Sidney's case may have been decided sooner if he'd cooperated...

Sidney's case may have been decided sooner if he'd cooperated...

 

:thumb:

 

IIRC he pretty much refused to provide anything the NCAA asked for, but somehow they decided he should play anyway.

 

Maybe the Kanter's should have gone this route and just taken the 1 year suspension. It couldn't have taken any longer.

:thumb:

 

IIRC he pretty much refused to provide anything the NCAA asked for, but somehow they decided he should play anyway.

 

Maybe the Kanter's should have gone this route and just taken the 1 year suspension. It couldn't have taken any longer.

 

Yes but this is also Katner's second go around. The first appeal didn't do much for UK so they went at it a second time and completely started over. So If you move by that the NCAA first ruled rather early in the season on it. Not to mention Kanter not cooperating would have been worse with Sidney. With Sidney they were fishing and had no concrete evidence of anything, with Kanter they had the Turkish team saying stuff.

Thanks for the information it just seems forever to those of us that want closure!

Go Big Blue!

Yes but this is also Katner's second go around. The first appeal didn't do much for UK so they went at it a second time and completely started over.

 

The original appeal was never ruled on. The NCAA made the stupid Newton ruling, and UK apparently wanted to make sure they brought that up.

So the process could go beyond March Madness reality is we will just have to wait period!

Go Big Blue!

I'll probably get creamed for saying this on a public message board but this whole situation is so ridiculous, I'm actually starting to believe that the NCAA really is resorting to a stall tactic. If they had a legitimate awnser for making Kanter sit, they would put it forth. Apparently they don't, so until they prove me wrong, I'm believing they are making Kanter serve his sentence prior to a ruling!

UK didn't get word from the original appeal, because they requested to give "new information" to the NCAA. From what I understand, UK knew the NCAA wouldn't change their stance. They simply wanted to have the "new information" (i.e. Cam Newton ruling) available to the appeal board. And if what I'm hearing is accurate, UK makes the be-all-and-end-all appeal on Monday.

The announcers doing the UK-Penn game made some good points in Kanter's favor. They said he was 14, 15, qnd 16 year old kid when he played for the Turkish club and only played 24 minutes total. If the appeals board uses any kind of common sense they will rule him eligible.

 

The NCAA committee operates with the idea if it's written in black and white then use a strict interpatation. I'm hearing the appeals committee is not as rigid in their rulings.

Larry Glover reporting that the appeal will actually be made tomorrow (Thursday) and that final word would come Friday or Monday.

The announcers doing the UK-Penn game made some good points in Kanter's favor. They said he was 14, 15, qnd 16 year old kid when he played for the Turkish club and only played 24 minutes total. If the appeals board uses any kind of common sense they will rule him eligible.

 

The NCAA committee operates with the idea if it's written in black and white then use a strict interpatation. I'm hearing the appeals committee is not as rigid in their rulings.

 

If common sense were used the Kanter situation would have never made it to the appeals board. However, it seems the NCAA has decided to exercise zero common sense and go completely by the book with Kanter.

 

I agree with your thoughts on things looking good for Kanter if common sense from the appeals board were used. It seems like I heard somewhere that the reason Kentucky presented new info (Newton ruling) to the NCAA was because they didn't like the way things were going to turn out with the appeal ? I may have heard wrong so please correct me if I'm wrong.

I heard that UK didn't know how the appeals board would rule, but after the Cam Newton ruling they wanted to ask to go back to the first process just to make sure it's included, as in the appeals process you cannot add new information.

 

But, are we back in the first process still or are we back in the appeals process already? As I have said before, the NCAA will not reveal the ruling on the initial process or the appeals, but may comment after the school releases the information.

OK does everyone understand that UK has never presented the first appeal as of yet! I think some people are confused that they were turned down by the appeals panel when they have not.

No, I understand that, it's just the NCCA has seen our case before and now we added the new evidence that should be all they had to look at in my opinion but i don't know all the variables! However, to a novice this timeline appears to be jaded and ridicously long!

Go Big Blue!

OK does everyone understand that UK has never presented the first appeal as of yet! I think some people are confused that they were turned down by the appeals panel when they have not.

 

I was under the impression that they did present the appeal, but they asked that the ruling be put off until they presented the "new information" to the NCAA. From what I understand, they made the appeal the same day as the Cam Newton decision. They presented the appeal in the AM & the Cam Newton info came out in the PM. When that happened, UK asked to go back to the NCAA & for the appeals committee to wait to issue their ruling.