Fayetteville to forfeit 6 wins

[CaptainJackRackam]

2 minutes ago, Crock1615 said:

All-Star Games Section 23 (a). No student shall be permitted to participate in an all-star game unless it is sanctioned by the TSSAA and unless he/she has completed high school eligibility in that sport; (b) no individual player is allowed to participate in more than two sanctioned all-star contests during the school year; and (c) any student who fails to comply with the preceding requirements loses athletic eligibility for a period of time to be determined by the Board of Control. This rule reflects the present NCAA rule involving all-star games and is designed to parallel those regulations. If a student-athlete withdraws from school and participates in an All-Star game prior to completing their high school eligibility in that sport, he or she will be ineligible to participate in that sport twelve months past the date of the All-Star game. An all-star game is defined as any contest (where admission is charged either directly or indirectly) in which one or both teams is composed of players selected from two or more regularly constituted teams. This regulation does not apply to summer baseball and girls softball. Any all-star game involving TSSAA athletes must be sanctioned by the TSSAA. A filing fee of $250.00 is required for the game to be considered for sanctioning. If the game is approved then an additional approval fee of $750.00 is required. If the request is denied, then all fees shall be refunded. This fee is required annually for games involving groups not affiliated with the TSSAA. No member school shall permit use of its equipment, facilities, or of its employees, directly or indirectly, in the management, coaching, officiating, supervision, or promotion of player selection of any unsanctioned all-star team or contest during the school year.

 

The part in bold answers your question.          

there is no set penalty.  each case is decided by the board of control. 

So if I’m understanding what the bold section is basically saying, if a current enrolled student athlete participants in a unsanctioned TSSAA sport their eligibility is gone for a period of time determined by the board of control! 
 Again, I’m questioning what rules the TSSAA decides to enforce and which they don’t! This Fayetteville situation will effect the playoff chances of another team but they choose to ignore a proven violation which cost one team a State Championship. Just something to ponder over..
 

[PullinGuard]

14 minutes ago, Southtowner said:

And if paperwork isn't filled out correctly then someone can be declared eligible then later ineligible after further review. 

This is a good point. 

I do not know one way or the other, but I think this could be critical. 

If the information presented was incorrect, and the correct information means the player is ineligible, then it's clear from precedent that the kid can and will be ruled retroactively ineligible, and wins will be vacated.  That happens all the time.

If, OTOH, the information was all correct and the new ruling was due to a change in TSSAA's review and consideration of the situation with no change in the facts, then that is much less common and is a more unusual circumstance. 

A court might well decide that if all of the information was correct and honest in the first place and the TSSAA declared him eligible based on that information, then he was eligible until their interpretation on the matter changed and was announced.  

Courts commonly consider relative fault when considering relief.  If all information was available at the time of the original clearance, the court may decide it unreasonable to punish Fayetteville for TSSAA's oversight.

 

 

Edited October 30, 2019 by PullinGuard

[sum1uno]

Just now, CaptainJackRackam said:

So if I’m understanding what the bold section is basically saying, if a current enrolled student athlete participants in a unsanctioned TSSAA sport their eligibility is gone for a period of time determined by the board of control! 
 Again, I’m questioning what rules the TSSAA decides to enforce and which they don’t! This Fayetteville situation will effect the playoff chances of another team but they choose to ignore a proven violation which cost one team a State Championship. Just something to ponder over..
 

You old pirate you! 

[Southtowner]

7 minutes ago, sum1uno said:

But if kid played before cleared ( Marion County game ) technically they was playing with ineligible player so MC should get win regardless? Idk

My understanding he was cleared before the 1st game.  All transfers must be cleared.  They are cleared based on the information provided them. 

Edited October 30, 2019 by Southtowner

[CaptainJackRackam]

13 minutes ago, sum1uno said:

Does transfer have to be cleared by TSSAA before participating in game? Is this a rule?

I know for a fact that before my stepson could even practice he had to be cleared by the TSSAA! So if a transfer played in a game before being cleared I would assume that is a violation!

[sum1uno]

Just now, Southtowner said:

My understanding he was cleared before the 1st game.  All transfers must be cleared.  They are cleared based on the information provided them. 

Ok. I thought letter was dated September 6 declaring him eligible 

[Crock1615]

3 minutes ago, CaptainJackRackam said:

So if I’m understanding what the bold section is basically saying, if a current enrolled student athlete participants in a unsanctioned TSSAA sport their eligibility is gone for a period of time determined by the board of control! 
 Again, I’m questioning what rules the TSSAA decides to enforce and which they don’t! This Fayetteville situation will effect the playoff chances of another team but they choose to ignore a proven violation which cost one team a State Championship. Just something to ponder over..
 

I guess we are to assume that the BOC decided the time the whitwell player would be ineligible was zero games.  

[CaptainJackRackam]

1 minute ago, sum1uno said:

You old pirate you! 

Well it just got me thinking of how they ignored a certain situation but apparently jumped on this investigation pretty quick! Was it because of misinformation or someone waiting for the perfect time to anonymously bring the situation to light?

[Southtowner]

1 minute ago, PullinGuard said:

This is a good point. 

I do not know one way or the other, but I think this could be critical. 

If the information presented was incorrect, and the correct information means the player is ineligible, ] it's clear from precedent that the kid can be ruled retroactively ineligible, and wins will be vacated.  That happens all the time.

If, OTOH, the information was all correct and the new ruling was due to a change in TSSAA's review and consideration of the situation with no change in the facts, then that is a much less common and is a more unusual circumstance. 

A court might well decide that if all of the information was correct and honest in the first place and the TSSAA declared him eligible based on that information, then he was eligible until their interpretation on the matter changed and was announced.   

 

I don't have all the details PG.    The smoking gun is this case will be revealed before long.  I just wished Fayetteville had gone thru the appeals process.  Sometimes we are blinded by what we believe to be true and thrust ourselves further into a situation without regard to anything or anyone else. 

[CaptainJackRackam]

Just now, Crock1615 said:

I guess we are to assume that the BOC decided the time the whitwell player would be ineligible was zero games.  

Zero games for participating in a televised all star game before the senior year started seems legit I guess! 
All that video of the game and his participation must not of been important enough like say a bus route! 

[RocketHouse]

7 minutes ago, sum1uno said:

Ok. I thought letter was dated September 6 declaring him eligible 

He went through the traditional transfer process and was deemed eligible. Someone filed a complaint and the TSSAA investigated and cleared him again with a formal letter on 9/6. In week 10 TSSAA again (third time) revisited the issue and deemed him ineligible. 

[PullinGuard]

6 minutes ago, Southtowner said:

I don't have all the details PG.    The smoking gun is this case will be revealed before long.  I just wished Fayetteville had gone thru the appeals process.  Sometimes we are blinded by what we believe to be true and thrust ourselves further into a situation without regard to anything or anyone else. 

You seem to know TSSAA history (I don't), and you've said you don't recall them ever losing a court case like this.  Have they ever granted an appeal in a relatively high-profile case like this? 

I think the appeal would have been gone through except for the timing.  If they get a 'no' Friday afternoon, there are no avenues left. 

I can't help but recall that there was a poster on here that said this was all going to happen as far back as Oct 5th - said an official told him.  Seems like if the ruling had come down back then (or before), there would have been plenty of time to go through the appeal.  Might not have even needed any appeals if the ruling had happened before 2-3 region games.

Edited October 30, 2019 by PullinGuard