attyatlast
Aug 28, 2007, 10:51 AM
Shooting itself in the foot
SPORTING CHANCE By Joaquin M. Henson
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
There is a clear failure to communicate within the NCAA hierarchy in the case involving San Beda College star Yousif Aljamal, last year’s Finals MVP.
Instead of closing ranks in the wake of a scandalous point-shaving scheme uncovered by police authorities, the NCAA has chosen to shoot itself in the foot by trying to gun down one of its role models.
Last Tuesday, the NCAA Management Committee issued a memorandum suspending Aljamal the day before the Red Lions were to face Jose Rizal University. Curiously, the memorandum was dated two weeks earlier.
The delayed issuance gave San Beda officials no time to appeal the decision before the Committee, forcing a move to go to the courts for a stay. On the day of the game, Judge Reynaldo Ros of Branch 33 of the Manila Regional Trial Court authorized a 72-hour temporary restraining order to allow Aljamal to suit up.
Showing no demoralization despite the attempt to barnacle him, Aljamal fired 23 points to power San Beda to an 82-74 win over the Heavy Bombers. The game, however, was marred by a series of flagrant fouls, temper blow-ups and a near fistfight involving the opposing coaches. Surely, the attempt to shackle Aljamal had a lot to do with turning the game into a powder-keg situation. The Committee can only be blamed for that volcanic eruption.
San Beda officials later secured a 20-day extension of the TRO, putting the NCAA in an embarrassing bind.
The sordid affair could’ve been prevented if only the Committee discussed the matter transparently with the intention of finding a positive solution to a prospective problem. From the looks of things, the hatchet job was a conspiracy to gang up on the league’s No. 1 team.
It’s never a good policy to question the administration or authority of a sports league in the courts. The spirit of sportsmanship is lost when an athlete seeks redress beyond the confines of his sport for an apparent injustice that is sports-related. But what is an athlete to do if he is unfairly treated by those who control his sport?
The Committee swooped down on Aljamal for participating in a three-day PBA rookie camp preparatory to the pro draft. The Committee said Aljamal never sought permission to play in the camp and slapped the suspension because of the apparent snub.
The Committee initially barred Aljamal from playing for the rest of the season but the NCAA Policy Board was more tolerant, deciding to freeze him only up to the end of the eliminations.
If Aljamal was really guilty of violating a league rule, why did the Policy Board relax the penalty earlier imposed by the Committee? What prompted the Committee to suspend Aljamal in the first place? A snub? An oversight? Where is the consistency of decision-making in the NCAA leadership?
Aljamal’s application for the PBA draft was well-known and publicized for weeks before the Committee issued the suspension. If all the Committee wanted was for Aljamal to seek permission, why didn’t it inform San Beda beforehand? Why was the memorandum dated Aug. 8 or 11 days before the draft? Was there a plot to disenfranchise Aljamal from the start?
San Beda officials claim no permission was needed for Aljamal to participate in the rookie camp because it wasn’t a tournament. Surely, if the NCAA’s rules were clear, there would be no misinterpretation. And since the rules were obviously unclear, shouldn’t there have been prior consultation or discussion before issuing a decision based on a hazy premise?
It’s as if the NCAA had no more serious problems to tackle. The point-shaving scandal certainly put to doubt the integrity of the season and rather than clean up its act, the NCAA chose to disbar one of its star players in a move that smacks of bad faith and poor sportsmanship. What message is the NCAA delivering to the students of the schools that make up the league?
Then, there was talk that the season might be scrapped as a way for the Committee to express its displeasure on the court’s invasion of its turf. Fortunately, the talk proved to be a baseless rumor. It wouldn’t have just been shooting itself in the foot but the Committee would’ve shot itself in the head if it decided to scrap the season.
Clamping down on a powerhouse school is nothing new. In the UAAP, La Salle was slapped a one-year suspension in all sports after it voluntarily informed the league of eligibility violations in its senior basketball program. The violations involved two relatively inconsequential players and in a show of sincerity, La Salle offered to surrender the championship trophy the Archers won with the ineligible cagers in the lineup.
Instead of using La Salle as an example, the UAAP chose to suspend the school not just in basketball but in all other sports. Even the high school athletes weren’t spared. Athletes who had nothing to do with the eligibility issue were penalized unfairly. The decision wasn’t only severe but abusive and apparently, spiteful.
If other schools were to uncover similar violations in the future, none would ever come out in the open to volunteer the information because of the risk of being chastised for honesty.
The UAAP and NCAA are supposed to be bastions of sportsmanship. School officials are expected to lead by example. But from recent developments, neither league has reason to be proud. Politics, partisanship and crab mentality are so prevalent in shaping decisions that are so uncharacteristic of Christian educators who make up the leadership in the school leagues.
SPORTING CHANCE By Joaquin M. Henson
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
There is a clear failure to communicate within the NCAA hierarchy in the case involving San Beda College star Yousif Aljamal, last year’s Finals MVP.
Instead of closing ranks in the wake of a scandalous point-shaving scheme uncovered by police authorities, the NCAA has chosen to shoot itself in the foot by trying to gun down one of its role models.
Last Tuesday, the NCAA Management Committee issued a memorandum suspending Aljamal the day before the Red Lions were to face Jose Rizal University. Curiously, the memorandum was dated two weeks earlier.
The delayed issuance gave San Beda officials no time to appeal the decision before the Committee, forcing a move to go to the courts for a stay. On the day of the game, Judge Reynaldo Ros of Branch 33 of the Manila Regional Trial Court authorized a 72-hour temporary restraining order to allow Aljamal to suit up.
Showing no demoralization despite the attempt to barnacle him, Aljamal fired 23 points to power San Beda to an 82-74 win over the Heavy Bombers. The game, however, was marred by a series of flagrant fouls, temper blow-ups and a near fistfight involving the opposing coaches. Surely, the attempt to shackle Aljamal had a lot to do with turning the game into a powder-keg situation. The Committee can only be blamed for that volcanic eruption.
San Beda officials later secured a 20-day extension of the TRO, putting the NCAA in an embarrassing bind.
The sordid affair could’ve been prevented if only the Committee discussed the matter transparently with the intention of finding a positive solution to a prospective problem. From the looks of things, the hatchet job was a conspiracy to gang up on the league’s No. 1 team.
It’s never a good policy to question the administration or authority of a sports league in the courts. The spirit of sportsmanship is lost when an athlete seeks redress beyond the confines of his sport for an apparent injustice that is sports-related. But what is an athlete to do if he is unfairly treated by those who control his sport?
The Committee swooped down on Aljamal for participating in a three-day PBA rookie camp preparatory to the pro draft. The Committee said Aljamal never sought permission to play in the camp and slapped the suspension because of the apparent snub.
The Committee initially barred Aljamal from playing for the rest of the season but the NCAA Policy Board was more tolerant, deciding to freeze him only up to the end of the eliminations.
If Aljamal was really guilty of violating a league rule, why did the Policy Board relax the penalty earlier imposed by the Committee? What prompted the Committee to suspend Aljamal in the first place? A snub? An oversight? Where is the consistency of decision-making in the NCAA leadership?
Aljamal’s application for the PBA draft was well-known and publicized for weeks before the Committee issued the suspension. If all the Committee wanted was for Aljamal to seek permission, why didn’t it inform San Beda beforehand? Why was the memorandum dated Aug. 8 or 11 days before the draft? Was there a plot to disenfranchise Aljamal from the start?
San Beda officials claim no permission was needed for Aljamal to participate in the rookie camp because it wasn’t a tournament. Surely, if the NCAA’s rules were clear, there would be no misinterpretation. And since the rules were obviously unclear, shouldn’t there have been prior consultation or discussion before issuing a decision based on a hazy premise?
It’s as if the NCAA had no more serious problems to tackle. The point-shaving scandal certainly put to doubt the integrity of the season and rather than clean up its act, the NCAA chose to disbar one of its star players in a move that smacks of bad faith and poor sportsmanship. What message is the NCAA delivering to the students of the schools that make up the league?
Then, there was talk that the season might be scrapped as a way for the Committee to express its displeasure on the court’s invasion of its turf. Fortunately, the talk proved to be a baseless rumor. It wouldn’t have just been shooting itself in the foot but the Committee would’ve shot itself in the head if it decided to scrap the season.
Clamping down on a powerhouse school is nothing new. In the UAAP, La Salle was slapped a one-year suspension in all sports after it voluntarily informed the league of eligibility violations in its senior basketball program. The violations involved two relatively inconsequential players and in a show of sincerity, La Salle offered to surrender the championship trophy the Archers won with the ineligible cagers in the lineup.
Instead of using La Salle as an example, the UAAP chose to suspend the school not just in basketball but in all other sports. Even the high school athletes weren’t spared. Athletes who had nothing to do with the eligibility issue were penalized unfairly. The decision wasn’t only severe but abusive and apparently, spiteful.
If other schools were to uncover similar violations in the future, none would ever come out in the open to volunteer the information because of the risk of being chastised for honesty.
The UAAP and NCAA are supposed to be bastions of sportsmanship. School officials are expected to lead by example. But from recent developments, neither league has reason to be proud. Politics, partisanship and crab mentality are so prevalent in shaping decisions that are so uncharacteristic of Christian educators who make up the leadership in the school leagues.