High School Player Wins Tournament, Denied Trophy Because She Is a Girl

[nevets88]

 Nash says she wasn't told about trophy rule. 

Quote

Nash countered Riordan’s account by telling WCVB she “wasn’t aware that if I won I wouldn’t get the title or the trophy.”

http://golfweek.com/2017/10/25/girl-wins-boys-high-school-tournament-but-denied-trophy-massachusetts-of-state-rules/

[jamo]

I played golf at a Massachusetts high school a few years ago (graduated in 2010). My team's best player my freshman year was a girl, and that team played in the state south sectionals (Nash played in the central sectional) and state finals. My senior year we had a girl on the team but I don't believe she made the top 6 to qualify to play in the state sectionals or finals (though she was a year behind me so she probably played in them the next year). Coincidentally, the state finals my senior year were also at Wyantenuck Country Club, where the OP article mentions the state finals are this year.

I was unaware of the rule. I didn't even know that the fall season was specially a boys' league that they allow girls to play in. My high school's website makes no boys/girls designation for the golf team. My high school in a fairly small town had just co-ed JV and varsity teams that played in the fall. There was no girls' team. The co-ed teams never had more than 1 girl the four years I was there. I can't remember more than like 3 girls ever trying out in a single year.

Lunenburg is a really small town bordered by a lot of small towns. I'd be very surprised if they had a separate girls' team in the spring. I looked at the high school's website but couldn't find much.

From what I've gathered on the MIAA website by looking at the results from recent seasons, girls at high schools that don't have a spring girls' team are allowed to play in the state sectional and finals individual tournaments, but not the team tournaments. (The tournaments are one in the same, your score can count for both or just one if you're team hasn't qualified.) In fact, you can go in the MIAA archives and see that she's been playing in the girls' spring individual championships the last few years. (Well, in 2015 at least. The 2016 and 2017 archives are blank.)

As people have surmised, what probably happened is that Lunenburg doesn't have a girls' team, so she plays on the boys' team during the fall while playing in the girls' individual tournament in the spring. So I get where the ruling came from - they don't want to let her play in both the spring and fall individual tournaments because the boys can't do so.

And yet ... c'mon. She won. Society won't crumble if we give her a trophy.

[iacas]

16 minutes ago, jamo said:

As people have surmised, what probably happened is that Lunenburg doesn't have a girls' team, so she plays on the boys' team during the fall while playing in the girls individual tournament in the spring. So I get where the ruling came from - they don't want to let her play in both the spring and fall individual tournaments.

And yet ... c'mon. She won. Society won't crumble if we give her a trophy.

No, society won't crumble, but if a girl can compete for two trophies, why not let the boys compete for two trophies?

What about a transgender person who identifies as a boy but has the body parts of a girl (or vice versa) (that's probably not the definition of transgender, so please excuse my ignorance there… I think you get my point)?

Bummer she doesn't have a girls team.

I think that making her ineligible for the individual thing is fine - she has an individual thing in which to compete. But if she can hack it as a team member, I think that should count.

So that's the only rule I'd change: a girl can compete in the team portion if her high school did not have a team the previous fall. (You couldn't say the next spring because you don't know if you'll have a girls team in the spring, so teams could just say "we don't think we will," and then, what, they can't even if they surprise themselves and get enough interest?).

Or better yet… It's much simpler in PA when girls and boys golf are both fall sports. I don't understand why it has to be spring for girls. So just make them both fall sports.

[jamo]

5 minutes ago, iacas said:

I think that making her ineligible for the individual thing is fine - she has an individual thing in which to compete. But if she can hack it as a team member, I think that should count.

So that's the only rule I'd change: a girl can compete in the team portion if her high school did not have a team the previous fall. (You couldn't say the next spring because you don't know if you'll have a girls team in the spring, so teams could just say "we don't think we will," and then, what, they can't even if they surprise themselves and get enough interest?).

I don't think that would even be a rule change (if I'm understanding you correctly, which I'm not 100% sure I am). Her scores for the team portion did count: http://miaa.net/gen/miaa_generated_bin/documents/basic_module/Central_D3_Results_2017.pdf

[iacas]

8 minutes ago, jamo said:

I don't think that would even be a rule change (if I'm understanding you correctly, which I'm not 100% sure I am). Her scores for the team portion did count: http://miaa.net/gen/miaa_generated_bin/documents/basic_module/Central_D3_Results_2017.pdf

Oh, I thought I read they hadn't, but they wouldn't have qualified to move on anyway, or something.

So okay, she gets to compete as an individual in the spring, and as a team member in the fall.

I don't see much of a problem there.

I also saw a Lucy and a Jennie in the list. Toward the bottom.

[Golfingdad]

10 hours ago, Pretzel said:

Don't have them compete against the men then, because the yardage difference is a large advantage. It's not fair or right to crown someone the "winner" of a tournament when they play from 500-1,000 yards shorter than the rest of the competitors.

It's not PC, but it is fact that there isn't a woman golfer out there who can compete with the best men on the planet. It's not fair, but that's why men and woman generally compete separately.

Yeah, this is a situation that might not be too dissimilar from the OP.  For now, they haven't really given it much thought because, frankly, there are very very few women who sign up.  And those that do, for the most part, don't do well even from the shorter tees.  Considering that, and considering that they'd want to be as "PC" as possible, the easy route is for them to do exactly what they're doing.

Now, if a woman started winning from those shorter tees, then they'd probably have a little problem brewing and would have to consider a solution.

Without thinking it through too much ... it seems like my solution would be to figure out how to convert their handicap to a mens handicap and then put them in that appropriate division from the same tees.  Instead of a womens 2 playing with mens 2's and getting a 500 yard advantage, her 2 becomes a mens 12 (or whatever, I dunno) and she plays with those guys from their same tees.  Problem solved. :)

Obviously, I'm OT now, so I'll stop.

[No Mulligans]

This story and media attention is probably really good for her. If college recruiters hadn't noticed her before they sure will now. 

[rehmwa]

19 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

Given the situation, I think everyone behaved pretty well:

The officials of the event followed the rules, exactly what they were supposed to do. 

The top official recognized the injustice of the rules, while he did his job in accordance with those rules.  He's said he'll do the little bit he can to recognize her achievement. 

The runner-up recognized the unfairness, and made a very magnanimous gesture,

and the young lady did a fine job of understanding the rules and declining the gesture. 

I find it a bit odd that the rules allow her to play in a boys team event, but not in a singles event, but I imagine that those rules will be re-evaluated pretty quickly.

I was going to post, but then I saw this.  Dave states it perfectly.

Everybody knew the rules, they chose play by the rules, they were all graceful about it, they abided by the rules, no one has sour grapes, all the boys acknowledged her skills.  No one is bitching.

so......a complete NON-STORY.  Just a reporter trying to manufacture some kind of outrage where there isn't any.  Seems the real story could have just ignored the whole trophy thing and just do a write up on how cool this golfer is as a player and as a person. 

It's annoying when a reporter takes a truly decent 'feel good' story and tries to twist into a negative.

 

So, if a boy plays on the girls team and wins it outright does he automatically get entry in the boy's tourneys when they come up?

Edited October 26, 2017 by rehmwa

[JxQx]

I read in another article that they don’t have a girls team so that was the reason for her playing on the boys team.

[iacas]

2 minutes ago, JxQx said:

I read in another article that they don’t have a girls team so that was the reason for her playing on the boys team.

Yes, but she competes in girls regional/districts/states in the spring, and her score counted for the boys team event this fall.

She's not being robbed of a chance to play team or individual golf.

[Dave Saari]

My take on this is that Emily Nash just wants to play golf. If I understand the article, she played on the girls team in the spring and the boys team in the fall, and she's obviously good enough to play with the boys. She didn't complain about the result and graciously declined the "winning" boy's offer of the trophy.

I won't weigh in on whether the rule makes sense or not (counting her score for the team but not as an individual). I'll just say CONGRATULATIONS to this fine young female golfer. Let's hope we see her on the LPGA tour someday.

[Buckeyebowman]

On 10/25/2017 at 5:21 PM, Vinsk said:

Rules are rules. It's the player's responsibility and/or parents in this case to know them. She chose to play. Rules are rules. Right? 

And sometimes the rules are stupid!

[Vinsk]

30 minutes ago, Buckeyebowman said:

And sometimes the rules are stupid!

Lol. I agree 100%....seems when I’ve felt that way the rule gurus get all in a bind over it. Sometimes I don’t think it’s too much a task to just be logical and reasonable and evaluate a situation with perspective for certain situations rather than just blanket the whole thing with rules are rules attitude. First it should be considered why the rule was made. Then, does this situation relate to the reasoning behind said rule. It’s not like these instances are occurring constantly. And golf isn’t a fast paced sport where a decision needs to be made immediately. 

[iacas]

5 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

Lol. I agree 100%....seems when I’ve felt that way the rule gurus get all in a bind over it. Sometimes I don’t think it’s too much a task to just be logical and reasonable and evaluate a situation with perspective for certain situations rather than just blanket the whole thing with rules are rules attitude. First it should be considered why the rule was made. Then, does this situation relate to the reasoning behind said rule. It’s not like these instances are occurring constantly. And golf isn’t a fast paced sport where a decision needs to be made immediately. 

No, you've consistently wanted the rules changed because things don't "feel" right to you, even though people can explain why the rules are the way they are, and how your take on things would require sometimes thousands of exceptions or lists of items to be made.

The best rules are simple, fairly black and white, and still reasonable.

Also, that is not the topic here.

[Pretzel]

1 hour ago, Buckeyebowman said:

And sometimes the rules are stupid!

This is not one such case. She already gets to compete as an individual. She shouldn't get to double-dip in the boys competition as well unless they're going to allow boys to also double-dip in the girls competition to get another chance at winning the state tournament. The boys season allows her to compete with a team, which she cannot do otherwise, but as an individual she will still have the same opportunity as every other girl to compete in the regional and state tournaments.

[JxQx]

16 hours ago, iacas said:

Yes, but she competes in girls regional/districts/states in the spring, and her score counted for the boys team event this fall.

She's not being robbed of a chance to play team or individual golf.

Yeah I was just posting it because many seemed to think she was playing on both a girls and boys teams.

I didn't know her scores would count for sectionals/states competition, I thought there had to be a school team/matches to qualify for them. If that's the case, it doesn't really seem like an issue.

[RussUK]

Like they say "rules are rules" whether we like or agree with them or not. She showed class in declining the trophy from the lad who was declared winner. That act from him also shows me that a) he didnt fully agree with the ruling, and b) the lad's got a big heart and wants to do the right thing.

Hats off to both of them. Good role models for their peers.

[DeadMan]

I just want to pop in and say that everybody knows who wins this tournament. Who cares about the trophy? We need to give kids more credit than this. I bet the boy who has the trophy is embarrassed by having it because he didn't win. 

I have a hard time getting too amped up about this considering she'll have a chance to play as an individual in a girl's tournament in the spring.