News & Observer | newsobserver.com | Ineligible rule needs overhaul

Published: Oct 16, 2007 12:30 AM
Modified: Oct 16, 2007 01:26 AM

Ineligible rule needs overhaul

 

Story Tools

Most Recent Photo Galleries


Share Your Photos

Your photos: View readers' high school sports photos and submit your own.

High School Sports Links

Home: Features stats, standings, schedules photos and video
Columnists: Robinson | Stevens
Advertisements
The Person and Chapel Hill football teams already have forfeited games for using ineligible players in early season games.

Before the season is over, there probably will be others.

But the Apex girls volleyball team, which also used an ineligible player, was not penalized.

The reason: an N.C. High School Athletic Association rule acknowledging that sometimes it really isn't the school's fault when an ineligible player is used.

In the Apex situation, the NCHSAA ruled that reasonable scrutiny by the school would not have discovered that a student's eligibility had been falsified.

The "reasonable scrutiny" clause went into effect a few years ago and has been used about once a year, according to Charlie Adams, NCHSAA executive director.

If a school does everything it can to verify a player's eligibility and later learns otherwise, the player, not the school, is punished.

"We learned that some people will falsify official documents, change transcripts and do almost anything to manipulate the system," Adams said.

"Our board felt that schools can only do so much and the other members of the team shouldn't be penalized for the actions of one person."

Under the old rule, if a team used an ineligible player, regardless of the circumstances, the contest was forfeited.

Using a player means allowing the athlete to put on a uniform and enter the venue.

That interpretation came after North Duplin had to examine game film in 1973 to find out if an ineligible player, a reserve, had participated in every game.

North Duplin, led by Larry Morrisey and Ronnie Byrd, was so overwhelming -- averaging a then-state record 49 points per game -- that the ineligible player had appeared in the final minutes of each win.

The victories had to be forfeited, and North Duplin didn't make the playoffs.

Soon, the rule was changed so that dressing for a game was the same as playing in it.

Broughton's football team might have benefited from the "reasonable scrutiny" clause had it been in effect in 1979.

The Caps won the league title but had to forfeit their wins because a student, who was in his fifth year of competition, had a falsified transcript.

"It was an incredible team, one of the best I've seen in Raleigh," said Dwayne Greene, the Caps' quarterback.

"We could have won the state, except we had to forfeit. And the guy who was ineligible didn't play much. It still bothers me."

Broughton had no way of knowing the transcript was incorrect.

"The North Duplin and the Broughton situations were very hard but clear-cut," Adams said.

"Times change, and our board of directors has changed the rule after determining that whether records are falsified is more and more difficult."

Adams said he has mixed feelings about the rule.

"I don't like ineligible players helping to win games," he said.

It is hard to think of ordering forfeits because someone has falsified records.

But to me, it's worse to allow schools to use any ineligible players and keep wins.

The current NCHSAA rule allowing "reasonable scrutiny" is a bad one.

tim.stevens@newsobserver.com or (919) 829-8910

Get $150+ in coupons in every Sunday N&O. Click here for convenient home delivery.

No comments have been posted for this story. Log in to be the first to comment.
 

 

The News & Observer is pleased to be able to offer its users the opportunity to make comments and hold conversations online. However, the interactive nature of the internet makes it impracticable for our staff to monitor each and every posting.

Since The News & Observer does not control user submitted statements, we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted on our website. In addition, we remind anyone interested in making an online comment that responsibility for statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not The News and Observer.

If you find a comment offensive, clicking on the exclamation icon will flag the comment for review by the administrators, we are counting on the good judgment of all our readers to help us.

Hosting Partners of
newsobserver.com

A subsidiary of The McClatchy Company