Unknown to the posters, this situation has more to it than is implied in
all of the posts. There is nothing being done by the coaches or the
school administration involved that warrant comments such as are
mentioned below ("ego and stupidity......The young people do not have to
put up with ridiculous rules....")
Before one makes statements like this, the complete facts should be
known. However, this forum is not the place to "try" the athlete, the
school, the coaches, or the PIAA, or air the facts. It is, as it should
be, an issue that is and should be dealt with internally within the
confines of the school system. Just like discipline hearing are not
open to the public, internal affairs of a school system's program that
involve students and staff should only be appropriately discussed in
private. If and when it is appropriate, the facts will be released to
the appropriate media by the parties involved. Let the appropriate
administrative body(ies) handle this according to their policies in the
professional manor that they are entitled. In the meantime, please let
us use this forum for what it is intended....discusion of current
coaching issues, meet results, and training information. Leave the
other comments for the grocery store tabloids.
"J. Fred Duckett" wrote:
> Ed Grant is absolutely right. What are coaches for -
> hard-nosed polcemen, or educators adding their area of
> taaching to the youngsters in their care. This is
> certainly a major case of ego and stupidity - yes
> stupidity!!. The young people do not have to putup
> with ridiculous rules like these, and if they did, an
> appropriate penalty might be found. These
> concrete-heads on the Hershey staff are merely put-out
> because they are faced with the accomplished fact that
> they have a runner who does not need them. I wish
> that at the small school where I help coach that we
> could find a talent of this strength.
> J. Fred Duckett, Houston, Texas
> --- Ed Grant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Netters:
> >
> >
> > The Pennsylvania case cited by Walt Murphy
> > sounds at this slkight
> > distance across the Delaware as a case of a clash of
> > egos. It is always
> > possible that more is involved than was contained in
> > the Inquirer story,
> > but, on the surface, it does appear as "much ado
> > about nothing."
> >
> > One would think that the coaches would be
> > happy to have a talented
> > runner who trains year-around and is always in
> > shape. What she does during
> > the summer as far as competition is concerned is
> > really none of their
> > business, something school people on all levels seem
> > to have a hard time
> > understanding.
> >
> > Coaches can ask their runners to eschew
> > off-season competition, but
> > that's about all they can do, legally. The takj oif
> > bringing the PIAA into
> > this case is sheer nonsense; a civil cour (while
> > unfortunate) would be
> > another matter.
> >
> > I did not like that part of the story which
> > seemed to say that the
> > school was "worried" about have an ineligible runner
> > on their team after her
> > transfer last year. When are these people going to
> > realize that it is, oince
> > again, none of their business where a student
> > attends school--the US Supreme
> > Court long ago made it clear that this is a parental
> > choice. The "athletic
> > advantage" rule, if it ever got that far, would last
> > about five minutes. It
> > is not only unconstituional, it is revolting.
> > As a judge said to the PIAA in another Pennsylvania
> > matter
> > several years ago, in effect: "Prove to me that the
> > school recruited the
> > athlete and I'll listen to you; otherwise, shut up."
> > Just because high school associations lack the funds
> > to establish an
> > athletic FBI of the type the NCAA has does not give
> > them any license to pass
> > rules that deny students their right---yes, my dear
> > folks, it is a right,
> > not a privilege---to try to make their school's
> > athletic teams.
> >
> >
> > The usual penalty for missing a practice or
> > two is suspension from
> > the next competition and a requirement of daily
> > attendance if the suspension
> > is to be lifted. Practices in individual sports held
> > before the day school
> > stars should be voluntary anyway, particularly if
> > they clash with family
> > vacation times. (Team sports are another matter, but
> > cross-country is not
> > essentially a team sport; the absence of one runner
> > does not affect the
> > training progress of her teammates the way an absent
> > football player might)
> >
> > I can't recall a case of this kind in my
> > long time observing sports
> > in NJ. The only thing CC coaches worry about is
> > whether their charges do
> > some summer running and report if fairly good
> > condition. Obviously, this
> > girl did that.
> >
> >
> > Ed Grant .
> >
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More
> http://faith.yahoo.com
