OK, then, I'm getting confused...I get a little lost sometimes when faced with seemingly contradicting points. Is your argument:
A. MPSC should have canceled the tournament early because they knew the weather would cause closings.
B. MPSC should not have canceled the tournament games at all because the weather they should have known would cause closings should not have caused closings.
or
C. Some teams should have gotten their "money's worth" while others were penalized, based on luck of the draw on field locations rather than universal rescheduling.
