Started By
Message
Bylaw 14.11.(1) Problem
Posted on 12/3/10 at 11:03 am
Posted on 12/3/10 at 11:03 am
This has been bugging me, so I'm going to point out something that needs clarification. I'd like a little transparency, so if you'll indulge me:
This is NCAA President Mark Emmert:
"Question: Explain the student-athlete reinstatement process.
Answer: It always begins with the institution acknowledging that a rule has been violated. The school, not the NCAA, declares the student ineligible after citing a specific bylaw that has been violated. Bylaw 14.11 states that once an institution knows that a violation exists, school officials are obligated to report it. It is an obligation of membership.
Once the school does that, officials have to decide whether to seek reinstatement."
Ok, that's all well and good. To summarize:
1) Institution acknowledges problem
2) Institution makes athlete ineligible
3) Bylaw 14.11 compels the institution to report the problem
4) Institution can then request reinstatement
President Emmert leaves out one thing, though: how quickly the institution has to declare the athlete ineligible. Numerous recent statements in the press from NCAA representatives do the exact same thing.
Now, let's take a look at Bylaw 14.11 (It's actually 14.11.1, to be exact.)
"14.11.1 Obligation of Member Institution to Withhold Student-Athlete from Competition.
If a student-athlete is ineligible under the provisions of the constitution, bylaws or other regulations of the Association, the institution shall be obligated to apply immediately the applicable rule and to withhold the student-athlete from all intercollegiate competition. The institution may appeal to the Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement for restoration of the student-athlete¡¦s eligibility as provided in Bylaw 14.12 if it concludes that the circumstances warrant restoration."
That one word in bold is huge - Auburn did not immediately "apply the applicable rule" or withhold Cam from competition. They waited until the end of the regular season, well after it was obvious that clarification was needed by the reinstatement committee. Every university follows this procedure, without fail, at risk of penalty.
Therefore, if the NCAA advised Auburn to wait, I'd like for them to admit it. The NCAA, which has a notorious reputation for inefficiency, is suddenly behaving like Switzerland, and it's pretty obvious that this week's events have been planned in advance.
But for now, the NCAA seems to be selectively interpreting its own bylaws. Considering how completely obtuse the NCAA can be about applying the letter of their own law in other cases, their recent behavior strikes me as thoroughly hypocritical.
This is NCAA President Mark Emmert:
"Question: Explain the student-athlete reinstatement process.
Answer: It always begins with the institution acknowledging that a rule has been violated. The school, not the NCAA, declares the student ineligible after citing a specific bylaw that has been violated. Bylaw 14.11 states that once an institution knows that a violation exists, school officials are obligated to report it. It is an obligation of membership.
Once the school does that, officials have to decide whether to seek reinstatement."
Ok, that's all well and good. To summarize:
1) Institution acknowledges problem
2) Institution makes athlete ineligible
3) Bylaw 14.11 compels the institution to report the problem
4) Institution can then request reinstatement
President Emmert leaves out one thing, though: how quickly the institution has to declare the athlete ineligible. Numerous recent statements in the press from NCAA representatives do the exact same thing.
Now, let's take a look at Bylaw 14.11 (It's actually 14.11.1, to be exact.)
"14.11.1 Obligation of Member Institution to Withhold Student-Athlete from Competition.
If a student-athlete is ineligible under the provisions of the constitution, bylaws or other regulations of the Association, the institution shall be obligated to apply immediately the applicable rule and to withhold the student-athlete from all intercollegiate competition. The institution may appeal to the Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement for restoration of the student-athlete¡¦s eligibility as provided in Bylaw 14.12 if it concludes that the circumstances warrant restoration."
That one word in bold is huge - Auburn did not immediately "apply the applicable rule" or withhold Cam from competition. They waited until the end of the regular season, well after it was obvious that clarification was needed by the reinstatement committee. Every university follows this procedure, without fail, at risk of penalty.
Therefore, if the NCAA advised Auburn to wait, I'd like for them to admit it. The NCAA, which has a notorious reputation for inefficiency, is suddenly behaving like Switzerland, and it's pretty obvious that this week's events have been planned in advance.
But for now, the NCAA seems to be selectively interpreting its own bylaws. Considering how completely obtuse the NCAA can be about applying the letter of their own law in other cases, their recent behavior strikes me as thoroughly hypocritical.
Posted on 12/3/10 at 11:04 am to MikeyFL
We seriously need a Bylaw board.
Posted on 12/3/10 at 11:05 am to MikeyFL
would it have made you feel better had he been ruled ineligible the thursday he gave his NCAA interview then reinstated friday before the UGA game?
you lost.... get over it.
you lost.... get over it.
Posted on 12/3/10 at 11:07 am to MikeyFL
.......and you're asking this board for clarification !
Posted on 12/3/10 at 11:08 am to piggidyphish
quote:
We seriously need a Bylaw board.
Posted on 12/3/10 at 11:10 am to lowspark12
quote:
would it have made you feel better had he been ruled ineligible the thursday he gave his NCAA interview then reinstated friday before the UGA game?
you lost.... get over it.
Yes, it would actually. That's the correct procedure.
I'm primarily annoyed because my family has been involved with collegiate athletics for a number of years. I've seen one thing over and over: the NCAA is, if anything, extremely pedantic with their bylaws.
You'd be shocked at the ridiculously minor things that are reported to reinstatement committee and take weeks.
Posted on 12/3/10 at 11:10 am to MikeyFL
quote:That is exactly what Jim Delany, a former NCAA investigator and current Big X conference commissioner is criticizing: NYT: Conference Commissioners Criticizing NCAA Decision
But for now, the NCAA seems to be selectively interpreting its own bylaws.
This post was edited on 12/3/10 at 11:12 am
Posted on 12/3/10 at 11:13 am to TigerWoody
quote:
That is exactly what Jim Delany, a former NCAA investigator and current Big X conference commissioner is criticizing: NYT: Conference Commissioners Criticizing NCAA Decision
Good article! Delany may have a very good point with the rule-of-agency principle.
Posted on 12/3/10 at 11:14 am to MikeyFL
quote:
The NCAA, which has a notorious reputation for inefficiency, is suddenly behaving like Switzerland,
Just a thought
Has anyone given any thought to the "Possibility" that the NCAA 's hands are tied due to a related/non related FBI investigation/case against an Auburn Booster?
Posted on 12/3/10 at 11:17 am to TigerWoody
It doesn't take Einstein to figure out that the NCAA worked with Auburn on the timing of the rulings in this. The NCAA and AU both knew for sure that a violation occured when they met the Thursday before the UGA/AU game. They planned it such that the process would occur at a time that would benefit Auburn and Cam being able to participate in all games. It is very clear that the NCAA is ALL IN.
Posted on 12/3/10 at 11:35 am to lctiger
quote:Could not agree with you more. This steaming pile of crap has dampened my excitement over the college game. At least with the NFL you KNOW what you are dealing with beforehand.
lctiger
Posted on 12/3/10 at 12:46 pm to MikeyFL
quote:
If a student-athlete is ineligible
Auburn makes this call only after being notified by the NCAA. The NCAA can't notify Auburn until the NCAA and Auburn agree on the facts or workout any disagreements.
My money says Auburn was disagreeing until Monday. I guess that Monday after going back and forth with the NCAA for some time, the NCAA struck a deal with Auburn to get the interpretation set as president and dodge the lawyers.
Then once the parties have agreed it becomes time for your 'immediate' action. The reality is that most schools probably didn't put up the fight that Auburn did and AU probably did so due to the current season.
Another factor in Auburn's fight might be that they aren't being investigated, MSU is ATM.
This post was edited on 12/3/10 at 12:48 pm
Posted on 12/3/10 at 1:06 pm to lctiger
quote:
They planned it such that the process would occur at a time that would benefit Auburn and Cam being able to participate in all games. It is very clear that the NCAA is ALL IN.
Us and the NCAA are family.
Posted on 12/3/10 at 1:20 pm to AUDave
AU's lawyers are earning their paycheck right now.
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News