The B.C. Human Rights Tribunal has dismissed two complaints connected to youth sports.

In the most recent decision, dated July 30, tribunal member Judith Parrack tossed out a complaint filed by the parents of a girl of South Asian descent.

The parents claimed that the Guildford Athletic Club, which operates a soccer league, discriminated against the girl on the basis of race, colour, and ancestry.

This was based on the girl being "consistently benched" and playing for only 10 to 12 minutes per game near the end of the 2008-09 season.

The parents alleged she was one of the best players on the team, and noted that she was the only one of South Asian descent.

According to the decision, 40 percent of the players in the league were of South Asian descent, as were the league president and vice-president.

Parrack's ruling withheld the full names of the girl, the parents, and the respondents with the club.

The respondents stated that there were 12 players on each team, and they played eight-on-eight, which meant that the girl received "fair and equitable" playing time.

In addition, the respondents maintained that the girl "regularly missed practices and games".

Two teams were combined for the 2009-2010 season, and the girl was the only member of her team not included on the roster. The parents complained that this was retaliation against them for speaking out.

The league, on the other hand, claimed that the head coach halted discussing the matter after the parents claimed he was racist.

Parrack noted that it appeared that many members on the combined team were of South Asian descent. In her decision, she surmised that if the coach was truly racist, she "would have expected to see far fewer South Asian players".

The ruling also pointed out that the girl could still play soccer, just not with the team of her choice.

"In my view, and given the context and the issues underlying this complaint, it would not be an efficient use of the Tribunal’s resources to further process this complaint," Parrack wrote.

The other human-rights complaint involved minor hockey. In this case, tribunal member Enid Marion also deleted the names in her July 29 decision to protect the child's identity.

A mother filed a complaint of discrimination on the basis of family status on behalf of her son.

The conflict originated in October 2008 when the mother and father orally complained to the association. They asked for the coach's removal for allegedly emotionally abusing and verbally bullying their son, who was a goaltender.

According to Marion's ruling, the mother had said that shortly before the complaint was filed, her son had been suspended for 32 days and was later cut to a house program.

The association dismissed the complaint and suggested he play for a different team for the remainder of the season.

The parents followed up by complaining to B.C. Hockey. It appointed an independent investigator, who found that the complaint had no merit.

Nevertheless, B.C. Hockey instructed the association to put the goalie back on his original team, which occurred in January 2009.

According to the decision, the parents then alleged that the coaches refused to go on the ice with their son. In addition, the parents claimed that they were "repeatedly told" he was not welcome back on the team.

On January 11, 2009, the mother alleged that she, her son, and the son's father were all suspended from the association for alleged harassment. This came after parents of other players wrote letters of complaint.

Four days later, the association rescinded the suspension "at the direction of BC Hockey", according to Marion's ruling.

That prompted the team's coaches to resign. The team then withdrew from a tournament, but ended up going anyway. The goaltender's mother claimed that she was informed too late for them to attend.

On January 17, B.C. Hockey re-entered the picture, suspending the association for not properly reinstating the player.

A few days later, that suspension was rescinded, but all the players with the exception of the goaltender were suspended until the end of the 2008-09 season. On appeal, B.C. Hockey shortened those suspensions to March 22, 2009.

In early August 2009, the father filed a complaint of criminal harassment against the coach and another volunteer coach. According to Marion's ruling, the respondents said that the RCMP investigated and found it to be groundless.

The boy was assigned to play house league for the 2009-10 hockey season. He claimed that at his first practice, the coach came to the rink and "intimidated him".

Human rights complaints must be filed within six months of the alleged infraction of the B.C. Human Rights Code. Marion dismissed the complaint because most of the events occurred more than six months before the filing.

In addition, she stated there was no evidence that the behaviour, even if true, was related to the goalie's family status.

"[The player] has no reasonable prospect of success of establishing that he was evaluated improperly and assigned to a house league because of his family status," she concluded.

Follow Charlie Smith on Twitter at twitter.com/csmithstraight.