Long Time Warrior Posted March 7, 2006 Posted March 7, 2006 What does everyone think of the age limit that has been set for high school students to be eligible to play ball. The current is can't be 19 before Aug. 1 senior year in high school. I'm going to attach an article about a girls parents trying to get this changed. She a soccer player. I put this discussion in football because I know there have been several players this involved. Now I feel it should be left where it is because like the article said "where does it end". You back it up for one player then another and so on. I read where some states allow 20 year olds to play high school ball. Can you see your 17 year old, going on 18 playing with (to me) men, 19 or almost 20 year olds. By the time my son reaches 20 he will be a sophmore in college, no place for kids of this age in high school. That's why you have to be 12 and younger to play little league baseball, remember what happend when a 14 year old played? here's the article:http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/news/14035666.htm
CharlieWeis Posted March 7, 2006 Posted March 7, 2006 I read the article and have to agree with Brigid Devries. There definitely has to be a finite date. I guess the issue or question is can there be a reasonable finite date other than August 1 that would not penalize kids like the young lady in the story? Also, can this be done without having any sort of a "grey area". IMO, the current rule of turning 19 before Aug. 1 is not an unfair rule. No matter at what age you set the cutoff there will be stories such as this. This current rule keeps the age range in high school athletics from around 14 - 18. 14 year olds playing with 19 year olds seems to be too great of an age gap.
HHSballer19 Posted March 7, 2006 Posted March 7, 2006 I remember having a lot of the guys on the team who were only a grade above me but about 3 years older than me in high school. It's a pretty big jump considering how much your body changes within those years. I won't be 20 until my 3rd year of college.
cshs81 Posted March 7, 2006 Posted March 7, 2006 She was held back one year? Normally, kids born in July would be 6 when they start first grade, 7 when they start 2nd grade, etc, and 17 when they start 12th grade. If this girl was only held back one year, wouldn't she just be 18 when Aug 1 of her senior year rolls around?
CCH05 Posted March 7, 2006 Posted March 7, 2006 I think the rule is good and should not be changed. Just imagine Mike Mitchell graduating at 19 verus 17 inwhich he did. You talk about making some noise.
stickymitts Posted March 7, 2006 Posted March 7, 2006 I think the rule is good and should not be changed. Just imagine Mike Mitchell graduating at 19 verus 17 inwhich he did. You talk about making some noise. :lol: :lol:
MountainThunder Posted March 7, 2006 Posted March 7, 2006 I think the rule is good and should not be changed. Just imagine Mike Mitchell graduating at 19 verus 17 inwhich he did. You talk about making some noise. I agree. What happens when a kid who was born in June is too old? Do we move the law back again then to June 1st? Then May, then April, etc. Pretty soon, if they are 20 they can play. I feel bad for the girl, but there could be no end if this passes, and it looks like it might.
CCH05 Posted March 7, 2006 Posted March 7, 2006 I agree. What happens when a kid who was born in June is too old? Do we move the law back again then to June 1st? Then May, then April, etc. Pretty soon, if they are 20 they can play. I feel bad for the girl, but there could be no end if this passes, and it looks like it might. :thumb: 100%.
cshs81 Posted March 7, 2006 Posted March 7, 2006 I agree. What happens when a kid who was born in June is too old? Do we move the law back again then to June 1st? Then May, then April, etc. Pretty soon, if they are 20 they can play. I feel bad for the girl, but there could be no end if this passes, and it looks like it might. The parents seem to be playing games with the "why penalize her for being held back a year". There are kids on every team in the state that have been held back a year.
MountainThunder Posted March 7, 2006 Posted March 7, 2006 The parents seem to be playing games with the "why penalize her for being held back a year". There are kids on every team in the state that have been held back a year. True, but those kids were not 19 before August 1st. You have to have a date set or why have the rule in place at all.
stick1 Posted March 7, 2006 Posted March 7, 2006 20 before the state championship seems like a pretty fair rule. I wonder how that has worked out?
cshs81 Posted March 7, 2006 Posted March 7, 2006 20 before the state championship seems like a pretty fair rule. I wonder how that has worked out? High school athletes should not be 20. Period.
BIGZIG Posted March 7, 2006 Posted March 7, 2006 High school athletes should not be 20. Period. :thumb: Agreed..Lets leave it as it is..
oldonetechnique Posted March 7, 2006 Posted March 7, 2006 I think we sometimes forget that not all kids or thier families are normal. the parents did the right thing by holding the girl back so she could improve her reading. I see no reason why this girl should not be allowed to play another year, I don't really think we need kids on the feild that are 20 all the time but I do feel there are circumstances that qualify for an exception, being held back for academic reasons (not failing) or a serious illness or something should be allowed. Maybe the solution is to come up with a strict appeal process that would need to be filed and reviewed by the KHSAA. We do have such a process for a fifth year of competition in kentucky don't we, why not for an age exception.
stick1 Posted March 7, 2006 Posted March 7, 2006 High school athletes should not be 20. Period. With that rule they wouldn't be if you read it. I agree!
Recommended Posts