I think you mean, follow the rules, obey a court order, and then get bullied by the KHSAA who thought themselves superior to all legal bodies in the land. Yes, you're right. A total joke.

 

Oh yeah, we have so much state power. We run the whole state from up here!

 

You would disobey a court order in favor of a KHSAA ruling? Wow.

 

I think 94 Camel is meaning to take the punishment that the KHSAA dealt out rather than take it to court.

 

I would assume that 94 would point out that taking them to court and getting them involved is exactly what 94 means by Highlands relying on their wealth and legal powers to not have to abide by the KHSAA rules and guidelines.

 

I believe 94 is indicating that the prevailing belief is that Highlands because of their money and legal resources has a feeling that they are above having to follow the rules as they will continue to drag it out into court and other areas till they get what they want. Either a court ruling in their favor or the KHSAA saying no mas.

 

This latest legal wrangling would seem to support that prevailing view and honestly is not shocking that they are pursuing it.

I'm not sure I get what you mean by your opening line.

 

The KHSAA was ruled to have set their guidelines and regulations above the state's laws by refusing to accept the Campbell County Circuit Court's decision to let Mitchell play. Despite your preference for or against Highlands (as well as mine), there is no way that the state athletic association should have the power to stand above the law.

 

So, which body's rules do you want to place at the top of the pecking order, the KY State Legislature, or the KHSAA?

 

It would be very interesting to know what Highland's vote was on that KHSAA guideline and regulation that they said usurped state law when it concerned them.

 

How ironic would it be that Highlands probably voted to put the guidelines and regulations in place AND THEN when it came to having them enforced on them, they decided the rules/guidelines that they might have helped put in place were wrong.

 

Remember that this state athletic association's rules and regulations are determined by the membership themselves.

It would be very interesting to know what Highland's vote was on that KHSAA guideline and regulation that they said usurped state law when it concerned them.

 

How ironic would it be that Highlands probably voted to put the guidelines and regulations in place AND THEN when it came to having them enforced on them, they decided the rules/guidelines that they might have helped put in place were wrong.

 

Remember that this state athletic association's rules and regulations are determined by the membership themselves.

 

Yes and the crux of this is that the association did not follow its own guidelines. Their guidelines allow for due process and deference to the courts. When the courts rule, you follow it. Now that the court has ruled, it would seem to make sense that any fines or sanctions incorrectly imposed would be rescinded.

Stupid move on the part of Highlands. We discussed this in the past, nothing good can come out of this for Highlands in the future. All this could potentially do is harm Highlands in any future disputes.

 

Now the one exception may be if there is already a behind the scenes agreement between the KHSAA and Highlands.

 

I don't know what Lneck will have to say about this one but I will be surprised if he comes out and supports this to the nth degree.

 

The final X factor is there is a changing of the guard at the KHSAA so the new regime may think different about the situation.

Stupid move on the part of Highlands. We discussed this in the past, nothing good can come out of this for Highlands in the future. All this could potentially do is harm Highlands in any future disputes.

 

Now the one exception may be if there is already a behind the scenes agreement between the KHSAA and Highlands.

 

I don't know what Lneck will have to say about this one but I will be surprised if he comes out and supports this to the nth degree.

 

The final X factor is there is a changing of the guard at the KHSAA so the new regime may think different about the situation.

 

Honest question? Why do you think this?

 

Is your thinking that the association will hold some sort of grudge???

 

Shouldn't the association be impartial in the application of the rules? (By the way, I think they are actually and do a pretty good job of things)

I need to stay out of this dispute. Things have changed since 2004. Sorry to those awaiting my diatribe.

I think 94 Camel is meaning to take the punishment that the KHSAA dealt out rather than take it to court.

 

I would assume that 94 would point out that taking them to court and getting them involved is exactly what 94 means by Highlands relying on their wealth and legal powers to not have to abide by the KHSAA rules and guidelines.

 

I believe 94 is indicating that the prevailing belief is that Highlands because of their money and legal resources has a feeling that they are above having to follow the rules as they will continue to drag it out into court and other areas till they get what they want. Either a court ruling in their favor or the KHSAA saying no mas.

 

This latest legal wrangling would seem to support that prevailing view and honestly is not shocking that they are pursuing it.

 

You sure do say a lot for 94.

 

The bottom line is that those of us that know few facts about the situation sure do like to point fingers and make accusations.

 

I agree with theguru that little good for HHS can probably come from this, though standing in principle is something that I admire.

I think 94 Camel is meaning to take the punishment that the KHSAA dealt out rather than take it to court.

 

I would assume that 94 would point out that taking them to court and getting them involved is exactly what 94 means by Highlands relying on their wealth and legal powers to not have to abide by the KHSAA rules and guidelines.

 

I believe 94 is indicating that the prevailing belief is that Highlands because of their money and legal resources has a feeling that they are above having to follow the rules as they will continue to drag it out into court and other areas till they get what they want. Either a court ruling in their favor or the KHSAA saying no mas.

 

This latest legal wrangling would seem to support that prevailing view and honestly is not shocking that they are pursuing it.

WHat you apparently don't know is that it was already IN court. Mitchell had been playing under cort order all year. It had nothing to do with Highlands pulling any strings. This stuff is just so frustrating! :madman:

Yes and the crux of this is that the association did not follow its own guidelines. Their guidelines allow for due process and deference to the courts. When the courts rule, you follow it. Now that the court has ruled, it would seem to make sense that any fines or sanctions incorrectly imposed would be rescinded.

Amen! The whole thing summed up very nicely. :thumb:

You sure do say a lot for 94.

 

The bottom line is that those of us that know few facts about the situation sure do like to point fingers and make accusations.

 

I agree with theguru that little good for HHS can probably come from this, though standing in principle is something that I admire.

 

You are assuming that 94 knows few facts about the situations.

I know that assumption to be incorrect.

 

I agree with you and guru on this move.

WHat you apparently don't know is that it was already IN court. Mitchell had been playing under cort order all year. It had nothing to do with Highlands pulling any strings. This stuff is just so frustrating! :madman:

 

Curious on who went to court to get the court order?

Honest question? Why do you think this?

 

Is your thinking that the association will hold some sort of grudge???

 

Shouldn't the association be impartial in the application of the rules? (By the way, I think they are actually and do a pretty good job of things)

 

I will answer your question with a question, if there are any future disputes what good can come out of this?

I was under the impression that one of the conditions of becoming a member school of the KHSAA was to let their decisions supercede all legal court precedings. Therefore, once you become a member of this organization, you are basically giving up all of your rights to litigation. So, in the HHS case, they violated one of the conditions of the KHSAA by getting the court injunction.

Good for Highlands.

 

If they think they are in the right and have the law on their side, pursue it all the way to the end.

 

I always felt the compromise solution with allowing Highlands to play in the finals w/o Mitchell was a cop out. Either he was eligible all along and should have played in the championship game or he was inelgible and Highlands should have forfeited the semi-final game to Bell and Bobcats should have played in the finals.

I think if this discussion is going to continue, then someone from Highlands needs to refresh some memories of the event.

 

What I remember:

 

Fact:

 

Judge William Wehr ruled on the case. Bill was a CovCath grad and a member of the first CovCath football team.

 

Fact:

 

Mitchell played football for CovCath for three years and lived in Florence, Ky during that time.

 

Fact:

 

Mitchell and his Mother and Father rented an apt in Ft. Thomas and transferred their son to Highlands for his senior year.

 

Not sure of:

 

Mitchells did not sell their home at the time, but allowed their oldest son to live in it, while he attended NKU.

 

Not sure of:

 

Mitchell wanted to play offensive, but Coach Ray thought his best option in College was on the "D" side of the ball.

 

Fact: Coach Ray was correct as he played DB in College is now a DB for Oakland in the NFL.

 

Right, wrong been a while.....