SC Soccer Forums SCSoccer.com Forums Club Soccer & ODP Let Romeo Play

Romeo is a new player to the 96 Boys Elite team for South Carolina United. He has recently transferred over from discovery where he played up in the 95 Boys for the fall season. Now he is back down into his actual age group. He now currently isn't aloud to play because he has already played on a different team. He is an outstanding player. He has already played in the state cup but wouldn't be playing in the other state cup in the spring. The team was well aware of this before hand. Now he isnt allowed to play at all under any circumstance. I and the 96 Boys Elite team all agree that this isnt right and totally unfair. Do you agree? For i know that this is america and we are founded to give everyone the right to do whatever makes them happy if it helps them in a positive way in the long run. Should anyone try to make a child not play the sport that he or she loves? I thought this was South Carolina soccer where we let any kid who has a heart and passion for soccer to play! So what do you think.....Let Romeo play or make him wait a whole season to play?

Let Romeo play or not? single choice

Let him play (44%, 23 Votes)

Make him wait a season (56%, 29 Votes)

Total Votes: 52 Voting on this poll ends: 05/07/11 10:15 PM

Please give your input on this situation!

Romeo is the nickname for Caleb Moore.

To take away something a kid loves is just stright up crude. Think about if this was your child force to not play the sport he or she loves. How would that make you and your child feel.

Romeo was so ready to show Cesa this past saturday that he was going to try to come back after the lost of by one point to cesa back in the beginning of this month. And for him to get a call saying that he cant play broke his, his mother, and team's hearts. Romeo even cried as he had to sit out of the game. But happy that he could at least cheer his team on! That my south carolina soccer players and coaches is a true team player!

What rule was cited as the reason he was not allowed to play? Was this decision made at the state or region level?

From an intrigue perspective, was a complaint filed that led to this decision?

The rules as I know them state that a player may move from one club to another provided he/she receives a waiver from the club who "owns"... yes more on the word "own" later.

Usually if the player owes fees then the current club can hold on to the waiver until the fees are paid. SCYSA allows for a player to move from one team to another after a 30 day waiting period which begins the day the player petitions the state. The rationale was that clubs invested in the player and had not been compensated for it and the player (if is up-to-date) has the right to move on for the players benefit.

The player is allowed to participate in one state cup in a playing year but could play the regular season for another team....Only if that players season is over...i.e the squad did not qualify for regionals.

Now for the "own" part....The clubs hold all the cards because they can simply refuse the transfer even if the player has completely payed all his debt.

So here is the rub RS9... it is interesting that a SCUFC affiliated member would complain about the inadequate process preventing players from moving since after all this is America ...when SC UNITED (YOUR CLUB) has specifically prevented unhappy players from moving from one club to the another even though they had payed for all the costs...

So "Should anyone try to make a child not play the sport that he or she loves?" I would recommend you discuss this with your leadership as they know exactly how to do this... Ans basically against the operating guidelines they tout.

Do some homework before calling out another club for being "unfair"...

SCP9194... since I do not know who you are I will not name in public forum because I believe in the privacy of the player.

I know of at least one player this past fall. And SCYSA was involved as well.

In fact there was no forum initiated for stating that "player x wanted out please voice your opinion". Simply because in the overall scheme it was determined to be detrimental to the player.

If you would like to know I suggest you check with your leadership. Simple question ..Has SCUFC ever prevented an unhappy player, who was completely paid up, movement to another club?

"The pot should not be calling the kettle black" or "people who live in glass houses should not throw stones"... you pick.

SCUFC has lots of quality folks as do lots of other clubs, but in the end you are not perfect either.

This thread should not have been initiated, it serves no purpose...

In fact I would wholeheartedly agree to back you with SCYSA if this young man was paid in full with Discoveries and wanted a transfer... there is no reason to hold him back for 30 days. But your club's track record indicates otherwise.

The young man and his parents decided to play up in the fall and now wants to play in the spring for another team..Live with your decision and transfer next fall..
How is it that when someone does not get what they want it is somehow..unfair?

As the coach of the Player in question let me quickly provide some insight before this thread gets out of hand.

Caleb Mooore played for DSC in the fall at the u15 level. he transfered to play for SCUFC u14 this spring. This transfer was signed off on by DSC,SCUFC and SCYSA. No club is holding anyone back.

The issue is now related to a new reading of an old rule which goes directly against futbol's and most others understanding of the rule "The player is allowed to participate in one state cup in a playing year but could play the regular season for another team....Only if that players season is over...i.e the squad did not qualify for regionals.".

Without boring everyone with the specifc rules and subsets of each rule if the current "ineligible ruling" is upheld many players on current scysa rosters could soon also find themselves ineligible.

Futbol- While i do not know whom you refer to when suggesting SCUFC was "holding" a player back, i do know that under this new reading that player would most likely have been deemed ineligible anyway.


As an added note no one is suggesting Caleb Moore should be able to particpate in the sping State cup for SCUFC.

This sounds like a life or death situation!! Especially for a 13 or 14 yr old playing club soccer!!!

Thanks Rob..... let me just state that my issue was with the first posting from RS9.... Do not know of the specific situation but felt that "calling out" a club for something needs to be left up to the individual clubs and SCYSA

I am interested in hearing about the new /old wording because as you state we may find lots of players that are ineligible.

if so I know of many instances in the very recent past that this "practice" was allowed and wonder why the change?

I am guessing that the wording "seasonal year" is the issue...

From Page 25 of the ADMIN Handbook on transfers

35. TRANSFER - a player who is currently or was previously rostered on an Official Team Roster
requesting and being moved onto the South Carolina Youth Soccer Official Team Roster of another team or
the return of a released player to the same roster within the current seasonal year. All requests for transfer
must have the explanation portion of the form properly filled out by the player's receiving coach, and the
transferring player's current pass should accompany this transaction. No transferred player may compete
with a new team until he/she receives a new player pass for that team and appears on that team's roster.

a. Any player transferring to another club, without their present (releasing) coach's signature on the
transfer form, will be required to wait 30 days from the date the transfer form was received by the
South Carolina Youth Soccer State Registrar/designee before they can be rostered to another team.
b. The player's present (releasing) coach may approve and sign the transfer form and the player will be
released from their current team and eligible to be rostered to another team immediately upon the
completion of the transfer form by the South Carolina Youth Soccer State Registrar/designee.
c. Any player changing their primary residence by a minimum of 50 miles or across state lines may
request to be transferred to another team without their present coach's approval or a 30 day waiting
period but must meet their financial obligations to the releasing club.
d. In scenario a, b or c, the releasing team coach's signature releases the player from their team and
their financial obligations.
e. Without the releasing coach's signature, a player will not be allowed to transfer to another club until
their present club's documented financial obligation has been completely satisfied.
f. Any academy non-rostered player who releases from one club to another shall complete the
transfer/release form and return their player card to their present club registrar who will destroy
before the release will be considered completed.
g. Any recreation non-rostered player who releases from one club to another during the seasonal year
shall complete the transfer/release form and return their player card to their present club registrar
who destroy before the release will be considered completed. The only exception to this rule is that
non-rostered recreation players may move between clubs from December 1 until January 30 without
completing the transfer/release form but clubs must notify the State Registrar/designee