I don't think this had anything to do with KHSAA. It was between the player and law enforcement officials. I would think the sheriff trumps KHSAA. That said, it seems like there should have been something in writing, something official stating the player was not allowed in the school and the coach and A.D. should have been aware of it before hand. Was the coach not aware of the boy being banned?

 

I dont think you understand. Every game played in the state of KY has everything to do with the KHSAA-- period. Both coaches were aware of the situation, and the S/A has apoligized in person and in writing. Sounds to me that the administration attempting to ban may be incompetent to administrate??

I dont think you understand. Every game played in the state of KY has everything to do with the KHSAA-- period. Both coaches were aware of the situation, and the S/A has apoligized in person and in writing. Sounds to me that the administration attempting to ban may be incompetent to administrate??

 

 

Or they were just trying to enforce a rule. Chances are that if the studentwas banned, then they must have committed an illegal act on school grounds. As an educator I know that bans such as these are only used in cases of drug dealing, weapons, or sex.

So the sheriff trumps the ACLU, or any other group. The law is very powerful don't get me wrong, however you cannot deny someone, especially a student/athelete his or hers due process. It is that simple. Neither the sheriff nor the school administration has the authority to do ban a player.

 

Who said anything about the ACLU? I was just saying that the legal system may have more power than the KHSAA.

Or they were just trying to enforce a rule. Chances are that if the studentwas banned, then they must have committed an illegal act on school grounds. As an educator I know that bans such as these are only used in cases of drug dealing, weapons, or sex.

 

As an educator, I can tell you that we have banned people from our athletic events based on behavior, not just what you mentioned.

Or they were just trying to enforce a rule. Chances are that if the studentwas banned, then they must have committed an illegal act on school grounds. As an educator I know that bans such as these are only used in cases of drug dealing, weapons, or sex.

 

Yes I agree with you on that, however in a case like that ie... drugs or weapons the expulsion from their own school cannot exceed one year. This case involved none of these, no injuries no criminal report, no criminal actions committed by the student.. to my knowledge anyone no for sure????

Who said anything about the ACLU? I was just saying that the legal system may have more power than the KHSAA.

 

Right, if they go to court and obtain a court order. I don't think that was followed in this case. I am refering to the ACLU only as a reference point. The KHSAA mandates that student/atheletes have due process and that their rights are not violated. It sounds in this case that the student/athelete's rights were being played with. AGREE???

As an educator, I can tell you that we have banned people from our athletic events based on behavior, not just what you mentioned.

 

I bet they weren't student/atheletes participating in a KHSAA event. Or were they? If so how does it work??

I know of these situations are hypothetical, but we need to keep Rule 9 in mind:

 

9. No discussion of ANY criminal behavior (charged or uncharged) in the high school forums. Discussion of adult criminal behavior is permitted in all non-high school forums. However, discussion of criminal behavior by juveniles (anyone under 18) is never permitted anywhere on BGP.