Wednesday, April 9, 2014

Age Change Debate: What's the three year transition mean?


So, after a day of digesting what these rules actually mean. Obviously the big one we're going to talk about is the age change. Most people seem to love it. The biggest debate now isn't about if its a good rule or not, but what EXACTLY the rule means.



Here's what was passed once again straight from Little League:



(a) Little League (Majors) Division: Any candidate who will attain the age of 9 years on or before 
December 31 and who will not attain the age of 13 on or before December 31 of the year in question 
shall be eligible to compete in Little League Baseball (subject to the local league board of directors 
alignment of this division). This means that a child who will be 12 years old on December 31 or earlier, is eligible to play that year; a child who will be 13 years old on December 31 or earlier will not be eligible for either local league play or tournament play at any time during the calendar year in question. NOTE: League age 12 year olds may participate in Minor Division under certain circumstances. 

Minor League Division: Any candidate who will attain the age of 7 years on or before December 31 and who will not attain the age of 13 on or before December 31 of the year in question shall be eligible to compete in the Minor League Division Baseball (subject to the local league board of directors alignment of this division). This means that a child who will be 12 years old on December 31 or earlier, is eligible to play that year; a child who will be 13 years old on December 31 or earlier will not be eligible for either local league play or tournament play at any time during the calendar year in question. 

EXCEPTION FOR 2015, 2016 and 2017 ONLY: A child who is league age 13, and who was born May 1 – December 31 of the current year is eligible for the Major Division in 2015, 2016 and 2017. Any player who would be eligible under this exception must be permitted to play in the Major Division and is eligible to participate within the 2015, 2016 and 2017 Little League (Major) Baseball International Tournament. This would provide a three (3) – year transition for implementation. 

Synopsis: Changes the age determination date for all divisions of Baseball and Challenger to be 

December 31/January 1, complying with the International Baseball Federation (IBAF). A three-year 
transition plan would be established, as outlined, for the 2015, 2016 and 2017 season should the change be implemented. The exception above is an example for the Major Division. All levels of Baseball and 
Challenger would be amended for their respective divisions. 

Now, this isn't how the rule will read in the book. This is just what the vote was passed on. I'm sure it will be clarified better. But, what does it mean. On a different page, it lists all the rules that were voted on and what year they will be implemented in. For the age change rule, it says 2018.

In one camp, which is how I originally interpreted the rule, this all meant everything stays the same until 2018 and then boom... new ages. Giving everyone a 3-year notice for when the change would come.

In the other camp, people think it means that the rule is changing next year in 2015, but kids turning 13 in May-Dec can still play majors. In other words, over the next three years, there will be kids who 18 months older than the other "12s" in the tournament.

This changes a lot. While every kid will get a chance to be 12 by themselves (except for the current 8-year olds still), this is hurting all kids for the next three years that are born Jan-April. They will always be significantly younger until the rule officially changes in 2018.

So which way is better? Keep the rules for the next three years and then completely screw one complete age group of CURRENT 8-year olds, but at least those 8-year olds could be ready for it (by playing up) OR by changing the rule in 2015 for all 10 and 11 year old tournaments, but the 12s will get to stick around underneath the grandfather clause.

Don't leave your comments below. It doesn't generate good discussion. Leave your comments here in our Facebook Discussion Group.

You can also LIKE us on Facebook and Follow us on Twitter

65 comments:

Anonymous said...

I think it says you have a choice. In our league we will suggest we move to the new ages starting next year for everyone but the 2015 12s. Then we'll be on schedule for 2016 and no player will miss their 12 yr old season.

Yes, we could face teams in the tourney doing it the old way, but so be it.

Anonymous said...

I find that most LL rules are not rules but guidelines with lots of grey areas. I use it to best serve the kids. There is a rule that states a game cant be played with 8 players, some umps will cancel game. That rule hurts kids as there is a few alternate options that can be used. Being an ethical member of our board I utilize LLs guidelines the best I can for my players. The verbiage in this is stupid. Leagues that want to compete in interleague or Tournament play will have to utlize this the best way it affects its players. We will start using new age ASAP so we are not weaker in All Stars.

Anonymous said...

The age limits never solve the issue. Instead of the young players being born in march now they are Dec. There is always a discrepancy. As a league, I would wiat until 2018 to implement. You will be at a competitive disadvatage if you did not. Let your kids experieince success/failure going against like ages.

Anonymous said...

This hurts every 8 year old kid that played little league this year! 8 year olds born after May 1st will not get to step on a little league field as a 12 year old and that is not fair to them!!

Dean Pappas said...

As I understand it, the age limits will be as follows (can someone tell me if my understanding is incorrect:

Summer 2014-Oldest 5/1/01
Summer 2015-Oldest 5/1/02
Summer 2016-Oldest 5/1/03
Summer 2017-Oldest 5/1/04
Summer 2018-Oldest 1/1/06
Summer 2019-Oldest 1/1/07

Thanks

Anonymous said...

This rule stinks. My son was born in July of 2005 and will lose his 12 year old season of little league. This rule has to be changed!

tjenkins said...

Great, so my 8 year old who turns 9 this year and is already playing tournament ball through his little league will lose a year of little league. This is a terrible rule change and will decimate a lot of smaller little leagues in a few years by greatly shrinking them, making it difficult to even field a majors division. It also makes fathers like me consider Fed ball. Not sure why my son and many of the kids he's been playing ball with since they were 4 should lose a year of Little League so that ESPN doesn't have to flash a few 13 year olds up on the screen,... God forbid.

Anonymous said...

Intermediate (50/70) is where it's at. It's real baseball and what this rule change does is put 13 year olds on small fields (50/70 fields) playing true baseball rules. This will be more entertaining on ESPN when 50/70 championship is eventually moved to Williamsport.

Anonymous said...

So basically Little League is a U13 league now. Someone always gets screwed by the dates.
Is it fair that kids born in May were the OLDEST in the league and now Kids born in January are the oldest?

If you don't wan't your kid to miss out on the 12 group, move him up now.

Steve Avila said...

As I understand it, the age limits will be as follows (can someone tell me if my understanding is incorrect:

Summer 2014-Oldest 5/1/01
Summer 2015-Oldest 5/1/02
Summer 2016-Oldest 5/1/03
Summer 2017-Oldest 5/1/04
I believe 2018 would move to 1/1/2005 as the oldest. It would have been 5/1/2005, but they are just moving it back to 12/31/2004. If they are 13 before 12/31/2017, then they would not be able to play in 2018.
Summer 2018-Oldest 1/1/06 - 1/1/05
Summer 2019-Oldest 1/1/07 - 1/1/06

Joe said...

They pushed the age change down far enough to not impact any board member or active majors players. While this makes sense it totally screws an entire year of kids. Why would they not just go back to t-ball and start with those kids in year one of little league?

Anonymous said...

it's 1/1 to 12/31, why do you all keep saying 1/1 to 1/1?

Everything I read says the youngest kid is 12/31 of the year.

Anonymous said...

This is screwing the 8 year olds. A disgraceful decision due to pressure from ESPN. If you careed abotu the kids you would implement for new kids entering the league in T-Ball.

Anonymous said...

Kids born in 2005 will have to miss their 12 year old year. Not a good decision. You will lose a lot of kids because of this. Either implement it earlier or make it a parent's decision to move a kid up, not the league's.

Anonymous said...

Everyone born from May 2006-Dec 2006 gets completely screwed by this. They will be playing with kids up to 20 months older than them for the next 4 years!!

Anonymous said...

What a shame for Little League Baseball. An entire group of children born between May 2006 and December 2006 will lose a year of eligibility. Except for a few All-Stars born in May-July that year, most of these children won't be able to play Little League after they've turned 12. It's a loss for those children, but it's also a loss for local leagues, who will lose a whole group of volunteer parents 1 year earlier.

Michael said...

I am appalled by LL's hasty decision to essentially destroy the little league experience of their current 8 year old population. Not only do these kids miss a year, they also will spend their entire LL career competing for tournament slots against kids who are 18+ months older.

This is a complete disgrace. I'm at a loss for words.

Anonymous said...

Someone didn't think this through. Last year's 8 year olds will no longer lose a season. That's great. But the 7, 6 and 5 year olds lose a season. Plus, to make matters worse, kids born from May 2006 to December 2006 now have to compete against kids who could be up to 20 months older! Not just for one season, but for the rest of little league. There were so many better ways to do this. 1) implement it for new T ball players and don't mess with the existing players. 2) move it one month at a time each year, starting next season. The oldest kids become the youngest in the following season. 3) Move the mound and bases back 5 feet in majors. All three of those ideas would work much better. This absolutely hammers kids born towards the end of 2006. They basically will never get to participate in All Stars. Plus, they lose a year of eligibility. Pony League, anyone?

Anonymous said...

Read the last paragraph from 2005 when LL last changed the league age policy:

http://www.littleleague.org/media/llnewsarchive/04_2005/05littleleague_011105.htm

What happened? Has the league had a change of heart, or is this all being pushed by ESPN for the LLWS?

So much for putting the kids first. It's all about dollars and cents. LL clearly has no concern over it's current 8 year old population. They are just a pawn that must make way for the empire to continue.

Anonymous said...

My youngest son was born in Dec of 2006 so it's an understatement to say Im pissed. None of my sons will ever play Little League again if this rule stands. I have been a volunteer coach for over 10 years but will never give one more second of my time to Little League. They think it's fine to destroy my sons baseball career by making him compete with kids a year and a half older, 4 inches taller, and weighing 25 pounds more. He will never get the chance to play and develop at the premium positions. If your son was born in 2006 and you keep him in LL, be ready for him to only play half the innings, play RF and bat 7, 8,or 9 his whole career when he would have been an all-star under the old rules. Screw the LLWS! It's travel ball and other local leagues for me and my boys from now on. I hope it blows up in their faces by coaches taking their travel ball teams to other leagues so they can all stay together in the same age group.

The Wacky Dad said...

I wrote the blog post on the link below before seeing the chain of comments here. No doubt a lot of angry parents of kids who "used to be" 8 years old.

http://thewackydad.blogspot.com/2014/11/the-little-league-blindside-making.html

Anonymous said...

Forget about all stars for a moment. A bigger issue involves arm maturity. LL's rush to implementation has been done without any consideration of lower arm injuries. An 8 year old used to have a pitch count of 50. These kids are now being rushed forward to play as 9 year olds. Their pitch count has magically increased by 50 percent. Do we really want a kid born in December 2006 to have the same pitch count as a kid born in May 2005?

It's all about the kids, right? Wrong!

Anonymous said...

There will be an age group screwed regardless of what year the change is implemented. The problem with doing it to last year's 7 year olds however is that these kids have already started in what is now an antiquated developmental chart. Many leagues have minor programs in place that cater to specific age groups (ex. 5 year old in t-ball, 6 year old in A, 7 year old in AA, etc.). These kids are now rushed forward to fit into a new model that will undoubtedly stunt their development.

The change should have been made to incoming/new players so that they could start under a developmental model that is built around the new age requirements.

Anonymous said...

This rule is totally unfair to what woudl have been league age 8 year olds. This group has been moved up into the 9 yr old division and will be competing against kids 1 to 1.5 years older for the rest of their little league careers. Not a smart decision in my opinion. An on-line petiton has been started, please sign and share even if your son is not impacted as I sure you can sympathize if you were in our shoes.

https://www.change.org/p/little-league-baseball-inc-terminate-the-2018-little-league-age-determination?utm_campaign=responsive_friend_inviter_chat&utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=share_petition&recruiter=185726311

Anonymous said...

This could have been done by moving the May/June 11 year olds to 12, July/Aug 10 yr olds to 11, Sept/Oct 9 year olds to 10. Then you would move each group behind them up. Next years 9-12 year old groups would each have 14 months of kids in them. In two years there would be no 13 year olds in the series. In 4 years they would be where they want be. This would have been much better.

Anonymous said...

When this year's 9 yr old group reaches their 12 yr old year theer is going to be an enormous # of 12's /Mandatory 12's even with attrition. How are leagues going to navigate the 2018 season with the mandatory 12 rule instituted as it is now

Anonymous said...

My son was born August 2006 and I'm also extermely angry & disappointed. How can they justify this change for anyone born in 2006 that affects the rest of their LL career? I will look at other leagues and alternative options. As a volunteer coach for the last 4 years I will not be supporting little league with any more of my time.

Anonymous said...

Wow...lots of dads with a kids born in may out there

Anonymous said...

This rule goes into effect next year. Not 2018..espn wants it done now.

Anonymous said...

Its a great rule.13 year old should not pitch from 46 feet. Not safe. What about the guy who not going to help out the kids anymore because a rule change..100% his kid was born in may June and only helps for his own self centered reason. Gald he is leaving....

Anonymous said...

As a dad of a kid with a June 2006 DOB, I would rather he have "skipped" his age 11 season than have to play as a 9-year old next year. In my league, it's the difference between coach pitch/everybody plays everywhere and kid pitch and bench time. I don't care about whether he someday makes all-stars, but now he and other kids that would have been 8 this year will have to compete for playing time against kids that could be up to about 18 months older than them -- for the next four years. I could live with whatever age cutoffs they pick, but they should make sure the league ages include no more than 12 months.

Anonymous said...

If your kid is getting shafted, just get together with the parents of the other kids and move them to another league with the old age rules. That way they can have their years as the top players and will get the full all star experience. This is what I am doing and I have 8 other parents going with me.

Anonymous said...

Personally, I like the new rule. I have an 11 year old, who will be 12 in February of 2015. He will play 2015 as a baseball 12, as he would under either rule. However, others in his league are up to 9 months older than him and are still baseball 12. A good friend of his has June birthday and will play in 2015 as a baseball 11, yet he is only 4 months younger than my son. Under the new rule he to would be a baseball 12 - a much better rule!!!

Anonymous said...

If you believe this rules is wrong. Please sign the following petition.

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/stop-little-league-vote-to-take-year-of

Anonymous said...

Seriously? Go play travel ball. You'll understand real quickly that LL doesn't matter much, and, your kid skills aren't much worth getting all riled up about. Just relax and play your rec ball.

Anonymous said...

The problem is that if other leagues and travel organizations follow suit within the next few years, those kids born between 05/06 and 12/06 will have no where to go to fairly compete against kids their own age. They will never get the chance to play and develop at the premium positions. They will be at a huge disadvantage when entering middle school and finally getting out from under these unfair rules. If it was your kid, you would be livid. My kid is in travel ball and we will seek out the other leagues with the old age rules but if everyone else follows suit, where we he be able to go then?

Anonymous said...

For the comment from the guy who's kid was considered a 12 while a kid who was 4 months younger considered an 11. Now it's even so you consider it a good rule. What about the kids who are now 22 months apart considered the same age? Does that make sense to you and do you still consider it a good rule? Here's an idea Little League: Move it back to how it was in 2006. You won't have 13 year olds playing anymore, which is the main problem I guess. And "12 year olds" can actually play as 12 year olds and not 11 year olds.

LL said...

As the parent of an 8 year old (born 11/06) I am yet another of the unhappy campers like you others. I am waiting to see how or if our local little league realigns the divisions based on this new rule. At least for 2015 season. For example if they split the what is now the only entry level division of kid pitch into two divisions with the younger and older league age "9" year olds in different groups that could allow all the kids to have a chance to develop and get to play certain positions that they would not get to if lumped all together

Anonymous said...

My kids were born in Jan. 2007 and Feb. 2011. Under the old rules they would have always been some of the youngest, now they are the oldest. For those born in late 2006 - too bad so sad. They will still be the oldest for scholastic sports. Thank you Little League!

Anonymous said...

For the commenter with kids born in Jan and Feb. You need to actually go back and read, then understand, the rule change. The rule is grandfathered in so your kids will continue to be the youngest. And the issue for the kids born in 2006 isn't that they will now be the youngest. It's that they will be the youngest by up to 22 months. Plus they lose out on an entire year of LL. They will never be able to play LL at the age of 12. All so LL can continue to receive their checks from ESPN. It makes the 'It's all about the kid's ring completely hollow.

ShutterbugMom said...

I have two sons, both born in July. My youngest was born in July 2006, so he is affected by this rule, and will miss his 8 year old season. Wow...I cannot believe how anyone would like this rule, except for the parents of kids born in April...LOL!

In our area, the age rules for sports are always the age at/near the start of the season. For example, summer swimming is your age as of 6/1, football and soccer are as of 8/1 and basketball is as of 11/1. Therefore the 4/30 date for baseball is right in line with all the other dates. Baseball is actually the *only* sport where my kids get to be close to the "oldest." I don't know how they can have a kid born in December and being only 8.5 years old in June, having to play as a 9 year old? Also, a girl, born on the same day in July 2006, plays as an 8 year old, but a boy plays as a 9 year old??

Our league has 4-6 year old tee ball...this will result in kids that are about 6.5 (league age 6) playing in the same group as kids that are 3.5 (league age 4). Wow...I would hate to try and coach those 3.5 year olds. Also the last few years our older league has been 9-12 year olds...so now my 8 year old, forced to play as a 9 year old, will have 12 year olds throwing balls at him. I can't imagine this will work out very well. I think even MORE people will leave to go to travel ball where the age cutoff is still 4/30. I know we will be looking for a team.

Anonymous said...

Kids born in Jan and Feb will be the oldest in their age groups for ages 8 and younger. The commenter with kids born in Jan and Feb is in fact correct.

Anonymous said...

Honestly, who cares about being the oldest. Right now you have kids who turned 6 in November and December going from traditional tball, skipping coach pitch and jumping right into machine pitch. This doesn't seem like a good move. Also, you now have kids with July-December birthdays who will never be the age they are grouped with. Another issue is some of these kids will be playing against kids 3 grades above them.

I think a better scenario would have been August or September birthday cut offs. Therefore, August 2007-July 31 2008 equals 7 yr olds for 2015. This ensures all kids are 7 or within a month of turning 7 by the end of the little league season. The new rules now have 7 yr old (December birthday) 1st grader classified as an 8 yr old 2nd grader. At this age a year of school means significantly more in the maturation process.

Jon W. said...

test

Anonymous said...

My wife is President of our League here in Kentucky. Below is an email she sent to Williamsport yesterday. I'll post it in two parts.

Thank you for your time and willingness to listen to the genuine concerns for Little League baseball players and how they are going to be affected based on the new age determination date and rules for implementation. In our league today, we have 59 players who will lose their 12 year old year---completely taken away from them. That is assuming we don’t add any new players whose birthday falls in that timeframe, so more and likely, based on the past years’ trend that number would be closer to 65-70 by 2018. That is also assuming all the players are drafted to a major league team during their 9, 10 or 11 year old year. If they are not (and we have plenty of players who are not drafted until their 12 year old year to a major league team), you will have some in this group, who will never have the opportunity to play Little League, EVER! Meaning, they were not drafted to a major league team as a 9, 10 or 11 year old and their 12 year old year has been taken away from them. On top of this, think about the major league teams….in 2018, they are losing all their 12 year olds on the team PLUS their 11 year olds. You will have teams who could lose all their players (if they are made up of all 11 and 12 year olds); or if they are made up of 9-12 year olds, they could still be losing close to 10 players of a 12 player roster.

Anonymous said...

This is affecting Eastern Little League directly, as we are having families leave our league, who have played here all their Little League years, for one of the Cal Ripken Leagues in Lexington. Southeastern Cal Ripken and South Lexington Cal Ripken are two of the most successful Cal Ripken leagues in the country; they both have been repeat Cal Ripken World Series Champions. They are encouraging current Little League families to switch to their leagues and promoting it as their child will have 4 years of eligibility and will be able to play their age (not being forced to play up a year, as our Little League players are now having to do). A coach from one of the Cal Ripken leagues said to me this past weekend, “you all have just shot yourself in the foot”.

The below email was sent to me from one of our board members who found this document on Little League’s website. It is explaining the reasons why and a Q and A from the 2005 age determination date change. As you read through it, obviously, Little League has changed its philosophy. For example, below it was asked if any player would lose a year of eligibility and the answer was “no”; below is an explanation on why the date was changing and went on to explain many players were playing their entire 12 year old season and not turning 12, so moving the age determination date to April, would assure more players to be 12 during their 12 year old season. Well, by moving it back to December, once again, you are limiting the number of players who will actually be 12 during their 12 year old season. In fact in our league, most of the players will be 11 throughout their entire 12 year old year. Why would the date not be Aug. 30th or Sept. 1; once the Little League World Series was completed; which would assure no 13 year olds were playing? But by using December 31, you will have more 11 year olds than 12, playing as 12 year olds. Below it’s also asked, if a player will have to skip a year and the answer was no; again, this is different than the current Little League rule, as my youngest son, now has to skip his last year of tball and play rookie as a 6 year old (but Little League is viewing him as a 7 year old). It is very interesting how Little League’s philosophy must have changed from the below document, and I have to ask why?

I do appreciate anything you can do to get the decision makers to re-think this rule. It may look good on paper, but realistically, it is not a smart move by Little League for many reasons. If the main reason was to eliminate the 13 year olds, that can be accomplished by a Sept 1 age determination date. However, the kids who are definitely not getting a fair shake from Little League, are these 9 year olds whose 12 year old is being taken away from them. Is this how Little League rewards a player/family for their dedication to Little League for 5-7 years?

Thanks in advance for your dedication to the players and families. I trust this will be sent to all needed parties and hopefully, discussions will continue. If I can be of any assistance, please don’t hesitate to contact me.

Respectfully, ___________
President, ____Little League
__________, Kentucky

DG said...

Just found out about the new age change when I took my kid for tryouts today. My son was 8 under the old rules, but now he is 9 according to little league even though he won't turn 9 until three months after the season ends. The little league website says they changed the rule after consulting with district leaders and parents. No one in my league consulted with the parents. We didn't get an email or anything else giving us a chance to voice our opinion. If they have to change the age eligibility why not start with kids in the t-ball division? They can't honestly claim it is a safety issue, or else in should be instituted right away. Hopefully someone realizes this is not fair and changes the rule.

Anonymous said...

Sure there's an option, leave LL and move to another sanctioning body.

Anonymous said...

We're leaving, citing discrimination toward 8-year-olds playing against 11-year olds. How thoughtless.

Anonymous said...

Are Little League boys sign-ups are WAY down at lower levels. Horrible decision affecting 8 year olds.

Anonymous said...

Son born very late in 05' will never get to play as a 12. Only plus is that we have a competing Ripken in same area so will just switch at that time, if not earlier.

Anonymous said...

can someone please help me understand how this effects my daughter? She was born in Nov 2009. She is in preschool. She should have started her first year of tball in summer 2015. But now with the change she is having to skip tball and go into pee wees. She will be 5 playing her first year of LL with 6 and 7 yr olds. Am I seeing this correctly? Is there anything I can do? Is it better to have her miss thos 1st year rather than play her down?

Anonymous said...

Hasn't the age cutoff been going the other direction for about 20 years? Why now the huge jump to a cutoff that is later than when I was a kid (turned 40 this year)? With the summer cutoff, most kids were also aligned with their grade in school so they played with all their classmates. Now there will be tons of them playing every other year mis-matched. My 5-year old wasn't allowed to play last year and now he will only have one year of t-ball/instructional. His birthday is in July so at least he will be middle of the age group and not really young. This is S-T-U-P-I-D

Anonymous said...

Terrible rule. It's completely about image for little League International.

Anonymous said...

My league has already decided to implement this moronic rule change. So my 8 year and all his team mates struggle to make the throws, catch a ball or even get a single strike to swing at, it's real shame.. Knowing these boys will all be done with LL before they turn 12..

LL is a POS in my opinion, always has been. The LL World Series is a joke. Every last one of those kids are travel ball kids which explains their talents. Yet LL exploits them, comes off like LL is the reason for their talents and cash in all the way to the bank based on what travel has done for these boys...

Between the over paid prima donnas in MLB and the idiots that run LL, I'm pushing my son more towards golf and surfing...

Mia Carlisle said...

My son just lost a year of baseball with this rule. His "age group" will consist of kids a year and a half older than him. A huge pool of "9 year old kids" makes it harder to make all stars for all those kids, especially the younger ones. Sign this petition to stop this change!!
http://email.change.org/mpss/c/iAA/SCE/t.1ls/zv_lkyWfSmWXBn5MXsJYbQ/h5/W9oZwjoGX5ulRlet7FB-2BvO9t8YaDa6vOb1xI8TJ6QviT4CGsHQBViTrB5lxdqeegCtJVpsDgZ8qYAdio7XbT99lRZBTDZ616RF2UqLhi0eOeu4pECoNgUgaH5yR15dGng0IqZf7j34AIN48tWSKeiZLhBxim9CMe9FjBvsH8wzlqJd4IRvYHg0btvLCpbWq-2BCWQbhv45qU6dfUU7uR-2BFhjzTtBfhyfGqPrqMCyz0H2QPaZ1hU7vFe9I22EGDq9FZtS9Y50IMAY3FdGQ96Kprug-3D-3D

Chris Campbell said...

I am on the board of a league that serves around 450 kids annually. I've sent numerous e-mails to LL and was even granted a phone conversation by a staff member in Williamsport. My main concern is the 20 month age group created for the league age 9 kids this year. As it stands, those kids born May-Dec 2006 will have to battle that 20 month group for a chance at all-stars for 3 straight years. In 2018 they will finally get a single season of being in a 12 month group when the now older 9's get aged out of LL and miss their 12 year old season. I think most of us understand the need to get younger at the Majors level. These kids are too big. Someone is going to have to skip that 12 year old season. We may not like it, but it is the right thing to do. The transition plan that dogs a single group of kids into a 20 month group just makes no sense. On the phone Daniel Velte (Director of League Development and Affiliation) told me people like it. I asked him where he is getting his information! A quick search on the web will yield hundreds of protests against the 20 month group. I could not find one person praising that portion of the plan. Speaking to parents around our league - none of them are happy their child moved from 7 to a 20 month pool of 9 year olds. It doesn’t seem to server any real purpose other than to make those kids eligible for Majors one year earlier. In our league there is not a single one of these young 9 year olds that wouldn’t be a safety risk in Majors anyway. Heck, we average less than one 10 year in Majors each year. Bottom line – this 20 month group is unfair, makes no sense and LL is not looking to change it for this season. Maybe there is hope for next season. If you feel the same, I urge you to communicate directly to Williamsport. They apparently can’t or don’t ready any of these forums. We’ll be leaving LL if the 20 month group stays intact.

Mia Carlisle said...

Who do we call? I'm just a mom, but a really angry one with an Oct 2006 boy. I'm willing to make any call, write any letter, put some time into this. I've signed and circulated the petition on change.org. I'm wondering if that might make any difference!?! We will also leave Little League if this doesn't change. It's so so wrong.

Chris Campbell said...

You can find all the contact info you need right here: http://www.littleleague.org/learn/about/contacts.htm

Maybe if enough people let them know we feel the 20 month age group is unfair to these kids they will do something.

Anonymous said...

Finished my 1st year under the "new age rule" and its awful. Kids are forced to play up and will not play little league when they are 12. Are you kidding me? Why not do it by school calendar instead of splitting up your class mates. Little League needs to own their mistakes and fix it.

Anonymous said...

I have been told by numerous resources that LL is considering moving the age determination dates back to the original rules. People need to contact LL to voice their support to change back to the old rules.

David Hascup said...

Date changing to August 31. This will allow kids in same grade to play together and still eliminates 13 year olds from the LLWS, which is exactly what they want. And that's a good think.

Anonymous said...

How do you know that the date is getting pushed back. I am a parent of a young boy born born in November 05 and he will miss out is 12 year old season because of this they should go by school year you're really discriminating against a certain age group. I completely understand about safety and that has to be the first things look into you can't have kids with a 20 month age difference playing against each other at certain levels it's just not right or safe

Anonymous said...

We just finished our 2015 season and it was the most pathetic and embarrassing thing I've ever seen. Our AAA division was loaded with kids that could barely throw. Walk fests and games that were just a waste of time. No one in AAA was happy. AA was effectively the same as what was the latter part of T-Ball, which was bad, but reasonably acceptable because the kids were so young. But AAA was a disaster, Many parents are taking their talented kids to travel leagues and less talented kids to other sports.

In our town, we have two leagues. One allowed you to move your 9 yr-old up to majors - if you realized your kids was getting screwed. Only a couple of parents knew about this. However, the other league refused, and they had several complaints and came close to serious injuries. Not good. There could be big lawsuits here.

Meanwhile, the kids born after May 1, 2015, will be losing their 12 yr old year. Very few parents realize this, and people will be furious when this occurs in 2018. Moving the age to Aug 31 is a step in the right direction, but still screws three months of kids. What a horrible thing to do. These people should be ashamed. Most of these kids won't even know until its too late. Anyone who follows this KNOWS this was instituted by ESPN. It's all about money. The IBF excuse is a sham, and could be implemented at the into levels anyway.

Changing the age rule is fine. JUST DO IT AT THE T-BALL OR A level. There are many kids in our league that will have just one year of majors. It's terrible. I will never support the LL organization again after this, and I couldn't care less if LL fades out of existence. It won't be long until ESPN gets its act together and starts televising the 50-70 championships, which will be far more entertaining and have better talent at the same age levels. Then LL will be in real trouble, if it is not already.

The answer is that LL should leave the age rule as it is for the 2015 kids. Change the age to be year-based at AGE 7 or younger NOW. Age 5-7 are intro levels anyway. The damage has already been done at those levels. Fix it at least for the 2015 kids.

Anonymous said...

The rule from 1950 until 2005 cut off date was August 1st . It should have never been changed. The way the rule is now a kid born on May first turns 13 years of age can play as a 12 year old . I don't no how many kids got hurt when a hitter or a pitcher hit them with the ball because some kids at 13 can really bring the ball . LITTLE LEAGUE WAS DESIGNED FOR KIDS THAT ARE 11 and 12 DURING THE BASEBALL SEASON. NOT TURNING 13 ON MAY 1ST. So parents that are crying about this is because your kid can"t play baseball when he or she 13 playing 11 or 12 year old"s. Let them move on up and play kids there on age.!!!!