> The NCAA is on very shaky ground here, in my opinion. As I understand it,
the
> Amateur Sports Act gives USA Track & Field total control over the sport in
this
> country. Article 4, Paragraph D, Subparagraph 3 of the USATF Bylaws
permits
> organizations such as the NCAA which conduct restricted competitions to
have
> jurisdiction over these competitions. The problem is when this runs afoul
of the
> IAAF contamination rule. The NCAA should realize that USATF can change
it's
> bylaws to limit the autonomy of the NCAA and similar organizations if they
abuse
> the independence they have been granted.
The NCAA is not on shaky ground legally. The amateur sports act is what
permits these organizations to govern the competitions - the USATF bylaws
are just a reflection of that. In no way could USATF have "legal" influence
over the NCAA. They can recommend and they can point out potential
problems, but they have no authority over the conduct of the NCAA in NCAA
competitions. He is banned from participation in USATF and IAAF sanctioned
competition but anyone can hold a track meet and allow him to run. The IAAF
might invoke the contamination rule, which could be very interesting for
some of the other sprinters and which might end up once again putting USATF
in an impossible situation. If the IAAF invokes the rule, all the other
sprint finalists may be ineligible for USATF nationals. Then again, the
IAAF might wimp out in their actual enforcement of the rule as they did in
the Baumann situation last year.
One question I have is what role USADA is supposed to play in this?
What is USADA's authority and could it be construed to apply to the NCAA or
is it only organizations under the control of the USOC which are subject to
USADA authority?
- Ed Parrot
