The NCAA News - News and Features

July 20, 1998

Steps taken to provide relief in certain reinstatement cases

The division-specific groups that address student-athlete reinstatement have taken a step toward modifying NCAA legislation so that student-athletes do not suffer significant eligibility consequences because of mistakes made by their coaches.

The Division I Subcommittee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement, the Division II Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement and the Division III Subcommittee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement are concerned about cases in which coaches have ordered student-athletes into games even though the athletes have not yet been certified as eligible.

Bylaw 14.2.4.1 states that any competition, regardless of time, during a season in an intercollegiate sport shall be counted as a season of competition in that sport.

Currently, the waiver process is through the administrative review subcommittees. To date, those groups have tended to adhere to the strict application of the rule.

The subcommittees are recommending that the Academics/Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet in Division I and the Management Councils in Divisions II and III sponsor legislation to amend NCAA Bylaw 14.2.6 to permit a student-athlete to regain a season of competition when a coaching staff member carelessly costs a student-athlete a season of competition by directing him or her to participate in a contest when the staff member is unsure of the student-athlete's eligibility status and the student-athlete is subsequently determined to be ineligible for competi-
tion.

The proposed legislation would not provide relief for student-athletes who know they are ineligible and should not be participating.

The proposal would shift the burden for the mistake from the student-athlete to the institution, which would be required to forfeit any contests in which an ineligible student-athlete competed. Further, coaches who knowingly allowed an ineligible student-athlete to participate would be penalized through the secondary infractions process and/or through institutionally imposed penalties (such as suspension of the coach for an appropriate number of contests, a decrease in the number of official paid visits, or a decrease in the number of evaluations and/or contacts).

Sports wagering issues

The committees took another significant action when they adopted a process that is intended to assist NCAA investigators and law enforcement officials in shutting down illegal sports wagering operations on college campuses.

The process, which is a new tool for combating impermissible sports wagering, is similar to the limited immunity provisions in Bylaw 32.3.7, and provides the committee with the ability to not impose conditions for reinstatement when the student-athlete voluntarily provides information not otherwise available to the institution or staff and no previous information has been developed that would jeopardize the student-athlete's eligibility.

The staff recommended the policy after it became apparent that student-athletes feared the loss of athletics eligibility more than the legal consequences of violating sports wagering laws. Government investigators say that the athletes' fear of losing all of their athletics eligibility is so great that many of them would not testify in sports wagering-related cases. Without their testimony, many such cases are impossible to prove.

The authority to grant the limited immunity would have to come from the full committee (rather than the chair or the staff). Once the procedure is codified and approved by each subcommittee, it would be provided to the appropriate body in each governance structure for review and comment.

In a related matter, the committee commended the NCAA Committee on Sportsmanship and Ethical Conduct for its work in deterring sports wagering. The committee endorsed the position that national associations should refrain from scheduling meetings in locations that have open legal sports wagering or in facilities that have casinos.

Community service

In another action, the committees approved the limited use of community service as a condition for reinstatement. Community service will not, as a general rule, replace game conditions or repayment of impermissible financial aid or other benefits; rather, community service will be a condition imposed by the staff when other conditions seem unreasonable or excessively harsh.

With this approach, the staff would require the institution to recommend a community-service plan, and the staff would have the opportunity to approve or deny the recommendation. The staff then would be charged with monitoring the plan to make certain that it was completed satisfactorily.

In addition, the executive director (or the appropriate staff member) of the not-for-profit organization would write a letter on the organization's letterhead documenting the student-athlete's specific contributions and the number of hours donated. It was emphasized that the use of this tool as a condition for reinstatement should be used sparingly. Once the procedure is codified and approved by each subcommittee, it will be provided to the appropriate body in each governance structure for review and comment.

Other highlights

Divisions I and III Subcommittees/Division II Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement
June 22-24/Sedona, Arizona