SC Soccer Forums SCSoccer.com Forums Girls Varsity Soccer Does West Ashley have to forfeit?

I heard through the grapevine, WA had 4 inelligible players on their roster in the 4A state chamionship. 2 of them were eighth graders and 2 were failing their classes (one of which scored during the final). IF this is true doesn't that mean that they must forfeit every game that they were on the roster meaning they would have to give up the state title. post what you know about this

I heard the same after the game, but that could just be a little Mauldin rumor.

i heard that kelly schenieder (sp) broke like 3 ribs and had a lung collapse when she was injured, any clarification available??

Yes she did. She was released after two days in the hospital. Doing better now.

lpaf,
I avoided the eligibility rumor all season. It may be necessary for someone at West Ashley to officially rebut this story.

good to hear, is this going to effect her playing in college in anyway??

Rules are rules, and they apply to everyone. If any rules were broken, they need to be investigated by the proper authorities. I find it hard to believe that West Ashley would have knowingly been using inelligible players at that stage in their season. If they did, very RISKY!

No inelligable players were used in that game or any other game throughout West Ashley's season iam tired of seeing all of these posts that are putting down a program of its third year of existance that has now one two State Championships. Let the facts speak for themselves and let the girls enjoy what they accomplished this season. The State Champioship game was one for the ages and will no doubt be rembered for years to come. With all these posts going on it leaves a bitter sweet taste in the mouths of the girls (on both sides) that performed last Friday. Congratulations to West Ashley and Mauldin on an outstanding game.

i agree....let's wait for the facts before we start posting rumors

But then it wouldn't be a rumor, and that just isn't any fun now is it?

The State Paper printed the rosters on gameday and WA did have 8th graders listed.. If middle schoolers did dressout (even if the did not play) the school would be in violation of the rules as proven by the CA Johnson fiasco during Basketball season.

Let's all stop posting things that we aren't sure of. Two rosters were submitted, one to the refs and one to the announcers. The one given to the refs did not have the 8th graders on it and the other roster did, but clearly listed them at the end and listed that they were in the eighth grade. This whole thing is just some mauldin fan who can't accept the loss.... do you think that if given the trophy, mauldin would really appreciate it?

I'm not involved in this topic.However, I do wonder why would West Ashley list an 8th grader on a Varsity roster if 8th graders are totally inelgible to play varsity soccer? Why even list them on ANY varsity roster,even one not given to the officials. Makes no sense to me.

Actually, shaiyza, i heard about ineligible players before the game started, so it wasn't the loss that sparked the rumor.

Once again no ineligible players were used, as stated on the local news here the players in question had on jv jerseys and had no chance of playing. Let thr High School League do their job and everyone will find out that West Ashley won the State Championship on the field of play.

It's not about what jerseys they were wearing or how much of a chance they had of playing or what color their hair was. It's about them being on the roster.

Just heard on the news that West Ashley will have to forfeit the last 2 games but no further explanation. Anyone know for sure what the reason is?

Here's what was on the WSPA website:
What I don't understand is how West Ashley could have had 8th graders on the roster and had them dressed. This is a well known rule..

West Ashley Forced For Forfeit Soccer Title

Pete Yanity
News Channel 7 Sports
Saturday, May 24, 2003

The South Carolina High School League has ordered West Ashley high school to forfeit its 4A Girls State Soccer Championship because two eighth-graders were dressed in uniform on the sideline. SCHSL rules state that eighth-graders are not allowed to be dressed for football, wrestling, or soccer because they're considered contact sports. West Ashley defeated Mauldin in over time May 16th and the two eighth-graders did not play in the game. The school will appeal the penalty and its forfeiture doesn't necessarily mean that the league will award Mauldin the championship instead.

As the old SCHSL motto states:

"An athlete is not crowned unless he competes according to the rules..."

If this is true though, why is it not in The State paper?

Is Drew a fine person and fine coach-absolutely.Should he have known the rule-I guess.Would he have dressed the girls had he known-absolutely not.Do I feel like I live in a Nazi state with some of these ridiculous rules-no question.

Anthony,

I don't think the rules are ridiculous or portray South Carolina as a Nazi state. There have been other incidents where 8th graders were playing on varsity teams this year. Those schools were forced to forfeit the games the 8th graders played in and/or were rostered in. I think you have to have the same rules for everyone and apply them the same. I would question why this infraction wasn't caught sooner in the playoff system.

Anthony,

I don't think the rules are ridiculous or portray South Carolina as a Nazi state. There have been other incidents where 8th graders were playing on varsity teams this year. Those schools were forced to forfeit the games the 8th graders played in and/or were rostered in. I think you have to have the same rules for everyone and apply them the same. I would question why this infraction wasn't caught sooner in the playoff system.

Just a few short years ago these same 8th grade kids could start in a varsity lineup--I kept three of them at Summerville,and now they cannot even sit on a varsity bench with JV uniforms on.Mr.Observer,you obviously do not think this is harsh-I do.As I said earlier,Drew should have known the rule,but can anyone explain why this rule exists?When I first read about this,the first thing that came to mind was the Gestapo-I still feel the same way and I do not mind telling you I have major problems with nit picky garbage like this and just wish more coaches would voice their heartfelt opinions.

If you feel this passionately, you need to take your objections to the powers that be, and work to change the rule. The fact remains, the rule exists and must be followed. Again, my question is why wasn't this infraction caught earlier in the playoffs? Why was it first caught in the championship game?

Yeah, it could've saved a lot of heartache.

Most of you are too young to remember Muhammad Ali (born Cassius Clay) when he was the best boxer in the world. Young, arrogant, and talented beyond a comfortable level of public acceptance he won the Olympic gold medal at the Rome games in 1960 and the world heavyweight championship, as a decided underdog, by beating Sonny Liston in 1964. Ali, now a 61 year old former world champion, suffers from neurologic damage that resembles Parkinson's disease due to the head trauma he suffered during his boxing career. In 1967 Ali refused to be drafted into the US Army due to his moral opposition to the war in Viet Nam, and as a result was stripped of his title of champion by the governing body of boxing, the World Boxing Association. Ali served his time and then proceeded to work his way (again) through the ranked competition to establish his title. For those of us watching there was never any question as to who was the best boxer in the world. The title had been taken away, but the athletic ability that had produced the title was still there.

No judgement by the SCHSL can undo the series of wins the West Ashley Wildcats had leading up to their victory over previously undefeated Mauldin in the state 4-A championship match. Their trophy can be taken away, but not their championship, no more than Ali's championship could be erased by the WBA in '67. The SCHSL has a responsibilty to protect young players from abuse by overzealous coaches. It also has the ability to interpret its own rules in a judicious manner, respecting the spirit as well as the letter of its laws.

lpaf

This, quite possibly, could be the biggest injustice ever done to a high school team in the history of South Carolina. They did not play, they did not contribute, they did not have an effect on the championship game. If you forget a player on the roster, the high school league fines you $50. If you add a player who does not play, why should the same penalty not be awarded? Is wasn't right, we all agree to that. But to take a championship away from those girls when they did not participate in any illegal activities to aid in their run through the playoffs is a horrific display of leadership by the high school league. All of us 18 and above posters know it is never fun to be the deliverer of discipline to younger beings. Obviously those doing the wrong will be upset, however understanding when the punishment fits the crime. I am ashamed to be a member of the high school league if the title is taken away. No Mauldin supporter/student/parent/player can look at that trophy and say with pride "We earned this championship." Let us pray for God's divine intervention...

This is an unfortunate turn of events since the West Ashley girls did win the game without the assitance of the 8th graders. However, rules are in place to be followed and when they are not, everyone involved has to accept the consequences. If the league doesn't enforce the rules, why have them? If you are going 90 on the interstate and don't have a wreck, can you plead not quilty to speeding? What happens the next time
8th graders dress out and play and the team loses- can that coach then say that they didn't effect the outcome of the game? I think you see my point. If the rules are in place, they must be followed. If not, you open the system up for ineligible players at all levels.

In the case - there are no winners. I'm sure that Maulding doesn't want the championship under these circumstances. In everything there will be adversity - the mark of a champion is how you deal with it.

Please don't ever compare a rule concerning high school sports to a Nazi state - you obviously have no idea about the human suffering inflicted on millions of people by Hitler and his regime - you can't compare a high school championship to the death of millions, ever!

Cnsoccermom,

I couldn't agree more....this issue can't be compared with Nazi Germany. It's just a game..although people won't like that comment.....Rules are rules..people need to be proactice and work to change them...there's alot of negative energy being spent on this message board complaining, when perhaps the posters should be writing letters to the "powers that be"...

Received this e-mail from Mr. Daniel Jordan (danieljordan@knology.net) on 5/24/03.

quote:

---

To whom it may concern,

What Ronnie Matthews has done to the West Ashley Wildcats is by far the most eggregious act in the history of high school sports. Taking away a trophy on a technicality which had no impact whatsoever on the way the game turned out is outrageous and heartless. If such a ridiculous rule was in place it should have been identified and investigated during the game; and West Ashley should have been told they must forfeit before the completion of the match. From what I understand the game went into two overtimes and left the girls on both teams physically and emotionally drained. This decision is bad for all concerned. I am not a father, friend or coach of any of the West Ashley girls. I am simply a fan of soccer. This decision is a testimant to the fact many Americans have no understanding of the game's value; not the least of which is this executive director, Ronnie Matthews. I hope he sleeps well knowing that he has broken the hearts of a number of girls, lessened the value of a state championship trophy for the now (unrightful) holders, and tarnished high school soccer in South Carolina forever. But, by all means, we must adhere to all rules, now matter how ridiculously artificial they may be.

Sincerely,

Disgruntled soccer fan.

---

Here's an interesting editorial that was in the Greenville News this morning...

I want to say that I am not associated with either team. My daughter doesn't even go to public school. The following is an editorial in the Greenville News today .

The Girls 2003 AAAA State High School final soccer game May 16th in Columbia bewteen Mauldin and West Ashley was a demonstration of the good and bad in high school athletics.

During the first 10 minutes of the game, four students from West Ashley decided to watch the game from the Mauldin side of the field. They stood next to the Mauldin students in order to try and get reaction. When Mauldin forward Kelly Schneider went down to an injury after a collision with the West AShley goalie and lay on the field for 10-15 minutes, obviously in great pain, one of the fans yelled " do it again West Ashley".

Mauldin lost the game 3-2 in sudden death and instead of celebrating the victory, the West Ashley players ran over to the Mauldin side of the field totaunt, yell and literally stick out their tongues toward the Mauldin players, students and fans.

Mauldin shuld hold its head high and be proud of a great season. You made your school, your classmates,your community and your parents very proud.

Soccermom and Observer--I do not need a hitory lesson,my reference to the Nazi regime had nothing to do with events during the war and everything to do with the gradual stripping away of basic human rights while demanding blind loyalty to the state(SCHSL).
This rule makes no sense-I mean really,try to explain why this rule exists.Your reference to speed as an analogy is a poor one since speed limits are clearly posted out in the open to see.You will find yourself challenged to find this obscure rule in THE STATE manual.
It is a shame that we cannot always control our fans and I will grant you that poor sportsmanship does still exist,but in all of the above posts there is not the mention of anything Mauldin players or fans did wrong.Think about it--surely we would have heard of WA poor behavior before this game-at Wando,nope-vs JI,nope-any time this season-you guessed it.Kids just dont walk over to another group without some type of prvocation.
Think about an episode of Law and Order you may have seen where you find yourself getting mad at the end when some slick lawyer gets his obviously guilty client off on some legal technicality.Now you know how alot of people feel.Imagine the victim of this fictional crime was your daughter.Now go argue as to why this is a good and valid part of our constitution.Have a good day!

I am absolutely disgusted with this whole issue....and please don't confuse me with "CNSoccermom"....Anthony, I understood your analogy for what it was....an analogy.

This whole situation is absolutley ludicrous and shouldn't even be happening. The rule is obviously to prevent players from PLAYING. No, they probably shouldn't have been listed on the roster, and never having seen a high school roster, does it clearly state what grade the player is in? Maybe it SHOULD becuase if the rule is that obscure then that would help in reminding coaches.

I'm real curious as to how the person or persons who reported this "infraction" feel right now? Are you happy? Do you feel vindicated in some way? Can you go to West Ashley girls and explain to them why you felt the need to point the finger at them?

The girls CLEARLY and OBVIOUSLY were not there in any way to impact the game - gee, wonder how they feel?

I in no way have any ties to either of these two teams but in my opinion, Mauldin should back West Ashley and refuse to accept the trophy/state championship - now THAT would send a message to the high school league administration....and both teams would be winners.

Soccermom

Columnist Ken Burger of The Post-Courier (Charleston)

No Good Deed Goes Unpunished

In all the controversy over the JV players, another point was overlooked. I was at the game, and I heard before the game started that West Ashley was thought to have one or two players that were failing classes (I actually never heard anything about them having the eighth graders on the roster.) Does anybody know whether this is true or not? I'm just curious.

I am glad I do not have a dog in this fight!
1- If, as stated, the precedent was set earlier this year when a basketball yeam was forced to forfeit a game where 8th graders were rostered
and that is how rule is written; I don't see where Mr Matthews had any choice.
2- However, I do think it is the wrong punishment
3- I think Coach Drew McNeally should take full responsibility . After more than 10 yrs in coaching, he should have known better.

i was not at the game so i'm a little tentative to make this comment because i'm sure all the rumors are not completely true. but i'm going to anyway. to comment on the letter written by "disgruntled fan"- I understand that the 8th grade players had no effect on the game. they did not play or even have the intent to play. however, to my knowledge, the rule is that you cannot have an 8th grade player on your roster. west ashley must have felt like they were an acception to this rule because the two players would not be playing in the game. regardless, just because they might have felt the rule was stupid or unneccesary in this situation, they still have the responsibility to abide by it. also, i understand that the west ashly girls played very hard in a game that left them "physically and emotionally drained" and it disturbs you that their title is being taken away by something you feel is very insignificant and ultimately, unfair. however, they DID break the rule. also, from reading the post made by observer1121- while i think that the decision made was the right one regardless of the teams attitudes and behavior, perhaps WA would recieve slightly more sympathy from others (and most certainly from me) if they had handled their victory with a little more class. okay... A LOT more class.

Thank you.

okay maybe i've missed this or something....but i've followed a lot of the stuff about the stripping of the championship....i'm just wondering why nothing about the two failing players was in the news? being two starters (and one being the deciding goal-scorer) and playing illegally throughout the season and especially in the playoffs, i don't see why they're not a bigger deal than the 8th graders...please correct me if i'm wrong, as i may not have all the facts straight

No failing players.

I have been reading and listening to this thread rather than writing for the most part but feel I should clarify at this point that there are no allegations of academic ineligibility according to everyone I have spoken with. That particularly hateful rumor was floated by mhssoc (I wonder what that could stand for) and echoed vaguely once early on in the thread. I was told that academic eligibility was checked closely and no problems found. No one is talking about it because it didn't exist. If someone has evidence to the contrary please present it. Otherwise, please stop trying to hurt the innocent further.

lpaf

Agreed. I would think with all the uproar, the SCHSL has confirmed all eligibility or they would have said something.

i read that editorial by ken burger of the post and courier that kyle posted. i totally agree with what he said. those girls worked hard all year and overcame adversity two win a second state championship in the schools third year of existence. they shouldnt be punished cuz their coach screwed up. those jv players had NO effect on the game whatsoever. i think that its ridiculous that those girls may have their championship stripped because of technicality. now if those two players had played, or even stepped on the field for that matter, i could understand the actions taken but this is ludicris. they shouldnt be stripped, they should possibly fined or put on probation.

I don't think that it was a "hateful rumor" in the least. Yes, I am a Mauldin fan, but as I said earlier, I heard it before the game had even started, so it wasn't a rumor started out of spite for the loss. All mhssoc said was that they heard the same thing, and wanted to know whether or not it was true. (Good job on decoding that name by the way.) I guess that we have an answer now.

I understand what everyone is saying here. Technically the 2 girls did not play during the game. But, if they warmed up for the game with the rest of the team, if they were directly interacting with the players that did play in the game, if they were giving encouragement to the girls that played the game during the player introductions, if they were communicating to the players as they were substituting on and off the field, if they were sitting on the bench and rooting for their teamates as they were running up and down the field...THEN THEY WERE PLAYING IN THE GAME !!!!

I'm only active in the Boy's side of the game, but I couldn't help but get involved in this controversy because the notion being passed back and forth is totally against what we preach to our kids(at least the boys) as they grow up in soccer and some have to face the fact that they play the bench. Notice I said "play" the bench not "sit on" the bench.

Since when have we said that the only players on the team are those that play minutes on the field. That's what soccer is all about. Using the logic that I see everyone throwing out here, we should only award medals to those players that had playing time out on the field... and everyone else needs to go home with nothing but the thought that they sat on the bench of the championship team.

I agree with Sweeps. Every player on your team has an impact on the game, regardless of whether or not they have playing time. If only for the intimidation factor of having a decent amount of subs... this can be enough to put a discouraging thought into the heads of the opposing team. Yes, I know, only 11 can play at once, but they're all on one team.

I agree that the punishment is harsh. It sucks for the players who gave so much for what sounds like a historical match-up (sorry I missed it). But the rule is the rule. And if the coach has been coaching for very long, he would know that you can't dress up J.V. players for Varsity matches unless they are in high school. They go over this at the beginning of every year in our coaches refresher meetings on the new rules.

I can't agree with the punishment, but if we let this slide then the saying my student's live by will be made true...
"It ain't wrong unless you get caught!"

Well put, y'all.

soccermom- i'm not completely sure but i have a feeling the person who initially reported the incident probably did so because they had these wacky things called morals.

do you let someone cheat just because them doing so isnt hurting you in any way? No. You (or most people) dont tolerate cheating because it shows disrespect for those who have played by the rules.

also, i think you're wrong in saying that "The rule is obvious to prevent players from PLAYING". you are inferring what you think the intent of the rule is when the rule is not open to interpretation.

Shame on you, Mr. Matthews! The recent string of zero tolerance policies being enforced in our public schools is sending the wrong message to our children. Whatever happened to adults, educators, judges, community leaders, etc. using good judgment and discretion when making decisions that affect people, particularly young people who rely on us for guidance and a proper example. You read about a school principal expelling an elementary school child because the child's parent packed a plastic knife in the kid's lunch to spread peanut butter on their sandwich during lunch. You stand amazed, waiting for further details to justify such a harsh reaction, and the only explanation offered is "we have a zero tolerance policy against weapons". Apparently, there is also a zero tolerance policy against common sense.

According to The Post and Courier, the rules state..."Any player in the uniform of one of the competing schools and permitted in the bench area is considered as having participated in the game or scrimmage."

Mr. Matthews seems to be willing to overlook the difference between JV and Varsity uniforms in order to fit this situation into his zero tolerance model. However, let's give him the benefit of the doubt and allow that these two middle school players, who were given the opportunity of a little self esteem boost by being listed on the PA announcer's roster and introduced with the team, were technically in violation of High School League doctrine. What is the best course of action?

Again quoting the Post and Courier's account of the rules..."The use of an ineligible player will subject the school to suspension, probation and/or fine."

If this is indeed accurate, then it appears that choices were available to Mr. Matthews in dealing with these "high crimes". I am sure that these choices were made available because someone had enough sense at one time to realize that the intent behind an action is often as important as the action itself. I have not heard anyone make the ridiculous claim that these two 8th graders were on the sidelines in order to give their team an unfair advantage over the opposition. I have not heard that this was common practice by this team and they had been properly warned previously. Perhaps probation would have sent a message that the rules will be enforced, but the adults responsible for maintaining a level playing field for all high school athletes have enough common sense to react and behave in a manner that is at least as responsible as we expect from our coaches and young athletes!

imnotinhighschoolanymore --

Shame on you if you can't recognize the blatant attempt at character assasination by innuendo (look it up if you don't know what it means) in mhssoc's first post in this thread. Your parents must have reared you better than that. When rumormongering in the absence of any hard information focuses on a specific individual it is deliberately hateful.

lpaf

And shame on you for lowering yourself to the level of a teenager by making personal insults against them and their intelligence. As a grown man, you should know better. There were two goal scorers in that game, so mhssoc did not single out a "specific individual." In order to show how important of a role the alleged had in the outcome of the game, mhssoc saw it necessary to reference the fact that she scored.

2002-2003 Rules and Regulations Governing Contests

Boys and Girls Soccer (p.B-41)

#3 - The head coach must attend a League sponsored rules clinic.

South Carolina High School League Handbook Constitution Rules and Regulations Directory (p.A-24)

B. Rules and Regulations:

#1 - Students below the 7th grade may not participate in interscholastic athletics. STUDENTS IN GRADES 7 AND 8 WILL NOT BE PERMITTED TO PARTICIPATE ON VARSITY INTERSCHOLASTIC TEAMS IN FOOTBALL, WRESTLING, AND SOCCER.

Article VII - Section 6 (p.A-10)

D. With the exception of football, wrestling, and soccer, eligible 7th and 8th grade students may participate on varsity teams. This is because the HSL views football, wrestling, and soccer as CONTACT sports.

NOTE: Any student in the uniform of and permitted in the bench area of one of the competing teams is considered as having participated.
================================================
My take (Kevin Heise, SCHSSCA President):

Thus, after reviewing the SCHSL Handbook, checking the state championship roster as submitted by West Ashley HS, and by my interpretation of the rules aforementioned, I can see where the SCHSL has to enforce this ruling. Although I don't necessarily agree that the punishment fits the crime, it is an obvious error by the WAHS coaching staff and athletics administration.

This is a tough lesson for all involved, especially the Wildcats varsity girls' squad. However, the old adage that "life is not fair" may apply here appropriately enough.

Whatever the outcome, thanks to WAHS and Mauldin for treating prep soccer fans to what I consider the best girls' soccer match that I have ever witnessed!

Adults make personal "attacks" all the time. It's called arguing, however I do not think that is the word I would use in identifying the comment being discussed...on to the point. Eligibility is done prior to the first game. It is a one time deal in soccer, unlike in basketball in which a player's eligibility can be restored in the rollover of semesters. I could be declared eligible at the beginning of the soccer season and write "Ants in the pants make the jovial man dance" on every test and still be alright to play. It would have to have been a mud slinging action for there is no base from which the accusations are made. It is an abiotic issue that should have been shot down a looooong time ago. It is unfortunate that the jersey incident did occur. I think we all knew what Drew was doing, and unfortunately a technicality has arised. Someone, and it doesn't matter who, made an attempt to slap his wrist in a previous post saying he should have known better since he's been coaching for 10 years. That would have only worked against him, seeing that the "contact sport" rule was not in affect at the beginning of his coaching stints.

Sigh, this is an entertaining issue to discuss with everyone here and I do enjoy intreacting with everyone's opinions. The lone setback in my joy is in knowing that there are several girls experiencing a lot of grief because of the proximity of two teammates and several letters on a piece of paper. The one argument that no one can rise up against to thwart (although some intelligent soul will try) is that those two girls did not physically step on the field once the whistle was blown, pronouncing the game officially started, and makes runs, passes, crosses, headers, and shots to aid their teammates in the victory. May we all find a suitable resolution...

Well done to Ronnie Matthews for having the backbone to enforce League rules even when it meant the loss of a state title. Easy decision to make in regular season; very tough decision to make in this case; but still the RIGHT decision. The enforcement of rules has a purpose; to ensure others don't repeat that mistake. In this case you can bet your bottom dollar no coach makes this mistake again after all the publicity; which is why we enforce rules in the first place!!!!

Region 1 Coach-

I wasn't saying that adults don't argue. I was saying that la was arguing in a juvenile manner with the "look it up" remark. By the way, what word would you use to describe the comment?

Bravo Bazza!! An unpopular choice but I also believe the right one...Its all up to Ronnie Matthews and his interpretation of the rules..

Bazza --

I thought we enforced these particular rules to make sure 8th graders didn't get hurt or have their studies distracted by playing in too many games a week.

lpaf

Observer - better check with slm26, according to him/her, there is no allowance for one's "interpretation" of rules.

Oh and slm26 -

Morals? I'm glad to know someone out there is perfect.

Cheating? Disrespect? We are discussing an honest mistake....maybe you should go back and read the posts....

Yes, I am inferring what I think the intent of the rule is - just as you noted - it's all up to Mr Matthews to interpret the rule - but wait, you said that wasn't allowed...I'm confused.

Any rule is open to intrepretation - that's why we have the appeals process.

Soccermom

I must admit that I have not gone back through every line of every post on this topic, but I do not recall anyone suggesting that the rules regarding an ineligible player should not have been enforced. Rules need to be enforced, but they must be enforced with wisdom, discretion, and an appreciation for the affect on all parties concerned. In my opinion, Mr. Matthews has failed on these points and created an injustice greater than the original offense that has taken place.

What if the ineligible players had played and contributed to the WA victory? Certainly the title would be taken away then, and fewer would rally to their defense. But wait...this is the very punishment being meted out for simply standing on the sidelines dressed in JV uniforms. Certainly, we cannot argue that the two scenarios are the same and deserving of the same consequences.

By the same token, if WA had not won the title match, what recourse would Mr. Matthews have to deal with the school that permitted these ineligible players on the sideline? There would not be a championship to take away, and an alternative punitive scenario would need to take place. Surely, that alternative might be more appropriate for the current situation.

This leads me back to my original sentiment...that rules DO need to be enforced, but with discretion. If there is discretion available to Mr. Matthews on delivering an appropriate message to WA for their technical violation of league rules, then it is my sincere hope that he reconsiders the options available. Surely he does not believe that the consequences for committing a technical violation can create an injustice greater than the violation itself.

Well put Cnfan....

Soccermom

soccermom- what would you have done if you were the one to find out that WA has violated the rule? just let it slide? i sure hope not. when i commented on cheating, i wasnt attacking the coach personally. ok, if you dont like the word cheat, let me replace it with "break the rules". yes, it was an honest mistake. i have no doubt that the coach (or any coach, for that matter) would have done the same thing if he realized the potential consequences. like someone said earlier, would he have broken the rule if he knew about it? most likely not. should he have known about it? absolutely. you cannot argue the fact that the presense of 8th grade players on the roster and sitting on the bench is in violation of the rule. also, can any rule really be interpretted? or do people just search for technicallities in order to make it go their own way? i really want to know. its not a retorical question.
also, observer and i are two different people. dont merge our arguements into one. yes, i see that you are very confused.

slm26 - I really did not intend to get into an argument with you, so my apologies if I came off that way...but I do want to answer your questions...

1)What would you have done if you were the one to find out that WA has violated the rule? just let it slide? i sure hope not.

Since this was a situation that did not have any impact on the game - I probably would have said something to the coach so that he could have had the opportunity to address it with the appropriate officials. The way I see the situation, it was more of a "tattle tail mentality" but that's my opinion, no one elses.

2)when i commented on cheating, i wasnt attacking the coach personally. ok, if you dont like the word cheat, let me replace it with "break the rules". yes, it was an honest mistake. i have no doubt that the coach (or any coach, for that matter) would have done the same thing if he realized the potential consequences. like someone said earlier, would he have broken the rule if he knew about it? most likely not. should he have known about it? absolutely. you cannot argue the fact that the presense of 8th grade players on the roster and sitting on the bench is in violation of the rule.

Yes, according to the interpretation of the current rules, you are correct, it was a violation

3)also, can any rule really be interpretted? or do people just search for technicallities in order to make it go their own way? i really want to know. its not a retorical question.

People write rules based on precedent - the appeals process provides a venue to open that rule up to interpretation, amend it if necessary and hopefully provide various levels of punishment. I was not speaking rhetorically either. Based on the many posts here, it's apparent that there is a lot of gray area - or interpretation, if you will. Rules are generally put into place to maintain public order and safety, to protect the individual, and/or to use punishment as a deterrent - in this case, the outcome of this situation is probably never what was intended when the rule was written.

The appeals process gives WA the opportunity to defend itself as related to the rule. However, in my opinion, it is the duty of the high school league to prove that the outcome would have been different if the rule had not been violated; the league also has an obligation to prove that the infraction was detrimental to both teams to uphold that what the rule was designed to prevent. It is also the leagues job to determine the nature and extent of the need to change the existing rule as written. These are all basic law principles.

4)Also, observer and i are two different people. dont merge our arguements into one. yes, i see that you are very confused

Didn't merge comments, simply commented on one vs the other...being confused - no, I was just being facetious.

Soccermom

I have no connection with either school. Obviously West Ashley broke the rules. I don't think that is in question at all. The punishment should be the topic of discussion. I think that if the high school league follows through with this and takes their championship away that they worked for not just this season but for their whole lives, that this will be the biggest travesty SC high school sports history. It isn't the player's fault; the coach should have known the rule. Therfore I think that a fine is appropriate. I believe that probation from next year's playoffs should be the maximum penalty, but WA would probably take that over being stripped of a championship that they rightly earned.

I don't even see how Mauldin could accept this title. I know that I wouldn't. They lost. Who wants to wear a medal around their neck that they didn't earn? What are you going to tell your kids about the state championship that you "won"?

If the high school league follows through with this, hold your heads up high WA. Yall won the game, and if they take your medals away, I would go get some new ones made cause you deserve it.

im not sure if anyone has mentioned this...but would any of this been brought up if West Ashley had of lost?? just wondering...because it just sounds as if someone is jealous that they won!

i don't know how many people remember the C.A. Johnson deal, when they had Jv players sitting on the bench. the players didn't play, but just sitting on the bench in a STATE CHAMPIONSHIP GAME gives the player a ton of expeirence, its different than sitting in the stands. I know from experience that it is. If the 2 girls hadn't been on the roster, and had been in street clothes, the game would be final, and west ashley wouldn'ty have to forfeit. But because they were in uniforms, they had a chance to play, and that is against the rules. Not making West Ashley forfeit would be unfair to the other schools who have been punished for the same reason in other sports.

I thought some of you who are debating the problem with West Ashley might be interested in what the SCHSL Handbook says on the matter. Here is the relevant section (the italics are mine):

Section 15. Ineligible Participants
A. AN INELIGIBLE PLAYER MUST NOT PARTICIPATE IN ANY INTERSCHOLASTIC COMPETITION.
This applies to any level of competition including varsity, junior varsity, junior high, middle school, "B" and any other teams representing a school. The use of an ineligible player will subject a school to suspension, probation and/or fine. Any student in the uniform of one of the competing schools and permitted in the bench area is considered as having participated in the game or scrimmage .

NOTE: Any student that participates before fulfilling the requirements of a mandated athletic suspension will be declared an ineligible participant.

B. The following penalties will apply when an ineligible student participates:
1. The player will be dropped from the team immediately.
2. All contests in which the ineligible player dressed will be forfeited.
3. All honors or individual points earned will be forfeited.
4. The school will be reprimanded and fined $100.00.
C. If the school knowingly played the ineligible student the Executive Director may suspend the school or program. In lieu of the suspension, the Executive Committee may fine the school $500.00 for each ineligible player and place the sport involved on probation for a period of time not to exceed one calendar year.

It is my impression that WA's appeal is based on the sentence I put in italics.

Is a student dressed in the JV uniform of their school "in the uniform of one of the competing schools"? Suppose the coach tried to sub one of these students during the game - wouldn't the referee object because the JV uniform was different than the varsity uniforms? As I understand it, only the keeper is allowed to wear colors different from the rest of the team.

If it is reasonable that if the ref would prevent a student in a JV uniform from entering the game, then that student cannot be considered "in the uniform". Certainly the reverse is true - when (eligible) JV players are invited to play with the varsity they are given varsity uniforms.

I wish WA good luck with their appeal. I really enjoyed that match, and I hate to see it marred by this very technical problem.

Let's just see what happens...

ddad -- good points, but these were all made yesterday within this thread at 6:15 p.m. by Kevin Heise, SCHSSCA President.

Thanks for your input!

tefs12--

The CAJohnson ruling actually was not about the JV players being on the bench, but about them playing in too many games per week (more than three) when they came to the varsity games in addition to playing their JV games. Basketball is not defined as a "contact sport" and the JV players could legally play, as long as a three games per week (and some maximum number of games per season) guideline was followed. Some of those JV players did play, and they did dress out in varsity uniforms, and score baskets, from what I can tell. For anyone interested, here is a link (I hope this works) to the SC HS Soccer Coaches Assn Forum and an instructive post by Kevin Heise from early March.

http://www.scsoccer.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=000168

What we keep straying away from in this discussion is what the SCHSL is trying to do by establishing rules for the participation of 8th graders at the varsity level. Why are these rules in place? The rules for the three contact sports, as I see it, are there solely to protect the younger players from injury. Younger, and presumably smaller, players are more prone to injury in a varsity match. This is a good rule.

How to judge compliance with it is the problem. It seems to me that the SCHSL, in order to avoid any possibility that a JV player might somehow get into a varsity game, decided to define participation in a game as being in the bench area dressed to play. Coaches don't put kids not in uniforms on the court or field. I would be willing to bet that this is where the West Ashley athletic staff made its mistake. To a HS soccer coach, being in a different uniform means not being eligible to play. Uniform means uniform. The two JV players, in addition to being in different uniforms, also had numbers that were already taken by players on the starting squad (one of whom played all 109 minutes and 31 seconds), and thus were doubly unable to take the field. These girls were not going into the game. The West Ashley coach respected the intent of the SCHSL to protect young players, though better judgement should have avoided this mess altogether. The question now is whether or not we through the baby out with the bathwater.

lpaf

The reason for the rules' existence is irrelevant. It is for the High School League alone to decide if the rule is achieving its objective.
The rule was broken and the punishment was applied. When one starts using "discretion" then one can get into endless arguments about the merits of this case or that case. Treat everyone the same and there can be no suggestions of favoritism if "discretion" benefits one program and then not another.
Applying the rule evenly across the board makes future decisions easier and unchallengeable.

"The reason for the rule's existence is irrelevant" ???

lpaf

ddad...Thanks for the updated info that you supplied in your recent post concerning the penalties for using an ineligible player. Contrary to other references, I did not see this info in Kevin's post at 6:15pm yesterday. It always helps to have as much information as possible.

Bazza...I find it disturbing that someone would be against the idea of using discretion when making a decision. The idea that using discretion forces people to consider "the merits of this case or that case" is precisely the reason it should be used. Making "future decisions easier and unchallengeable" is hardly a motive for coming to a just decision.

The complexity of individualism and circumstances unique to each person or situation prevent us from realistically treating everyone in every situation EQUALLY...we should therefore focus our energies on the more honorable and just goal of treating everyone FAIRLY.

Does anyone know when the appeal meeting will take place and will the results be posted on this website?

Thanks

Tefs12 brings up a point that I don't think anyone has really spoken to. Given that there was never any intention of these girls playing in the game, I wonder why they were even on the bench. Maybe all the wisdom out there can enlighten me on this. I'm afraid the answer might be so that the two could gain the experience of dealing with the pressures and excitement of the state championship soccer game. If that's the case, the advantage this may present to West Ashley in the future has to be considered when deciding the penalty and I tend to think that the forfeit of the games is appropriate. Assuming all other schools keep 8th graders off their benches, then West Ashley potentially has players with additional championship game experience over the next 4 years that no other school had an opportunity to match.

Lets have a "REMATCH" and all the proceeds/gate money/fines go towards (The Children Cancer Foundation)
As a HS/Classic Lady's Head Coach I wouldn't accept the championship trophy (if we lost to a better Team) And I wouldn't accept the Championship trohpy if I broke the rules of the game period.So fine the WA H/Coach $1000 WA Ast Coach $200 WA AD $500 and the school $100.And lets have a "REMATCH" becauce 18 young lady's on both sides will have to bare the bitter scars/pain for a long long time.To end the pain the suffering and all the BS is to have a "REMATCH"

Sweeps --

This is the magical jersy argument. I've been waiting to explore this when the opening arose. Since the 8th graders did not actually play but would have been clearly legal on the sidelines if they had been dressed in street clothes any illegal advantage they could provide to West Ashley arose from the fact they wore JV jersies. Thus the "magical jersy" theory.

lpaf

High School League to Hear West Ashley Appeal Monday
Philip Bowman, The Post-Courier (Charleston)

It comes down to intent and/or deception. I don't see any. Let the game stand as it was played on the field.

West Ashley May Forfeit Title
Adam Davis, The News (Greenville)

I know that this argument could go on until the end of time but once again the rules need to be reviewed and enforced. There are 100s of high schools in the state with 1000s of players. If we use the philosophy of interpretation of the rules and discretion on an individual basis that has been suggested, then I'm afraid that every high school game played will be under review. There are rules for every sport clearly defined in the league handbook. Every coach has access to these rules and should know them, especially where player elgibility is concerned. I feel sorry for everyone involved as there will be no winners. The players on both teams should feel proud that they both made it to the championship and no one can take that away from them. The both had very successful seasons!

West Ashley Seeks Majority Ruling in Appeal
Philip Bowman, The Post-Courier (Charleston)

Very interesting!!! Since there is no more Lowcountry representation than there is, it could work against WA.

Wow!!! I go away for a couple of days vacation and the whole high school soccer scene is turned upside down with West Ashley getting stripped of its' state championship. Now I wish I would have had a laptop around to check into the board, because the part of S.C. I was in never had a mention of this happening in the local paper.

After going through the numerous posts about the situation it certainly appears that the West Ashley coaches neglected some basic rules and ultimately its' entire community, most importantly the girls of that varsity team, are paying the price of "cheating". I use that word loosely, because I can see where the intent of Coach McNeely's actions lie, but to blatantly ignore and undermine the other teams involved with high school athletics was both naieve and foolish.

Are the JV players to blame, NO. Are the varsity players to blane, NO. Are the coaches to blame, YES. Is the administration to blame, YES. So, that's a lack of institutional control in my book and they deserve to have to forfeit the title in my eyes. Rules are rules and there is very little "interpretation" needed in most matters and this one is no different.

In fact, my notion is that in his mind he may have thought that if he could pull this off on the biggest stage of the year that leaves me to wonder what other actions he has pulled off in years past! After all, he's been tucked away west of the Ashley River for years with little oversight of his practices and coaching principles and this might be just the tip of the iceberg for onlookers like me. Could West Ashley be the new "renegades" of high school athletics? Maybe the only people that can answer that are those located between Highways 17 and 61 and bounded by the 526 Overpass.

The state of S.C. witnessed this same sort of black eye with boys basketball this past winter and it cost C.A. Johnson a region title and top spot in the playoffs. I read earlier "Wayne's" comment about the inner city school against the other types of schools, this would surely be portrayed by those that don't have a clue about soccer playing the race card. Like it or not, the decision Mr. Matthews made is a hard line and correct ruling!

My question is;Why didn't someone from West Ashley pick up the phone and contact the SCHSL and ask underwhat circumstances would 8th grade JV players be allowed to sit on the bench? They would have recieved the SCHSL interpretation on the front end and saved everyone much heartache.

I know this is monday morning quarterbacking,but if I'm in the state finals I don't risk anything.Make the call and be sure.

1.) Rules exist for a reason, whatever the reason is, and we must abide by existing rules. No one truely feel that anything sinister or clandestine occured here, but the existing rule was broken. The rule has a clear explanation of the consequences of the infraction whether intentional or not.

2.) The sad thing here is when it occured. State championships are things to be earned on the field and not lost or gained off the field.

3.) We can not pick and choose which rules we or our student athletes follow. Just because it was the state championship game should not change the interpretation or the forfiet. Life is full of hard lessons and though unintentional, adults made a mistake and some young future adults have to live with the consequences. What are we teaching them if we bend and contort the rule to fit what one side of the argument wants which is to keep their state championship?

4.) For the athletic director and the coach and the players at Mauldin to be willing to accept a state championship that they ALL know they did not earn on the field and ALL know that these 2 8th graders had nothing to do with the outcome of the game, truely is an embarrasing thought. Can you hear the explainations that they would have to give some years down the line to their children as to how mommy won the state championship on a technicality and actually lost the game 3-2? Will they really PROUDLY wear their state championship ring or necklace or whatever award is given to the winners?

5.) What ought to happen is that WEST ASHLEY is made to forfiet the crown and state title, MAULDIN should show some athletic integrity and decline to accept the trophy and the title, and the SCHSL declares the AAAA title vacant and there is no state champion this year

I have no affiliation with either school and have no daughters let alone none that play soccer, only sons that play. I have read these empassioned lines and can only come to these conclusions.

6.) Lastly, there seems to be enough sentiment here to suggest that the rule is flawed and this should serve as a reason to look at this rule closer and consider changes so that this unfortunate lesson does not have to be learned again. Self inspection and change, revision and modification are a sign of a mature society. If nothing else this rule may need to be cleaned up and a better interpretion of what a participant really is may be necessary. Different punishment may be appropriate as to "participates" in the game while standing on the sideline versus
actually plays and participates on the field in the actual game.

Lets look at this from another perspective using deductive reasoning, shall we? What is the absolute worst the high school league could do to West Ashley? My assumption (scary word) would be to take away the title. What is the worst punishment used for? The worst crime. Did West Ashley commit the most hanus crime? No. We all agree they did not follow the written rule, I just don't see how the punishment fits the crime. Drew should run some laps or have to do some push ups. That would be fair. Besides, what are we teaching our kids? The last thing I want to see is my girl monkey stomp the annoying kid next door for not allowing her onto the school bus first.

...or me for using a preposition to finish a sentence.

In my long post I forgot to ask, has anyone spoken with Coach McNeely about this situation or has he perhaps addressed the forfeit on this board? Just wondering, because I don't recollect seeing his name on here, but of course that doesn't mean anything since most people are using screen names.

I would like to take exception to those of you who feel that the intended purpose of a rule and the intent of someone who may have violated the rule are irrelevant.

If you read the SCHSL handbook, there are several places where they cite examples to clarify the intent of a rule. The reason is that it is impossible to take into account every possible eventuality - you do the best you can and then adjudicate the cases you didn't anticipate.

I am reminded of the fable of Procrustus, an early forerunner of Norman Bates. Procrustus ran an Inn, and if you were too small for the bed, he'd put you on a rack and stretch you to fit. Or if you were too long, he'd chop off whatever hung over, so everyone in the end fit perfectly.

I agree with those of you who feel forcing WA to forfeit the championship is too harsh. The rule as it stands is a good one - but it wasn't handed down from the mountain.

I think worse punishments could be given to West Ashley, or any team for that matter besides giving up a state championship. For instance, they could be suspended for a certain amount of time. In my opinion, making them forfeit a game in which they broke the rule is not the worst punishment, even if it was the championship. The championship is still a game, and if they would have to forfeit any other game because of it, it would only be fair for them to forfeit this one. The rules shouldn't be bent because it was the state final.

It's obvious you'renotinhighschoolanymore. You practice and play all season long for the chance to win the state championship. This is a high school league and the decision should take the kids into consideration. If need be, suspend the coaches for a few games next year, leave the kids out of the punishment.

Does the punishment fit the crime? NO. Is the punishment defined for the crime currently? Yes.

Change the punishment for the future, not for the current infraction.

In SCISA boys competition, Ben Lippen had an ineligible player (a 5th year senior), blew the whistle on themselves, and as a result forfieted 8 games, 7 of them conference games and still made it to the state championsip game. SCISA has the same rule and you must forfiet games where an ineligible player is rostered etc.

Do I agree with the rule? No. It needs to be changed for the NEXT time. To change it now just reinforces the notion that if you whine enough, you'll get your way.

I feel very bad for the WA girls, they beat Mauldin by playing some great soccer. I hope the SCHL executive commitee shows wisdom in this appeal process. I know everyone wants the (SCHL) to remember the girls had nothing to do with who was sitting on the bench. Does it surprise me that Mauldin would accept a title they did not win? No.

You're right, sweepit. I graduated way back in 2002, so I'm far too old to have any idea of what's going on. The kids did practice and play all season to the get to the championship, which they won, and even if it's taken away, they still know that they won. Suspending the coaches just takes away from the kids more, so that doesn't do much good either. By the way, how long did you sit there thinking of some way to be clever, only to fall short with "you'renotinhighschoolanymore"?

Has Mauldin accepted the title? No.

I'm still going by my comments on page 4 of this thread. I believe that the JV girls DID have something to do with the win in a support function. Apparently they and everyone else on the team believed that they did too, or they would have not been permitted to receive championship medals. If they were simple observers sitting on the bench with JV uniforms like laplageauxfolles suggests, then they should not have been awarded medals. I don't think they are at fault for the violation, but it did provide unfair advantage to WA on that day in relation to all other teams participating and will in the future with the experience the two girls gained that day.

You're right. They did get medals. This post should've never escalated into the argument it did. Good call, sweeps.

sweeps and Idon'tquiteknow --

Can you explain exactly how you feel the JV players brought an advantage to the WA team? For a moment, consider that a poorly informed or ill advised coach simply wanted to honor a couple of 8th grade JV players and made the honest mistake of dressing them in JV uniforms instead of street clothes. If they received medals or not is not known to me, but they were not on the roster presented to the officials of the girls eligible to play. They didn't play.
They couldn't play -- they shared numbers with other starters and wore different uniforms. I personally don't buy into the magical 8th grade cheering squad on the bench theory of why West Ashley left the field victorious. West Ashley's aggressive individual play and tough defense eventually wore down the Mauldin team. In the end individual athleticism triumphed over beautiful team play, and speed was the key factor. I hope as best I can that WA and Mauldin can meet again next year in the finals. There are sure to be no 8th graders on the bench. Just like last year when WA also won...

lpaf

sweeps & I'mamauldinfan-

Your ignorance of the facts astounds me. None of the three JV players were awarded medals. I was there when the medals were awarded to all of the varsity girls. Why would they receive medals if they were not on the team? Try to post facts and not fabulation....

sh8

Maybe I do have the facts wrong about the medals. I was there too, but seeing as how "i'mamauldinfan," I didn't look too closely at the West Ashley girls receiving the medals. I know I saw everyone get a medal that was on the field, but I guess the JV girls stayed on the bench.

Oh, and lpaf, I never said that they brought an advantage to the team. I was simply agreeing on the medals situation presented by sweeps, which I am now informed (and i'm trusting you on this one, shaiyza) was incorrect. Since you brought me into it though, I think that the girls on the field might not have been given an advantage from the eighth graders, but that the eighth graders received valuable experience on the sideline, giving them, and thus, West Ashley, an advantage in the future.

Imnot-
The eighth graders were not on the field because they are not a part of the team. As to your comment to lpaf, recognize that these girls were allowed to be on the sidelines since they were not dressed in UNIFORM. Mauldin could just as easily have had JV eighth graders on the sidelines, as well, as long as they were not in varsity jerseys.
-sh8

If there was any comment provided by the JV girls to any of their teamates regarding their play or comment of an opposition player regarding their play to an WA player by a JV girl that was advantage. That's what the players on the bench do. They may not be playing the game on the field, but if they are well coached, then they will be watching the game for any kind of help that they can provide to those on the field. Whether comments were made in this instance, I do not know, of course, but I do not believe that Mauldin was given an opportunity to dress two of their JV players to sit on the bench to scout out West Ashley. Again see my comments on page 4. I have never believed that only the 11 players out on the field affect the game's outcome. All on the bench who have opportunity for direct contact at halftime and during substitutions affect the play on the field.

Sweeps --

I understand where you are coming from. But were you at the game? Did you see the intensity the two teams played with? 8th graders on the sidelines were and are legal, for either side, the only question is what kind of clothes they were wearing . These JV players were spectators, not contributors. I know this, I was on the field for the entire game.

sh8

ps:

Nobody want to go back three pages and read what you think is important.

It is definitely a different perspective to these forums when you do not have a personal stake in the issue.
Re the whole 8th grade player issue, I have to go back to the fact that it is not that obscure a situation. The coach should have known the ramifications.5 yrs ago before the advent of JV girls soccer, Wando had a case where a talented 8th grader wanted to play varsity because she had no spring club option. Scott Ferguson advised her it was against SCHSL rules. Last yr in 2002, in the Field of Champiosn tournament, a Georgia team came to play and brought a talented 8th grader who was a starter. Coach Ferguson had to inform the team that that team couldn't use an 8th grader since tournament was being run under SCHSL jurisdiction. Boy, was that coach mad.
My point is - coaches are responsible for knowing
the rules for the organization of which they are a member. Just like they need to know to go to meetings to represent their team. It is part of their job. Knowing the rules also means knowing the penalties as they are written.
I personally think the Coach and Athletic Director ought to bear the punishment for screwing up - but that isn't how the rule is currently written.

I take no pleasure in seeing the West Ashley girls suffer through this. But, how do we teach our kids to respect rules and laws when we bend them or ignore them when we don't like the punishment? Most of us probably deal with teenagers and curfews, speeding tickets, etc. Is it ok to speed if you don't hit anybody? Is it ok to stay out after curfew "if I wasn't doing anything wrong!"?

Do any coaches out there think that two 8th graders sitting on the bench could or would give any kind of tactical input during the game?

I'm not- No attempt at being clever and no time either. You can suspend the coaches and lose those games but still win a state championship. If you take away this championship which was won on the field and taken away in an office it is gone for good. Find a punishment for the coaches, not the kids who earned it.

Ruling Comes Monday on Title
The News (Greenville), 5/30/03

Shaiyza-

Does that mean I could have been on the sideline since I was in street clothes?

I don't have any personal interest in this either. None of my kids play soccer but I do coach at the high school level and hate to see it happen to a team because of a technicality that had nothing to do with the outcome of this game. I do believe the coach should be dealt with in some manner. Swimmer makes a good point about rules, but a speeding ticket and hitting someone (reckless) are different penalties. My kids breaking curfew and doing something wrong carry different penalties. My guess is this will too,....after monday.

Imnot-

The whole reason this was brought up is because the two eighth graders were wearing purple jerseys(the JV jerseys that is). I am sure though that these girls were allowed on the sidelines as long as they were not wearing the team's uniform. As for you, unless you are a coach or were a JV player being brought up, I don't know if you can sit the bench... maybe you can look into that.
sh8

if they wore a purple jv jersey and the varsity wore a purple jersey - then basically they're trying to match. if they warmed up in pre-game and sat on the bench in their jv uniforms they are guilty. how simple is that. i don't think it's right to forfeit the title, but i do think they're guilty as sin. maybe the coach would like to comment. by his/her silence that must mean he/she is worried of outcome.

Hammer,
What a ridiculous assumption. Remember WA has an attorney and he has been the official spokesman.

I knew why it was started. I was just asking a question. Thanks.

I am going to state what I know about this.On Wednesday before the state final W.A. was asked to send a roster to the South Carolina Coaches Assoc. in Columbia.This request also specifically asked to please include any J.V. players that might be called up for this contest.Obviously,this is where the misunderstanding comes into play.
The 3 young ladies were put on the list but were the only 3 not assingned numbers because they were obviously not going to be in a varsity uniform and not going to play.This is bore out by the fact that the roster given to the officials by W. A. did not even have them listed.At that point these girls could never have played regardless of any situation.
The problem arose when members of th pressbox staff were trying to find out why no numbers existed for these 3 girls.The 2 eighth grade girls in question have senior sisters on the team.I am almost positive that this is why they were allowed this honor-to sit with their sisters in their final high school game.These girls have been described to me as average players who will surely play JV again next year{assuming they get over this}
If the High School League judges strictly by the letter of the law--The National Federation Handbook{which the SCHSL is pledged to uphold and enforce} clearly states that anyone defined as a team member must have a uniform with the same color,design and pattern--their JV uniform has a clearly different design and pattern.

[

Thanks AP, I'm glad that there are some people who understand what is going on.

hammer-

I don't know if you've looked into the rules or anything but from what you say, "basically they're trying to match", it doesn't seem like you think the two jerseys are the same(which is what UNIFROM means right?) Well, as you probably know and have been told, the rules say that in order for two jerseys to be the same, they must be the same in color, pattern, and design. The WA team has done NOTHING wrong, correct me if you can, so please think before you accuse us of being "guilty as sin". Also, how can you assume that silence equals worry? Maybe the coach is sick of stupid rumors going around and chooses to stay off the board as an attempt to keep rumors to a minimum.

-sh8