The Morning Call has an article regarding the policy that ‘allowed’ two wrestlers to exploit a ‘loophole’ and how it will be changed to prevent the same in the future (read the article here).
The issue to me is more one of interpretation and enforcement than it is how the policy was written.
Initially I wrote about the incident (read it here) and didn’t have the policy. Then a reader forwarded a copy and I provided some additional information (read it here).
Fundamentally, the policy does not ‘allow’ a student to participate in a different sport. In order to be suspended one must not only be on the team, but must compete at an equivalent level, which in this case was varsity. Therefore, both wrestlers would have had to have challenged for a spot on varsity, earned a varsity spot and then be suspended all of which occurred after the required community service and meetings/counseling had been completed.
I don’t think these actions could have been completed in the time allotted, or fulfilled. If the wrestlers had won varsity spots, they should have competed on the team at some point.
Turns out the Cross Country team was pretty good this year, they won Districts, and to the best of my knowledge, they didn’t do it with either in the starting line-up. If they were good enough to make varsity, they should have competed after their suspension.
All of which leads me to the point that the loose interpretation and apparent failure to follow/enforce the policy as it was written are the reason there is now a need to close a ‘loophole’.
The new policy will only be as good as it is enforced and followed.
No comments:
Post a Comment