A great perspective on the Boatright situation

[caw]

According to this logic, universities should do away with compliance offices and the coaches should know and follow all the rules and not have to consult this department. And there should be no need for lawyers because we can all read books about the law. Maybe this this last statement has a bit of exaggeration in it. But expecting 16 - 18 year olds to memorize an NCAA compliance book is a stretch in my opinion.

The original infraction that Ryan was accused of was that Rose paid for the ticket and not the AAU team, an AAU team which Rose started and ran. It was a technicality because it came from Roses account and not from the AAU account. I would bet Rose didn't know the difference and, at least in this instance it was an honest mistake.

A lot of people are "guilty" of not reading legalistic or technical writings and that doesn't mean they are bad or lazy. It means that not everyone is tuned into this facet of life. We are in the age of specialization and have been in this age for sometime because of the complexity of our time period. So I can't agree with you on this one.

If true, I still have no idea why he was given the six game ban. If his coach is handing him a ticket saying, "take this ticket to join the team in city to play in YYY tournament", how is that a problem? Does this mean if Rose had paid for said flight with the team credit card/account, it would have been OK? This seems like more of a stupid mistake than anything else and not something that should be a violation. If you were talking about some booster from some college, or some agent or runner or whatever then sure, but if it can be shown the ticket was a regular ticket to a basketball event his entire team went to and paid for by his coach, why was that even an issue? I also fail to see the benefit to anyone in this situation. Boatright really doesn't benefit (he was going to go the tournament either way), UConn didn't benefit, the AAU coach didn't benefit (he lost money from his personal account).

More to the point, how, in said situation, would Boatright know how his coach had paid for the ticket? If his coach had been paying for tickets to go to tournaments/games all over the country and one time he paid with the wrong account? Why would Boatright know? Should he have asked his coach, "are you paying with your credit card or the teams?" It just seems a bit silly, but it is the NCAA's. Again assuming that is what happened.

Not knowing what the accusation is this time, I imagine Boatright did do something outside the letter of the NCAA rules. The question is, is it something like the above case or something more planned out and sleazy?

 

[Scalito]

,
You are correct Sir. the court did back the NCAA, but pretty much on a limited issue of whether the NCAA was a "state actor". I twas a faily long and convoluted case/series of cases and I was incorrect in tryin gto give a quick shorthand. The court didn't though overturn the State requirement that UNLV follow due process in its dealing with Tark so the University, Tark and the NCAA needed to come to an agreement.

The "limited issue" of whether the NCAA is a state actor is a very important issue. Because the Supreme Court ruled that the NCAA is not a state actor, it cannot be sued for failing to provide due process. Ever.

 

[freescooter]

The "limited issue" of whether the NCAA is a state actor is a very important issue. Because the Supreme Court ruled that the NCAA is not a state actor, it cannot be sued for failing to provide due process. Ever.

I don't disagree but I'm also not sure how that applies to this situation, or to the fact aht the NCAA actually changed its practice after that suit and a congressional investigation to insure that there was due process. It dropped, for example, its right to rely on heresay evidence in reaching its decisions. And it no longer provides carries out either its deliberation or its reviews in secret. And it notifies the subjects ofits investigations that it is undertaking them and provides them with an opportunity to provide responses. Now none of that was required by the Court, but due to the negative publicity and the outside Congressional findings, which wouldn't have happened with the Tarkanian case (the subcommittee chair or maybe the ranking member I'm not sure which, was from Nevada I believe findings. And while the NCAA did doge a bullet with the court's ruling, it had little practical impact in that the original Nevada Court decision that the University failed to comply with due process in firing Tarkanian remained in effect and ultimately the NCAA, Tark and the University ended up negotiating a settlement there too which included allowing UNLV to play in the tournament in a year where they were to be banned. Tarkanian later sued the NCAA for harrassment and defimation, I believe, and the NCAA settled. their lawyer was quoted after the settlement as saying they ran 7 mock juries and in everyone they lost.

 

[freescooter]

If true, I still have no idea why he was given the six game ban. If his coach is handing him a ticket saying, "take this ticket to join the team in city to play in YYY tournament", how is that a problem? Does this mean if Rose had paid for said flight with the team credit card/account, it would have been OK? This seems like more of a stupid mistake than anything else and not something that should be a violation. If you were talking about some booster from some college, or some agent or runner or whatever then sure, but if it can be shown the ticket was a regular ticket to a basketball event his entire team went to and paid for by his coach, why was that even an issue? I also fail to see the benefit to anyone in this situation. Boatright really doesn't benefit (he was going to go the tournament either way), UConn didn't benefit, the AAU coach didn't benefit (he lost money from his personal account).

More to the point, how, in said situation, would Boatright know how his coach had paid for the ticket? If his coach had been paying for tickets to go to tournaments/games all over the country and one time he paid with the wrong account? Why would Boatright know? Should he have asked his coach, "are you paying with your credit card or the teams?" It just seems a bit silly, but it is the NCAA's. Again assuming that is what happened.

Not knowing what the accusation is this time, I imagine Boatright did do something outside the letter of the NCAA rules. The question is, is it something like the above case or something more planned out and sleazy?

I think that scenario was pretty unlikely. I suppose anything is possible, but I really have a hard time believing that even the NCAA would find that to be a problem...or for that matter that a former boyfriend of his mother would even knowthose details. I mean, that stuff happens all the time. I just did it, paid for a business expense with the wrong credit card. I'll just note the file and get reimbursed. I won't discuss it with the boyfriend of the mother of the kid who makes copies.

 

[Chief00]

This whole thread misses the bigger picture - you have a very willing partner on both sides - the snitch and the NCAA - Bottom-line - they are trying to bring our program down. That's what all this is about - it ain't about Boatshow.