheRev (Login leelaxman)

St Kitts-6 Orangeville-2
Burlington-7 Hamilton-5
Clarington-5 London-3
St Kitts-7 Clarington-1
Hamilton-3 Oakville2-2
London-5 Orangeville-5
Burlington-5 Oakville1-4
Oakville1-8 Oakville2-4
Clarington-5 Guelph-0
Clarington-6 Shelburne-4
6nations-9 Hamilton-2
Windsor-7 Orangeville-4
Mimico-7 St Kitts-7
Windsor-4 London-3
London-7 Mimico-5
St Kitts-5 Guelph-1
Oakville1-7 Caledon-3
Oakville1-6 6nations-3
Orangeville-7 Shelburne-4
Whitby-11 Hamilton-5
Cent welly-7 Buurlington-3
Caledon-4 Oakville2-3
Whitby-7 Burlington-1
Centwelley-6 Oakville2-2


Posted on Jul 27, 2014, 10:26 AM
from IP address 184.147.123.80


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Nepean-Guelph Midget

by TheRev (Login leelaxman)

got a chance to watch this game-pretty good one-Nepean had a 5-2 lead into the third but nerves got to them and Guelph scored 3 to tie it and ended 5-5

St kitts edged Owen Sound 6-5 while Orangeville routed Beaches 7-1 and Mimico handled 6nations 7-2


Posted on Jul 26, 2014, 11:58 PM
from IP address 184.147.131.54


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Re: Nepean-Guelph Midget

by Stkittslax99 (Login stkittslax99)

I watched the nepean Guelph game as well. It was a great game, nice to see nepean upset the #2 ranked Guelph team.


Posted on Jul 27, 2014, 11:54 PM
from IP address 192.252.169.49


Respond to this message

Return to Index


2nd qualie scores

by TheRev (Login leelaxman)


Peewee

Whitby-6 London-5
Brampton-7 Missy-5
Missy-6 Halton-4
Windsor-3 Halton-2
Clarington-8 6nations-8
6nations-5 London-4
Brampton-9 Windsor-8
Whitby-12 Clarington-1
Halton-9 Caledon-6
Shelburne-9 London-6
Mimico-8 Windsor-2
Shelburne-7 Whitby-2
Missy-7 Caledon-1
Peterborough-8 Brampton-4
Oakville-7 Missy-2
Oakville-10 Windsor-2
Peterborough-5 Halton-2
nepeean-4 Claington-3
Brampton-5 Mimico-5
Burlington-8 Clarington-1
Orangeville-6 Whitby-4
Orangeville-11 6nations-2
Burlington-6 London-0


Posted on Jul 26, 2014, 11:47 PM
from IP address 184.147.131.54


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Qualifier Weekend 2

by LAxDad (Login laxdadx3)

Post scores here please....


Posted on Jul 25, 2014, 12:24 PM
from IP address 70.53.10.96


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Re: Qualifier Weekend 2

by laxbhoy (Login laxbhoy)

midget
beaches 8-7 brampton
oakville 4-4 owen sound
brampton 6-3 oakville
owen sound 8-4 beaches


Posted on Jul 25, 2014, 7:09 PM
from IP address 69.157.106.90


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Oakville Titans Semi Final Schedule

by Oakville Titans Lacrosse Club (Login OakvilleTitans)

The Oakville Titans meet up with Ennismore in the semi-finals of the Sr.B playoffs.

Game 1 - Friday July 25 - 8:30pm - Robert E. Young Arena
Game 2 - Sunday July 27 - 7:00pm - Glen Abbey
Game 3 - Saturday August 2 - 7:00pm - Robert E. Young Arena
Game 4 - Sunday August 3 - 7:00pm - Glen Abbey (if nec.)
Game 5 - Tuesday August 5 - 8:30pm - Robert E. Young Arena (if nec.)

We look forward to seeing you out at the games!

GO TITANS!!

Remember to follow us:

Twitter - @Oakville_Titans
Online - www.titanslacrosse.ca
Facebook https://www.facebook.com/pages/Oakville-Titans-Lacrosse-Club/140513566007863


Posted on Jul 24, 2014, 11:26 AM
from IP address 70.30.51.235


Respond to this message

Return to Index

3 hour rule

by Curious (Login rrspman)

As I grey the memory becomes foggy but there used to be a "Rule" about there being a minimum of 3 hours between provincially sanctioned games.

Does anybody know if it still applies or has it evaporated into the ether?


Posted on Jul 21, 2014, 7:15 PM
from IP address 24.150.57.73


Respond to this message

Return to Index

it is a guideline not a rule

by ocimim (Login ocimim)

it basically says if possible....


Posted on Jul 22, 2014, 9:58 AM
from IP address 206.177.43.76


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Fall Box Lacrosse

by BHi Lacrosse (Login bhilax)

Link to flyer:
https://www.facebook.com/bhistc/photos/a.337432336368183.70728.290588201052597/553509881427093/?type=1&theater


Posted on Jul 21, 2014, 3:53 PM
from IP address 96.1.38.97


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Junior Lacrosse

by BHi Lacrosse (Login bhilax)

Link to flyer:
https://www.facebook.com/bhistc/photos/a.337432336368183.70728.290588201052597/554645344646880/?type=1&theater


Posted on Jul 21, 2014, 3:51 PM
from IP address 96.1.38.97


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Youth Garbage Can Lacrosse

by BHi Lacrosse (Login bhilax)

Link to Flyer:
https://www.facebook.com/bhistc/photos/a.337432336368183.70728.290588201052597/554676667977081/?type=1&theater


Posted on Jul 21, 2014, 3:50 PM
from IP address 96.1.38.97


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Intermediate Provincials

by lacrosse fan (Login dugoutfan)

It really disappoints when the OLA makes changes to the rulings for provincials

I was sure it was suppose to be 16 in each division for provincials

This year they decided to only put 8 in A for Intermediate! Very disgusted....Cambridge was one of the A teams and should be....Toronto appeals to move from B to A.... Cambridge does not get a chance to fight

They are a true A team .... They deserved to play A they are a fantastic team! This past weekend they proved they should be A by winning their 2nd tournament the Conradi....beating out an A team in the Championship game!

Hmmm....there still is time...adjust the schedule let the teams play where they should be playing and give all teams a chance!



Posted on Jul 21, 2014, 12:19 PM
from IP address 174.88.149.20


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Re: Intermediate Provincials

by Int Fan (Login intfan)

Historically the winner of the Conradi is out of the A provincials their first day, the only exception I know of is Orangeville a couple of years back. Looking at MYLAX they have only played four A teams going 4-2, while playing mostly B teams and having very close, mostly one goal games with them. To anyone without a bias that would show they are a clear B team. The Beaches have played five A teams going 3-1-3(this is including the tie and one goal loss they suffered to Clarington in Zone play which is not accounted for). You should also take into consideration that the Beaches won A last year. In my opinion this was the right decision by the OLA, and the A provincials will be stronger because of it.

Had their been 16 A teams, maybe six of the teams wouldn't compete, where as having only 8 A teams will make both A and B instantly more competitive.


Posted on Jul 21, 2014, 2:04 PM
from IP address 99.253.38.58


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: Intermediate Provincials

by U never know (Login creaseeee)

Good assessment -- My understanding is Cambridge won the B championship and it was Missy beating NOTL for the A championship, with Missy winning 4_3 . Not sure who is the best of the best in the province, but if teams come to play lacrosse, the provincials should be competitive. Tough to say who's to beat in A and B ---


Posted on Jul 21, 2014, 2:13 PM
from IP address 99.242.220.205


Respond to this message

Return to Index


sounds pretty bias

by longpolejoel (Login longpolejoel)

Beaches will likely be lucky to advance past the first day of provincials in A. And clearly clarrington aswell, and sudbury who has played 6 games and one tournament deserve A? The OLA has messed up this year. Teams like Cambridge, Guelph, and even stayner all seem to have young teams. And have all proven to be competitors in the A division. Just because beaches won A Last year does not mean they have the same team. If anyone saw them at conradi,they looked like garbage. Clarrington looked as if they didnt even belong there. missi had an unreal preformance by their female goalie all weekend and truely deserved that win. A should be expanded to 10 or 12 teams. So teams in B that have played and beaten most of the teams in A could prove there position. Not get shafted by the OLA.


Posted on Jul 21, 2014, 3:57 PM
from IP address 99.236.86.157


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: sounds pretty bias

by U never know (Login creaseeee)

Even if the Beach get a through an appeal -- the team in that 8th position should be notified when ratings first come before appeals so they know some one may bump them and have the ability to appeal as well -


Posted on Jul 21, 2014, 4:44 PM
from IP address 99.242.220.205


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: sounds pretty bias

by longpolejoel (Login longpolejoel)

The appeal process is a joke. Ola has gone to **** in the past few years. Rankings in the past few years seem to be fairly political. The fact that they give zero explanation for their decisions is bl. Again, the A Division for provincals is basically 5 teams in my opinion. 5 teams who legitimately can be competitive. Beaches, Clarrington, and Sudbury dont have the right to be there. Would have loved to see beaches appeal letter.


Posted on Jul 21, 2014, 7:39 PM
from IP address 99.236.86.157


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: sounds pretty bias

by U never know (Login creaseeee)

Given your assessment -- do u think cambridge will take b no problem or are there any teams that may be a sleeper in team in b




Posted on Jul 21, 2014, 8:41 PM
from IP address 99.242.220.205


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: sounds pretty bias

by Int Fan (Login intfan)

First off there is only one "R" in Clarington. Yes, Iam from Clarington but no I have no involvement in the Intermediate program. Maybe A should only be 5 teams in the case of only having 5 legitimate contenders. Again Cambridge would still be a B team. This seems to be a yearly ordeal for Cambridge in Intermediate, every year they some how get shafted. Why did they not declare A for the prelim ratings, or why did they not appeal the B rating they were given? I don't think Cambridge got shafted at all, I also doubt anyone here has the whole story as to why they are rated B. I would love to see Cambridge in A, simply to hear all the stories on how the OLA stole the championship from them.

But please enlighten us as to how the rankings are politically influenced.

It appears you are basing your analysis on the Conradi Tournament, one tournament, an open tournament featuring A,B,and C teams. A Tournament whose champion has only twice won the A provincial title. Clarington and Toronto both played in the A final, no they probably dont have the same teams but I can't imagine two teams that were pretty young last year lost very many players. Sudbury was very entertaining C champion last year, they brought 6 runners and a goalie. By far the best games of the tournament were Sudbury games. Why does Cambridge have the right to play A ball above Beaches, Clarington, and Sudbury?


Posted on Jul 21, 2014, 9:42 PM
from IP address 99.253.38.58


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: sounds pretty bias

by lacrosse fan (Login dugoutfan)

Cambridge was A in the appealable ratings, Beaches appealed

Cambridge also won their own tournament

I have watched many different games in then Intermediate division this year and no I am not from Cambridge, I believe there are actually 12 possible teams who could contend at A

OLA set out 16 per division....they changed it for Intermediate


Posted on Jul 22, 2014, 8:40 AM
from IP address 174.88.149.20


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: sounds pretty bias

by laxdad (Login laxdadx3)

You also have to realize that Intermediate is a totally different group than the rest of minor lacrosse. It becomes smaller and smaller every year with more associations going to Jr. C instead of Intermediate.

The 16 "A" teams in Novice through Midget participate at qualifiers. Not at the lacrosse festival. I would guess that Intermediate is not included mainly due to total team numbers.

There are a total of 30 Intermediate teams participating. 8 in A, 16 in B, and 6 in C.

Look at every other age group. Midget has 63 teams, Bantam 81, and Peewee 92. Much easier to go with 16 team divisions in A, B, C, and D.

Could Cambridge have competed in A? Probably. Could other teams compete there as well? Probably. Maybe would have been better to have 3 10 team divisions.


Posted on Jul 22, 2014, 9:44 AM
from IP address 70.53.10.96


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: sounds pretty bias

by curious (Login creaseeee)

who r your 12 teams


Posted on Jul 22, 2014, 1:22 PM
from IP address 206.177.43.70


Respond to this message

Return to Index


So....

by laxdad (Login laxdadx3)

So how did the B finals go.....


Posted on Aug 7, 2014, 3:55 PM
from IP address 99.243.148.202


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Nice Scheduling! Not

by BT (Login rememberourvets)

Not sure who did the scheduling for the Shelburne Midgets but it is just not balanced and unfair at provincials. Yes it is the "D" division and I don't expect the world but playing 4 games in 26 hours at provincials and you may not even advance out of your division and if you do your going to be tired! Friday at 8am, then noon and just to top it off lets have us wait around and play the final game of the night as well at 9pm. So the first game and the last game of the day...just great! Then the next day (Sat) have us play at 10am! So Friday these guys will be up at probably 6am ish if they are staying there and if they are coming from Shelburne across the city in the morning at least 5am ish then get finished playing well after 10pm and if they are lucky in the sack by midnight. Then to top it off Shelburne, North Perth ,Newmarket #2 have to play 4 games to advance(play each other twice) while the other 12 teams only play 3 games to advance. 3 divisions of 4 teams and 1 division of 3 teams. If your in the 3 divisions of 4 teams 2 advance so your chances of advancing are 50% however if you're in the 3 team division like us only 1 team moves on so your chances of moving on are 33%. Plus if you do advance you have to play against a team that has rested only playing 3 games. Great scheduling...anyone else having to play 4 games in 26 hours just to advance out of your division? Not sure how you fix it with 15 teams in "D" but 3 teams just got what the other 12 teams in that same division didn't get....that being a fair schedule!
Okay my bitch session has ended! I feel better now! happy.gif


Posted on Jul 19, 2014, 12:31 AM
from IP address 65.92.96.113


Respond to this message

Return to Index

"A" Qualifier Results

by Laxitup (Login Wind13)

If anyone has the results of the first weekend for Peewee and Bantam could you post them.

Thanks!


Posted on Jul 18, 2014, 1:39 PM
from IP address 107.1.228.86


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Re: "A" Qualifier Results

by TheRev (Login leelaxman)

Midget
Whitby-7 Guelph-2

Bantam
Caledon-5 Whitby-4

Peewee
Mimico-8 Caledon-0
Peterborough-6 Oakville-5
Orangeville-4 Burlington-2


Posted on Jul 18, 2014, 3:16 PM
from IP address 184.147.135.157


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: "A" Qualifier Results

by Abused Fan (Login krashr)

Bantam
Windsor-3 Guelph-2
C/W-8 Six Nations-4
Mimico-9 Shelburne-8


Posted on Jul 18, 2014, 5:53 PM
from IP address 70.48.177.142


Respond to this message

Return to Index


more scores

by TheRev (Login leelaxman)



Peewee

Oakville-15 Caledon-0
Peterborough-5 Mimico-3
Burlington-7 Shelburne-3
Mimico-5 Halton-2
Nepean-5 Whitby-2
Oakville-8 Brampton-1
Burlington-8 6nations-2
Windsor-8 Caledon-5
Shelburne-7 Clarington-3
Peterborough-7 Missy-3
Orangeville-6 London-1

Bantam

Windsor-3 Guelph-2
Centre-welly-8 6Nations-4
Windsor-12 Clarington-8
Oak1-5 Whitby-2
Mimico-4 Orangeville-2
Centre-well-9 Hamilton-3
Mimico-5 Guelph-4
Whitby-4 6nations-3
Guelph-5 London-4
Burlington-4 Caledon-1
Mimico-9 Shelburne-8
6nations-3 Oak2-3
Shelburne-6 Windsor
Centre-welly-5 Caledon-4


Midget

6nations-3 WestDurham-2
KW-4 6nations-2
Whitby-3 6nations-2
St Kits-7 Akwesasne-3
Guelph-3 Mimico-2
St Kitts-7 Beaches-3
Burlington-3 St-3
Guelph-6 WD-3
Clarington-9 WD-3
Akwesasne-4 Owen Sound-1
Orangeville-5 Akwesasne-2
Burlington-6 Orangeville-3
Whitby-6 Nepean-4










Posted on Jul 19, 2014, 4:19 PM
from IP address 184.147.135.157


Respond to this message

Return to Index


end of the day scores

by TheRev (Login leelaxman)



Peewee

Peterborough-6 Windsor-4
Clarington-7 Orangeville-7
Brampton-3 Caledon-3
Shelborne-7 6nations-4
Oakville-7 Halton-1
Burlington-8 Whitby-6
Mimico-9 Missy-4
Nepean-4 London-2


Bantam

London-2 Shelborne-0
6nations-5 Burlington-3
Windsor-5 St Kitts-1
Caledon-9 Hamilton-4
Mimico-8 Clarington-2
Centre welly-4 Oakville1-3
Guelph-6 Orangeville-2
Whitby-5 Oakville2-2
Burlington-4 Brampton-4
6nations-8 Nepean-1
Orangeville-5 Brampton-5


Midget

Whitby-4 Clarington-1
Orangeville-4 Oakville-3
Burlington-3 Owen Sound-2
Mimico-6 WD-2
Akwesasne-4 Beaches-1
KW-4 Guelph-4
St Kitts-4 Oakville-2




Posted on Jul 19, 2014, 10:56 PM
from IP address 184.147.135.157


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: end of the day scores

by TheRev (Login leelaxman)

Orangeville-5 Brampton-5 midget


Posted on Jul 19, 2014, 10:58 PM
from IP address 184.147.135.157


Respond to this message

Return to Index


little work for updated scores

by Jasper19 (Login jasper19)

If you go to mylaxrankings.com
Select Division (Peewee,Bantam or Midget)
find team ya want and select details
you can find out how teams are doing
they seem to be very up to date


Posted on Jul 20, 2014, 11:40 AM
from IP address 192.206.181.81


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Bantam Standings

by rick (Login pezram)

Here is a link to the bantam standings.

[URL=http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e328/laxmotion/2014-07-20_1758_zps03b9fe82.png" alt="[linked image]">[/IMG][/URL]



Posted on Jul 21, 2014, 6:55 AM
from IP address 24.150.226.146


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Midget Standings Week 1

by rick (Login pezram)

[URL=http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e328/laxmotion/2014-07-21_1145_zps677d7433.png" alt="[linked image]">[/IMG][/URL]


Posted on Jul 21, 2014, 11:47 AM
from IP address 24.150.226.146


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Peewee Standings Week 1

by rick (Login pezram)

[URL=http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e328/laxmotion/2014-07-21_1122_zpsd1ab9aa4.png" alt="[linked image]">[/IMG][/URL]


Posted on Jul 21, 2014, 11:48 AM
from IP address 24.150.226.146


Respond to this message

Return to Index


PeeWee Standings Incorrect

by ocimim (Login ocimim)

Pretty Sure the Mimico Peewees are 3-1 not 2-1-1

Beat Caledon 8-0, Halton 5-2, and Miss 9-4
Lost to Peter 5-3

Awesome job on the standings though! Too bad the OLA couldn't do it that quickly.


Posted on Jul 21, 2014, 1:23 PM
from IP address 206.177.43.76


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: PeeWee Standings Incorrect

by Rick (Login pezram)

Not sure if it's right but My Lax has Mississauga and Mimico tied 4-4 that's where I am getting scores from.


Posted on Jul 22, 2014, 9:59 AM
from IP address 24.150.226.146


Respond to this message

Return to Index


PEEWEE

by Big W (Login big_wooden_stick)

Pool B

*1. Orangeville -7 pts.
*2. Shelburne - 6 pts.
3.Burlington - 4 pts.
*4. Napean - 4 pts.
5. Whitby - 2 pts.
6. London - 2 pts.
7. Clarington - 1 pt
8. Six Nations - 0 pts

Teams with * have played four games in weekend #1 of Qualifiers

Don't Quote me on the Teams in your Pool, They might change it up ? Maybe this is the reason for not releasing the both Qualifiers schedules together. ?


Posted on Jul 21, 2014, 11:26 AM
from IP address 162.249.237.4


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Qualifier's 2nd weekend schedule

by JD (Login 7jd17)

Anyone seen this yet?

The provincial schedules have been released for games in August, shouldn't they be able to release July 25-27 Qualifiers more than a week in advance?

If it is out there, can someone post please.


Posted on Jul 18, 2014, 10:58 AM
from IP address 66.11.73.153


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Week 2 schedule

by Perplexed (Login rrspman)

I know most work done by volunteers but come on already in the midst of 1sr weekend & still not schedule -
Give people chance to plan & prepare
The excuse you know its this week doesn't fly.
Do I need to take Friday off?
Can I cancel hotels?
Should I get babysitters?

Same format as last year - fill in the blanks and send out the schedule


Posted on Jul 18, 2014, 7:30 PM
from IP address 24.150.57.73


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: Week 2 schedule

by Laxitup (Login Wind13)

I think you will play opposite of what you played this weekend? So if your team played Friday & Saturday this weekend, next weekend you will play Sat and Sun.
But that is just what I think.....but it might make too much sense for the OLA to do it that way.


Posted on Jul 18, 2014, 8:09 PM
from IP address 107.1.228.86


Respond to this message

Return to Index


TREND

by BIG Wood (Login big_wooden_stick)

I'm not 100% sure on this, But Judging by the schedule of other teams in our pool. if you played 3 games in the first weekend, it was 2 sat. & 1 sunday
Now if you played 4 games in the first weekend, you played 2 friday & 2 on sat.
my guess is this coming weekend will be the the opposite of what you played this weekend. if that isn't as clear as mud, i don't know what is lol


Posted on Jul 20, 2014, 11:38 PM
from IP address 162.249.239.10


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Makes sense

by JD (Login 7jd17)

Also makes sense to release both weekend's schedules at the same time. It's not like you are waiting to see who will have to play who? You already have that figured out. I know that at least 3 different teams in one age group asked this weekend about the schedule and were told it is done, but "I" may decide to make some changes so I can't tell you. You can wait until it gets released on Monday.(hopefully)

Mirror what you did this weekend and you are all set.






Posted on Jul 21, 2014, 8:29 AM
from IP address 66.11.73.153


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Love the 2nd week schedule

by Confused (Login rrspman)

Why would they only schedule a 2 1/2 break between games on day 1
6 hours on day 2???????

I've got a meeting so the 6 hours works for me but


Posted on Jul 21, 2014, 7:19 PM
from IP address 24.150.57.73


Respond to this message

Return to Index


1st Round Playoff Series

by Oakville Titans Lacrosse Club (Login OakvilleTitans)

The Oakville Titans meet up with the Owen Sound Northstars in the first round of the Sr.B playoffs.

Game 1 - Friday July 18 - 8:00pm - Glen Abbey Arena
Game 2 - Saturday July 19 - 7:00pm - Bayshore Arena
Game 3 - Sunday July 20 - 7:00pm - Glen Abbey (if nec.)

We look forward to seeing you out at the games!

GO TITANS!!

Remember to follow us:

Twitter - @Oakville_Titans
Online - www.titanslacrosse.ca
Facebook -https://www.facebook.com/pages/Oakville-Titans-Lacrosse-Club/140513566007863


Posted on Jul 14, 2014, 3:26 PM
from IP address 70.52.136.123


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Green Gaels host Halton Hills Tomorrow Night in Game #1

by Matt Chamois (Login Matt_Chamois)

The Green Gaels and the Halton Hills Bulldogs get their OLA Junior B Lacrosse League Eastern Conference Semi-Finals underway tomorrow night with game #1 of the best of five series starting at 8PM in Bowmanville at the Garnet B. Rickard Recreation Complex.

After splitting the regular season series at one game apiece, both teams will be looking to jump out to an early series lead on Saturday night at Rickard to gain control of the second round matchup. Surprisingly, this will be the first playoff series between these two teams since 2011, after what seemed like an annual affair in the post-season in the late 2000's.

Game #1 of the series will be a great compliment to the action at the Garnet B. Rickard Recreation Complex this weekend as the Clarington Minor Lacrosse Association is hosting the Dan Greer Memorial Tournament this weekend, a tournament featuring Tyke and Novice teams from across the province. It's a great opportunity to get out to the arena early in the evening before the Gaels and Bulldogs matchup to watch and support some of the future stars of our Nation's Summer Sport.

Tickets for the Green Gaels second round playoff series games at the Garnet B. Rickard Recreation Complex are $8 for adults, $5 for seniors and students, while children 12 and under are admitted free under the supervision of an adult.

The floor will be open during the intermissions for kids of all ages to go on the floor with a helmet and stick to throw a ball around during the ten minute break in play.


Posted on Jul 11, 2014, 4:36 PM
from IP address 66.203.207.68


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Untitled

by TheRev (Login leelaxman)

This is always a fun time to look at the Minor OLA page to see how all the people react to the final ratings and believe me it hasn't changed at all since my son started playing lacrosse way back in the late 80's

Everyone seems to come up with the perfect ways to make the system work but are there revolutionary changes---i would say no--the question that should be raised is WHY My sons year in Peewee A provincials there were 5 teams--Beaches Whitby Orangeville Peterborough and Six Nations--and Nations really was a B team--I asked the coach why they were A and he said for the kids to learn how to play A ball--and look at their association now--that is the right approach

Changes to have to be made--but will they--the OLA will never change from what I have seen over the last 25 years I have had kids play


Posted on Jul 9, 2014, 11:54 PM
from IP address 184.147.135.157


Respond to this message

Return to Index

2014 Ontario Minor Lacrosse Ratings

by Ratinbgs Are Out (Login titanz43)

http://assets.ngin.com/attachments/document/0058/7441/2014_Appealable_Ratings_and_Rankings.pdf


Posted on Jul 8, 2014, 12:17 PM
from IP address 198.162.74.25


Respond to this message

Return to Index

2014 ratings can you post the girls ratings also

by ptbotim (Login ptbotim)

nm


Posted on Jul 8, 2014, 1:07 PM
from IP address 99.235.214.123


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: 2014 Ontario Minor Lacrosse Ratings

by Abused Fan (Login krashr)

Why are Clarington and Mississauga highlighted as pending? Are they appealing every ranking?


Posted on Jul 8, 2014, 5:08 PM
from IP address 70.27.136.191


Respond to this message

Return to Index


not sure what the shaded teams were in the appealable ratings

by FINAL RATINGS (Login titanz43)

Here's your groups for the 2014 Ontario Lacrosse Championships

http://ontariolacrosse.com/content/2014OLAFINALRATINGS.pdf


Posted on Jul 8, 2014, 5:12 PM
from IP address 198.162.74.25


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: not sure what the shaded teams were in the appealable ratings

by Abused Fan (Login krashr)

Those were what was released to the public eye. See the first post in this thread for what was released to the associations.


Posted on Jul 8, 2014, 6:15 PM
from IP address 70.27.136.191


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Pay Me My Money Down

by Johnny99 (Login johnnydavis)

In the past, the high lighted teams are because their respective organizations have not payed their OLA fees yet.


Posted on Jul 9, 2014, 4:40 PM
from IP address 192.40.105.236


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: 2014 Ontario Minor Lacrosse Ratings

by Dan (Login DanC_44)

anyone know what happened to Toronto Beaches 2? mylax had them ranked D but they don't appear on any of the released ratings


Posted on Jul 8, 2014, 10:12 PM
from IP address 99.252.245.118


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: 2014 Ontario Minor Lacrosse Ratings

by spittal (Login spittal)

when will schedule for A qualifiers be out?


Posted on Jul 9, 2014, 1:29 PM
from IP address 173.238.127.51


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Ratings

by jfee11 (Login jfee11)

Does anyone now if the final (appealable) ratings have been released? I'm a tyke coach and haven't seen them yet.


Posted on Jul 8, 2014, 10:09 AM
from IP address 207.219.69.239


Respond to this message

Return to Index

What's new

by PricklyThistle (Login PricklyThistle)

We wait for the OLA to post something well past the deadline that they themselves set.......shocker. I wonder if an email to zone directors/club presidents has gone out yet....


Posted on Jul 8, 2014, 12:18 PM
from IP address 99.251.166.30


Respond to this message

Return to Index


past deadline

by qwikstic (Login qwikstic)

I think a fine and hearing is in order !


Posted on Jul 8, 2014, 12:40 PM
from IP address 24.157.70.223


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Novice rankings

by scott (Login hyperhoyt99)

Hello anyone see the Novice rankings yet?


Posted on Jul 7, 2014, 2:50 PM
from IP address 198.103.221.52


Respond to this message

Return to Index

You mean from MyLax?

by Tsitshoh (Login tsitshoh)
Moderator

She:kon!

http://www.mylaxrankings.com/rank.php?y=2014&a=1&v=1002

This is the current rankings that are pulled into Provincials are they not?

Skennen

...Tsitshoh...


Posted on Jul 7, 2014, 4:15 PM
from IP address 174.92.107.234


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Qualifiers

by Coach (Login lacrosse2014)

How can a team like the midget Sarnia pacers be ranked 13th with a 19-1-1 record going to the finals in tournament play winning two get dropped down out of "A" division this makes no sense I thought mylax would have been better then this but the politics in the ola has once again taken over


Posted on Jul 7, 2014, 1:55 PM
from IP address 216.8.129.120


Respond to this message

Return to Index

As a disinterested observer..

by Tsitshoh (Login tsitshoh)
Moderator

She:kon!

Mind you, I am only reading the current MyLax rankings.

They could have gone 20-0 and still be ranked 13th with what they did in their schedule. I see some pretty close games with 24th ranked Wallaceburg, a close game with 29th ranked Gloucester, a tie with 16th ranked Stars 1 and a game with a 4 goal differential with 36th ranked Stars 2. Regardless of any other team ahead of them, based on the weaker schedule and unimpressive results against weaker opponents, I would not place them in A. This is what MyLax is designed to do, weight the schedule and results.

The Clarington Gaels, on the other hand, had one goal games against top 10 opponents, even though they lost, they had a slightly tougher schedule and very competitive results against the top teams in the province. Owen Sound is in the same boat. Some tough one or two goal losses to the best teams, but hammered the teams they were supposed to, including an 8-1 win over Sarnia.

Based on the records of those two teams, I would rank them ahead of Sarnia.

I mean, its a close call for the Pacers, but look at the tournaments they attended: Milton was a B/C tournament, Herb Lea was a B/C tournament, Super Series is A and Nepean is a B/C tournament. So of 4 tournaments, Sarnia went to 3 B tournaments and only won gold in their own B/C tournament.

Of the three tournaments Clarington went to, 2 of them were A. All three of Owen Sound's tournaments were A. If you want to go A, you go to A tournaments, be competitive and that's all there is to it really.

Skennen

...Tsitshoh...


Posted on Jul 7, 2014, 4:13 PM
from IP address 174.92.107.234


Respond to this message

Return to Index


tournament results

by Je (Login laxman5)

I do agree: Sarnia has not played enough "A" teams to know for sure if they belong but they have only played 3 tournaments to date: Milton B/C won gold...Sarnia B/C won gold...Hamilton A/B Silver (lost in finals). Would have been nice to play in more A/B tournaments, but based on results in Bantam 2 years ago they thought they would be a middle of the pack "B" team. They'll have to play their best to have a good finish in "B", so I guess that is not a bad place to be, but would have been nice to get in to the "A" qualifiers.

Good luck to all!


Posted on Jul 8, 2014, 4:08 PM
from IP address 72.38.34.252


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Politics?

by A lover of LAX (Login aloverof)

What "OLA Politics" are you refering to???

Lots of posters on here always trashing the OLA... I'm no fan of some of the things they do but most posters seem to just complain for the sake of complaining. How did these "OLA" politcs come into play here?

In doing a little reasearch I was looking at the mylax site & I really don't see that Sarnia has played any of the top 'A' teams out there.

I am not the site designer but I would be pretty confident in saying that who your opponints are is figured into the sites algorithm.

19-1-1 is an impressive record & Sarnia should do quite well in B if that is where in fact they will end up... "Politics" or not


Posted on Jul 7, 2014, 4:18 PM
from IP address 198.161.183.51


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Only 5 Ontario A/B Tournaments

by Not A Lot of opportunities to play "A" Ball (Login titanz43)

It's not easy to play in the top tourneys for teams from Sarnia's zone or Glouchester's zone.

There is Peterborough, Brampton, Orangeville, Owen Sound & Hamilton for A/B tournaments at the Bantam/Midget levels.

If your a centre that does not typically play "A" ball you probably didn't think to enter the Peterborough tourney unless your from the far east.

Last year Brampton & Orangeville were full before the tournament listing was released in March, so that leaves Hamilton & Owen Sound for the teams that have to wait until registration closes to see what you have.

I'm from a small centre and until registration closes I don't know if we have a "B" team or a "D" team.

Sarnia (midget), Glouchester (Bantam) didn't really play the top teams and I'm sure they didn't have an opportunity either.

I know in our org if we win "B" provincials we plan an "A" schedule 2 years later but we still have to wait until registration is closed to make sure everyone comes back to lacrosse.

If you don't have a house league system or tier #2 teams and don't hold tryouts because you only have 15 kids register at each level should you plan on playing "A" ball?

Give London & Nepean A/B tourneys and maybe everyone in Ontario would have the opportunity to play A teams (just an example)

Create a top 24 loop based on results from 2 years ago and eliminate zone games for these teams they just play each other all year, top teams only play the top competition. (just another example)

16 "A" teams and the 8 teams that reached the "B" quarter finals all play each other through the summer with a balanced schedule, maybe have A/B play days in each zone.

In zone 7 for example, the Windsor & London "A" teams were required to play tier 2 teams in their zone so the tier 2 teams get in the required amount of games, 5th ranked Bantam Windsor probably doesn't get much from playing #65th ranked London #2, twice this year but Windsor #2 needed to get 10 games in and zone 7 only has 2 tier #2 bantam teams.

If your in Kitchener you get to play top teams all year and don't have to play Simcoe or Guelph #2 or Six Nations #4.(again just an example)

Different centers face different challenges, Sarnia should have embraced the opportunity to play Midget "A" but maybe they weren't prepared to spend 2 more weekends in Whitby after already spending 3 weekends in hotels, thats a lot of time off work for parents. Parents might already have the festival weekend booked off and never thought they could be an "A" team.

2 years ago the Sarnia Bantams didn't even make it out of their group at Bantam "B" provincials.

In my opinion they are a "B" team along with Glouchester (bantams)


Posted on Jul 7, 2014, 5:05 PM
from IP address 198.162.74.25


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Preaching to the choir...

by Tsitshoh (Login tsitshoh)
Moderator

She:kon!

I would like to see Zone concept eliminated altogether and go the same way that hockey is organized. In each of the AAA, AA, A & B levels have 8 regional divisions, for each age category and then provincial tournaments with the divisional champions. Of course, this would mean the Festival idea would be scaled back resulting in a loss of revenue and me being black-listed forever for even suggesting such a thing! Egads!

But I am in favour of removing the Zones to allow each league to run their own administrative affairs. Scrap ratings altogether and go with a divisional playoff format. That will determine who is who and where they should be.

Skennen

...Tsitshoh...


Posted on Jul 7, 2014, 5:39 PM
from IP address 174.92.107.234


Respond to this message

Return to Index


As another disinterested observer

by Johnny99 (Login johnnydavis)

With due respect, I believe the original poster raises some very valid concerns. "MyLax" has shown to be a very accurate evaluation of a particular teams ability. Contrary to what has been stated here, the strength of a teams schedule is taken in to account by MyLax. The argument that a team just entered B/C therefore should not go A is obviously flawed. The argument that parents won't want to spend two weekends in Whitby is ludicrous. The removal of teams by the OLA from MyLax's top 16 should be critically viewed by us all. We need to follow these teams through the provincials and evaluate the OLA's decision. In the bantam division, Huntsville is rated 8th by MyLax. The OLA has decided they are not going to play in the A qualifiers. The reason given, as I understand it, is they are from a smaller center and a weak zone. However, Shelburne, from the same zone, is playing A in two divisions. Honestly, why does the OLA pick and choose teams to drop out of A? Why does the OLA make changes to the MyLax rankings at all?


Posted on Jul 7, 2014, 5:35 PM
from IP address 70.27.35.37


Respond to this message

Return to Index


I tend to agree...

by Tsitshoh (Login tsitshoh)
Moderator

She:kon!

I made a disinterested case before looking at the final 16's for each division as posted on the OLA website. While I still maintain that if you want to be ranked A, you play in A tournaments and/or play A teams period, I do see where MyLax has been massaged to produce an outcome and I am totally against that. I thought MyLax was supposed to be 'it' as far as rankings go. If that is not the case, then it cheapens everything.

Skennen

...Tsitshoh...


Posted on Jul 7, 2014, 5:43 PM
from IP address 174.92.107.234


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Mylaxrankings - Box lacrosse

by qwikstic (Login qwikstic)

Mylaxrankings was never meant to be "it", and rightfully so, for the very reasons that have been pointed out here. If you go to the OLA announcement when they added "MyLaxRankings", I'm going to paraphrase, but it said something along the lines of "one of the criteria" in helping come up with the rankings. IMVHO that is how it should be, another tool to come up with the impossible, i.e. making everyone happy.

My observations:

i. as has been mentioned it is difficult to attend "A" tournaments, too few and not enough openings not to mention logistics in geography. This needs to be addressed.

ii. I like the idea of blowing up Zones and coming up with some type of regional representation, but before you blow Zone up, lets have a well thought out and intelligent discussion on what to replace it with.

iii. by far and away the best lacrosse of the universe, at least for minor, was the 13 team qualifiers and Final 6. WHY, WHY, did the OLA ever want to change something that was not broken ! Huge mistake, again imvho. That was easily the best box lacrosse of the year for Peewee, Bantam, and Midget, bar none, and that would include any type of Nationals that I have seen in the last 10 years.

iv. I've said this before, there has to be an incentive to play at "A". There has been some talk about having some type of tournament to determine who gets the last few spots at qualifiers, an excellent idea. Maybe tie in either this kind of tournament or the "A" tournaments to centres/teams that win/compete/ at A. i.e. They would get the right to hold the "A" tournament(s), for either the following year or the year after.

but again... please, please, for Peewee,Bantam and Midget, go back to the 13 team, 2 weekend (6 games per weekend), for Qualifiers. Has to be one of the worst decisions/moves the OLA has made in my 10+ years at minor.

And while I'm at it, I'll make a pitch to the CLA for a two tier National Championship, similar to what Junior hockey or the FIL does at world's.

Group A

Alberta
BC
Iroquois
Ontario East
Ontario West
winner of Group B

Group B

Manitoba
Nova Scotia
New Brunswick
Quebec
Saskatchewan
NF/PEI
HOST Minor

"Home and home" round robin, top four teams playoff. 5th and 6th play a one game playoff to determine 5th place.

Just my two cents.

Cheers and good luck to Canada at worlds in the next few weeks !



Posted on Jul 8, 2014, 12:37 PM
from IP address 24.157.70.223


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Good Points

by Ratings Are Out (Login titanz43)

I Like all of your points except the 13 team "A" group. In my opinion all groups should be the same size, if the "A" group has 13 teams then so should all the other groups.

It wasn't the "A" group that was broken, it was the 32 team B or C group that was broken, you shouldn't have 12 - 1 scores in any group at provincials although the deeper you get into the rankings the harder that is.

16 teams is not much of a difference and by adding 3 teams you now have the Shelburnes, Windsor's & London's competing at the "A" level at provies and they can beat those teams so they should be there. Having 16 teams creates underdogs & upsets, look at the Peewee final six last year, no one would have predicted those 6 teams because there were some great upsets at qualies.

If you had the chance to watch kids play for championships in the E or F groups it was nice to see those teams finally get the opportunity to play close games vs their level of competition after a long year of blowouts in their zone.

13 "A" teams just seems too small for a province with over 80 teams at some levels and having 16 is just enough to give hope to the underdogs and when it's all said and done the "B" champion is still usually good enough to make the final six in "A" if that's how the ratings would have worked out.

Ontario has a lot more parity today, I look forward to seeing "A" Champions from smaller centres in the near future.


Posted on Jul 8, 2014, 12:54 PM
from IP address 198.162.74.25


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Good Points

by Not A Lot of opportunities to play "A" Ball (Login titanz43)

I like the points you make too, maybe mylax rankings should be set in stone.

I would agree with that too but I still think there has to be more opportunites to play the "A" teams throughout the year.

If a team goes 20 - 0 but never plays a top 20 team then it really doesn't make sense for them to have to play the top teams in provincials.

This arguement comes along every year in NCAA football and as long as the OLA is using mylax (and they should) there will people who criticize it.

Remember in College football when TCU, Bowling Green, Boise State..... go 11 - 1 in the regular season there are people screaming that those teams should not get a spot in the cmampionship game over a 10 - 2 Georgia, Florida, Texas team.

In college football they don't want the little centres in the big game, in OLA lacrosse the fans want the little centres in the big games to take their lumps.

I love the chatter, I will certainly be following those "B" teams this season that had a top 16 ranking on mylax at the festival in August


Posted on Jul 7, 2014, 5:46 PM
from IP address 198.162.74.25


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: Good Points

by Coach (Login lacrosse2014)

This is why I said in my first post about politics, I was at the agm when they first introduced the mylax system and the way they introduced it was the ranking you have is where you play, and to say that to play in "A" you should play in those tournaments is something that shouldn't always be the deciding factor what about the mid pack "b" teams if they lose in b tourneys should the ola be considerate to them and move them to c division, trust me I like the mylax rating system what I don't like is the way the ola will just change their mind and move teams,they seem to refuse/turn down appeals for many teams that try to play in the division that best suits them, this system is also why they went to a max of 16 teams in each, there is a lot of good points being stated by everyone


Posted on Jul 7, 2014, 10:51 PM
from IP address 216.8.129.120


Respond to this message

Return to Index


mylaxrankings

by qwikstic (Login qwikstic)

one very good reason the OLA should not rely only on mylaxrankings is that it supports the notion of running up the score on weaker teams, which in most zones is almost unavoidable, playing weaker teams. If you relied solely on mylaxrankings and it is likely bad enough now given its weight, you give coaches the excuse to run up scores to improve their mylaxrankings position. You also likely limit the development of weaker players on these stronger teams that would otherwise get to play more in these types of lopsided games, again reinforcing the idea of running a short bench. Speaking of which, running a short bench has gotten a little easier to do now that the "A" bracket has moved to 16 teams, and a "softer" qualifier schedule.


Posted on Jul 9, 2014, 9:06 AM
from IP address 24.157.70.223


Respond to this message

Return to Index


What's the alternative.....?

by Johnny99 (Login johnnydavis)

MyLax is MUCH more accurate than you seem to be suggesting. I may be mistaken but I believe the maximum goal differential recorded by MyLax is 8. Having witnessed first hand the OLA drop a team a whopping 19 spots from MyLax a few years ago despite an appeal, believe me we need to be very critical of this practice. qwikstic, want to take a wild guess at who turned out to be right? MyLax may have some limitations but it is much more valuable than you are indicating. The one huge advantage of MyLax is that it is OBJECTIVE. When teams are arbitrarily moved by the OLA, the membership is left to wonder. There are cries of "politics" and favouritism. I am not suggesting MyLax is perfect but we need to look very closely at the results of these OLA decisions to "over rule" MyLax. They should be evaluated critically. My experience has been that MYLax is much better at predicting than the OLA.

BTW, I agree that the 13 team A format was a much better model for qualifiers. There is no better way to get the best 6 teams than to play each team once. In fact, last year the eventual Bantam A champs were very nearly ousted in the qualifiers by a four way tiebreaker because the two groups were uneven. However, the lobby for 16 team divisions seems to be swaying the OLA at this point. It may also be a reasonable approach for teams applying to get in A division again as in years past. Bigger lacrosse centres like Clarington, Burlington, KW etc.. may want all their clubs to play A despite the fact they are not in the top 16.


Posted on Jul 9, 2014, 4:33 PM
from IP address 192.40.105.236


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: What's the alternative.....?

by qwikstic (Login qwikstic)

JD,

My intent was not to give that impression, only to counter the call for using MyLax exclusively as many of the posts believe or have called for on this forum. It absolutely does have its use, but it does have some drawbacks. I think the OLA got it right when saying that it was one tool that would be used in determining rankings. Again I don't think you are ever going to make everyone happy, every year, there will always be some subjectivity involved unless you can change the regular season format and/or tournament schedule. (Which I am in favour of, some have suggested a regional type play down which I think has some merit and should be explored more fully). With the current system the OLA needs to ensure that the ranking process is open, transparent and undertaken by qualified, knowledgable people. I know for example in Bantam, our centre had beaten three of the teams head to head in A, but had a few bad games vs some lower ranked teams, for various reasons, which hurt our MyLax rankings. With not enough games played and, what I assume given our preliminary A ranking and relatively late start, the inability to enter A tournaments, we get ranked B.


Posted on Jul 10, 2014, 9:26 AM
from IP address 24.157.70.223


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Agreed

by Johnny99 (Login johnnydavis)

No, we are never going to make everyone happy. However, the MyLax system introduced by the OLA has made significant improvements in the ratings system. In fact, there is a lot less complaints on the forum since it's introduction. I believe there is a decent argument to use MyLax alone. There may be some exceptions especially appealing to move up for example due to injuries. However, unilateral team movement from their MyLax ranking should be able to be justified by the OLA. They may even have a good reason! As you stated qwikstic, "with the current system the OLA needs to ensure that the ranking process is open, transparent and undertaken by qualified, knowledgable people".

Qwikstic, you will have the unique opportunity of facing Huntsville(if you aren't with them...lol) this year in the Bantam B provincials. They were rated #7 by MyLax and yet the OLA has decided that they are no better than #17 in the province. BTW, Kudos to the small great lacrosse town of Huntsville on producing such an exceptional team. Good luck in the provincials!


Posted on Jul 10, 2014, 5:39 PM
from IP address 64.134.172.16


Respond to this message

Return to Index


MyLax and Bantam ratings

by qwikstic (Login qwikstic)

JD no doubt MyLax helps in large part because it does the math for the decision maker(s). It has the added bonus of communicating to the lax world scores and game updates and this makes everything very transparent.

With regard to Bantam, it is a mystery/puzzle to me why the OLA moved Huntsville out of A, using them as an example. But I think moving Gloucester out was the right decision. You could argue that given Huntsville's weaker schedule, due to Zone and geography, that MyLax, is not a good measure for them. A valid point imvho, especially given the number of games, and repetitive competition, i.e. see Gloucester. The goal should be, to obtain an accurate seeding, and there has to be some flexibility. In Huntsville's example I think you have to place a higher weighting on a team's tournament schedule. In their case they've won both their tournaments beating two currently ranked "A" teams along the way and that alone imvho should at least give them the option to play "A". (This gets back to my point of having an incentive to play "A"). Also in MyLax ratings with so few games used to calculate the rankings, a 7-1 win by Caledon over Mimico, where half of Mimico's team was away, probably got them in A, and not a true reflection of their seeding.

To your point I think along with Huntsville, you have to give a big shout out to Windsor, Shelburne, Gloucester and Sarmia (who I understand wanted to appeal to go A ,along with Brampton and P'boro), and all from area's not well known for playing A lacrosse at the minor level. All deserving of consideration to play A at this age group.

FWIW, and IMVHO here is how I would have ranked them, (_) difference from MyLax,


1. Mimico (+1)
2. Windsor (+3)
3. CW (-2)
4. Six Nations (-)
5. Clarington (+6)
6. Oakville (+2)
7. Whitby (-1)
9. St. Kitts (+3)
10. London (+5)
11. Shelburne (-8)
12. Burlington (+1)
13. Huntsville (-6)

and again that should be it .

14. Sarnia (+6)
15. Hamilton (+1)

and then if you have to take one more this is where it gets interesting as everyone has beaten someone on the list so take your pick, better yet have a tournament to decide, and for incentive, only let the teams that play A, be able to host the A tournaments in two years time, and profit form it. I would give 16th spot to Brampton, as much as that would pain me, based on the fact they won B two years ago and that should count for something. You could also make an argument for Oakville 2 based on their higher MyLax ranking, but should a 0-0 tie with Oakville 1 count in the numbers ?

16. Brampton ( loses to Peterborough, Oakville 2 x2, split with Orangeville)
16. Halton Hills (loses to Brampton x2)
16. Oakville 2 (loses to Halton Hills, split with Orangeville and Caledon)
16. Peterborough (loses to Oakville 2)

20. Caledon (loses to Brampton, Halton Hills, P'boro x2, split with Oakville 2)
21. Orangeville (Caledon, Brampton, Halton Hills x2, split with Oakville 2)
22. KW (Oakville 2, Orangeville)
23. Guelph (loses to KW, Orangeville, Brampton)
24. Gloucester (not enough info)


Posted on Jul 11, 2014, 3:40 PM
from IP address 24.157.70.223


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Nice try but MyLax much better (n/m)

by Johnny99 (Login johnnydavis)



Posted on Jul 13, 2014, 10:20 AM
from IP address 70.27.35.37


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Don't think so !! n/m

by qwikstic (Login qwikstic)

.


Posted on Jul 30, 2014, 11:39 AM
from IP address 24.157.70.223


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Qualies Rumour

by Oldlaxr (Login rrspman)

Some thing that's was floated (a few beers had been imbibed)
Each grouping would play all there games over one weekend.
So instead of having to travel to Whitby twice - once for 3 and the second for 2 - you'd would play your games on the 1 weekend.



Posted on Jul 6, 2014, 10:37 AM
from IP address 24.150.57.73


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Well That Just Absolutly Makes Way Too Much Sense!!!!

by A lover of LAX (Login aloverof)

That would save the out-of-towners some coin & give all the teams a very scarce summer weekend!


Posted on Jul 7, 2014, 4:25 PM
from IP address 198.161.183.51


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: Qualies Rumour

by Abused Fan (Login krashr)

I could be completely off the boat here, but I think each team in A qualifiers plays 7 games. There is 4 one weekend and 3 the other weekend and the games will be played within two days each weekend so that you are only staying in Whitby one night.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, because that is what I'm telling all my parents.


Posted on Jul 7, 2014, 5:09 PM
from IP address 70.27.136.191


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Qualifiers

by JD (Login 7jd17)

Last year we played 4 games over 3 days one weekend and then 3 games over 2 days the other weekend. I hope they change that for this season, but with 48 teams playing each weekend, there may be floor constraints?

Does anyone know when a schedule will come out? If they are not compressing the format, then couldn't they just release last year's schedule and then fill in the team names once they figure that out?


Posted on Jul 8, 2014, 8:40 AM
from IP address 66.11.73.153


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Ratings

by Doug (Login Doug_Kemp)

Anybody with a list of appealable ratings? Should be out there somewhere with the appeals slated for sunday.


Posted on Jul 4, 2014, 8:50 PM
from IP address 24.138.186.136


Respond to this message

Return to Index

My Bad

by Doug (Login Doug_Kemp)

I have been informed that the ratings coming out on Monday are not the final ratings but the appealable ratings with appeals scheduled for the 13th........


Posted on Jul 5, 2014, 6:25 AM
from IP address 24.138.186.136


Respond to this message

Return to Index


DOA

by Oldlaxr (Login rrspman)

Ratings coming out
16 days till qualies start
yet not a peep
No teams pissed at there coaches, moaning about mylax rankings, or how the OLA is killing lacrosse

How about the parity in Bantam - seen some good lax - could be a tough battle for final 6 and a great weekend of lax in August


Posted on Jul 2, 2014, 11:41 AM
from IP address 24.150.57.73


Respond to this message

Return to Index

Bantam

by qwikstic (Login qwikstic)

Bantam is clearly going to be a battle and some great "surprises" with Windsor and Shelburne getting an "A" rating. Equally surprising is Huntsville with a #8 MyLaxRatings, Burlington with a #13 MyLaxRating, and to a lesser extent Brampton, Halton all "B". Might be some interesting appeals in the next few days.




Posted on Jul 3, 2014, 2:40 PM
from IP address 24.157.70.223


Respond to this message

Return to Index


Re: Bantam

by Laxitup (Login Wind13)

I'm guessing top 6 will be:
Mimico
Center W
Windsor
Oakville 1
Clarington
Burlington

And this is just a guess at best!


Posted on Jul 4, 2014, 2:27 PM
from IP address 24.57.101.189


Respond to this message

Return to Index


2013 PROVINCIAL CHAMPIONS
Tyke: Whitby (A), Oshawa (B), Barrie (C), Stars (D), Windsor (E)
Novice: Mimico (A), Innisfil (B), Orillia (C), Wallaceburg (D), Kawartha Lakes (E) Nepean (F)
Peewee: Whitby (A), Wallaceburg (B), Cambridge (C), Huntsville (D), London (E) NOTL (F)
Bantam: St. Catharines (A), Owen Sound (B), Oakville (C), Wallaceburg (D) Nepean (E)
Midget: Orangeville (A), Owen Sound (B), Cornwall (C), Orangeville (D)
Intermediate: Beaches (A), Six Nations (B), Sudbury (C)
Bantam Girls: Centre Wellington (A), Six Nations (B), Sarnia (C)
Midget Girls: Whitby (A), Hamilton (B), Sarnia (C)
Intermediate Girls: Whitby (A), NOTL (B), Kitchener-Waterloo (C)