May 6, 201313 yr Well, speaking from experience, there is an addendum to the exceptions to bylaw 6 wherein the commissioner can grant a waiver at his discretion in the best interest of the child. We made that very appeal when applied for exception when we transferred our son. Seems that the KHSAA stood firm to the bylaw, likely because the administrator from the "sending school" denied the allegations. I have to wonder if there was any face to face evidence presented or simply depositions presented by the family with regards to the alleged abuse.
May 6, 201313 yr Most salient lines from article: "The KHSAA decided last month that the evidence in the allegations of abuse against the girls “does not reveal any threat of physical violence against” the teens and “was not so pervasive and intense as to cause psychological injury” — finding instead that the parents were unhappy with the way the program was being run at PRP." "The KHSAA ruled in March that there was no “bonafide change of residence of the Mercer family” and there was a “sharply divergent view of events between the Mercers and the personnel who testified” for PRP." "While the KHSAA has in the past recommended a waiver because there had been bullying, they did not conclude that to be the situation in the Mercer case. “The evidence supports a conclusion that the Mercers were unhappy with the manner in which the softball program was being run at Pleasure Ridge Park High School.” Would seem KHSAA did their due diligence, and made their decision. However, as we teach are kids today, if you don't like a decision made by an authority, do we accept with grace and move on? No, we sue until we get our way.
May 6, 201313 yr From the reporters Twitter feed: "Jason Riley @jasonrileyCJ 43m Zach Osborne's father, Troy, said his e-mail was not meant to be made public and he and son are furious. Would not talk about alleged abuse" Smokescreen. This kid played college baseball at TN from 2009-2012. The players were not even in HS when he graduated!! Make of it what you will.
May 6, 201313 yr Well, speaking from experience, there is an addendum to the exceptions to bylaw 6 wherein the commissioner can grant a waiver at his discretion in the best interest of the child. We made that very appeal when applied for exception when we transferred our son. Seems that the KHSAA stood firm to the bylaw, likely because the administrator from the "sending school" denied the allegations. I have to wonder if there was any face to face evidence presented or simply depositions presented by the family with regards to the alleged abuse. Or maybe the Commish thought to himself I would rather let this one work its way through the courts than make a decision that some would interpret as an "indictment" of PRP.
May 6, 201313 yr Or maybe the Commish thought to himself I would rather let this one work its way through the courts than make a decision that some would interpret as an "indictment" of PRP. Or...he didn't want to go against an administrator from a school who essentially pays his salary. This is, once again, a problem of too few resources to do what would be necessary to bring this to an end. So, the easy answer is make the subordinates happy. Forgive me for the skepticism, but I don't think it was a "let it work it's way through the courts". And I'll tell you why. First, if it stays in appeals long enough, and LN can testify that attorneys can put things off for a period of time and then you have a kid who is already out of high school, played on an injunction and the appeal is never heard. So, in my opinion, the Commish was pleasing the school involved, knowing damn good and well it would go to court anyway. Win win for him. Kid plays, school is happy with the decision from the organization because they "rendered a decision within the bylaws" and never a resolution. It's a sorry system and now they want to include middle school sports with no increase in manpower or resources to my knowledge. Outstanding! Edited May 7, 201313 yr by spindoc
May 6, 201313 yr Simple answer is to reinstate the provision that if a kid plays under an injunction and is later found to be ineligible the school can be penalized. Since the legislature saw fit to intervene in this it will never happen. Then the school has to make the decision if it's worth the risk to play the kid.
May 7, 201313 yr I know for a fact they have shopped around looking for a new school for 3 years.:thumb:
May 7, 201313 yr I dont even think they are enrolled at Ballard any longer. I believe they are now enrolled at Valley. So are they trying to gain eligibility to play at Valley or Ballard..so confusing!!!! If the kids were truly bullied or the coach was out of line like what is portrayed then getting them to out of there was best thing and if that means having to wait to play so be it. It should be about the kids safety more than where they play ball. Shouldnt it!!!!
May 7, 201313 yr Simple answer is to reinstate the provision that if a kid plays under an injunction and is later found to be ineligible the school can be penalized. Since the legislature saw fit to intervene in this it will never happen. Then the school has to make the decision if it's worth the risk to play the kid. I disagree 100%
May 7, 201313 yr They are, and have been Ballard students the entire year, as I understand. I don't really think the players playing or not playing will have any bearing on how the remaining games will turn out. My critique is on the process that has ensued surrounding this entire, drawn out mess. As the great poet of our time, Phillip H. Anselmo once opined "Is there no standard anymore?". KHSAA has rules and guidelines regarding varsity athlete eligibility specific to transfers and residency, with provisions to cover "exceptions", right? So, again here we are. You don't like the decision made by the arbiter covering your specific area of dispute, for whatever reason, for whatever the issue, and rather than saying to yourself "OK, we gave it a shot. Next year's gonna be great", you file a public lawsuit dragging people's names through the mud in the media with accusations that they now have to disprove and live with, cause you can't un-ring that bell...Accusations that the original arbiter determined were not worthy of an exception....all to possibly play in a handful of end of the season games. IT'S GIRL'S HIGH SCHOOL SOFTBALL IN KY, PEOPLE!!!! I do not know, or have ever met, Coach Miller, but have seen her coach many games, and know more than a few of her current and former player's parents, and find nothing but support from them. Actions reveal character.
May 7, 201313 yr Author IT'S GIRL'S HIGH SCHOOL SOFTBALL IN KY, PEOPLE!!!! . Some would read this as the "girls" and "softball" being the important parts. I assume you mean the "high school" part to be the most important, correct?
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.