baltimoresun.com

« Prep fans love their football, basketball | Main | Coachspeak: South River football coach Lance Clelland »

August 17, 2011

Sparks clarifies reasons behind Atholton football forfeit

In the last couple of days, I've received a number of comments on this blog as well as emails from folks who agree or disagree with the MPSAA penalty against Atholton's football team for holding a 7-on-7 practice too early in the summer. The Raiders will have to forfeit their season opener at Glenelg on Sept. 2 as a result of the violation.

Raiders coach Kyle Schmitt took full responsibility for misinterpreting the rule, saying he believed the team could practice once before Memorial Day even though 7-on-7 events could not begin until the following week. However, the MPSSAA rule stipulates that neither practice nor games can take place until after the last game of the spring season, which was the Saturday of Memorial Day weekend.

I asked Ned Sparks, executive director of the MPSSAA, which governs all of the state's public school athletics programs, to explain how the penalty was derived.

"The penalty is in our handbook," Sparks said, of the rule that stipulates the No. 1 penalty for a rules violation as forfeit.

"There’s always a penalty against a school," Sparks explained. "The first penalty is 'Declare forfeit of all games in which the violation occurred.' The thinking on [the Atholton situation] is that they had an unfair advantage by practicing out of season. Then, they probably would have an unfair advantage in the first game and probably in more than that.”

Sparks said that Howard County coordinator of athletics Mike Williams conducted an investigation after Schmitt and Atholton athletic director Mike Senisi reported the violation to him.

"They concluded that there was a violation and what they have to do is apply the penalties that are there. They can’t make them up," Sparks said. "The school determines whether or not this was a penalty. Secondly, they apply the penalties according to what’s prescribed [in the MPSSAA Handbook.] It’s like mandatory sentencing. The severity of it, they make the recommendations.

"They send it to me and my job is just to make sure they followed this procedure. For example, if they said, 'Well the coach made a mistake. The team shouldn’t have to be penalized, so we’re not going to forfeit any games,' Then, it would be my job to say, 'No, you can’t do that.' They realize that. After they’ve made their investigation, they’ve determined a penalty, they’ve imposed it and we’ve supported it because it’s in accordance with our procedures, then they have an opportunity to appeal, but I don’t think they’re going to appeal, because they’ve self-admitted it and they’re taking their medicine."

Williams said Wednesday that he would not appeal.

"The rule was broken and they self-reported it. It was inadvertent," Williams said. "It is a shame, but we're not going to appeal."

Sparks said the dilemma that players have to pay for mistakes made by coaches -- whether on purpose or inadvertent -- is not a new one.

"It’s not pleasant. It never is," Sparks said. "I guess for years people have tried to figure out how in the world can you address this fairly. Did the team get an advantage? Did they do something that other teams aren’t allowed to do? At what point is the penalty? We don’t only wrestle with it. Look at the colleges. The team – Ohio State or whoever – they’re facing penalties for the team and the school and they may affect kids who might not have even been students there at the time, being freshmen this year. It’s always tough. There’s never an easy way, but somehow, some way the school – it’s a school team – is ultimately responsible. No one has ever figured a way to do it fairly."

To read the rule in its entirety, visit the MPSSAA website, where the 2011-2012 Hanbook is included in full. Go to page 28 for the section on "Violations, Penalties, and Appeals."

Posted by Katherine Dunn at 12:10 PM | | Comments (1)
Categories: Football
        

Comments

I understand what Mr. Sparks is saying; however, I don't totally agree. Is there never room for looking at each case individually rather than just "applying the rule" to all situations? Our courts do this all the time. Judges look at each case individually and can give a sentence from probation all the way to the max penalty. There is no way you can make me believe that one 7 on 7 practice (no lineman, no special teams, no running game) will make a difference in a real game played 3 months later, so where is the "unfair advantage" that must be penalized by forfeit? Is this the lesson we want our kids learning... that having integrity and honesty in self reporting is rewarded by a maximum penalty? I'm afraid they may learn that keeping your mouths shut and lying is a better way to go!!!!!

Post a comment

All comments must be approved by the blog author. Please do not resubmit comments if they do not immediately appear. You are not required to use your full name when posting, but you should use a real e-mail address. Comments may be republished in print, but we will not publish your e-mail address. Our full Terms of Service are available here.

Please enter the letter "d" in the field below:
-- ADVERTISEMENT --

Most Recent Comments
Baltimore Sun coverage
Sign up for FREE local sports alerts
Get free Sun alerts sent to your mobile phone.*
Get free Baltimore Sun mobile alerts
Sign up for local sports text alerts

Returning user? Update preferences.
Sign up for more Sun text alerts
*Standard message and data rates apply. Click here for Frequently Asked Questions.
Photo galleries

Blog updates
Recent updates to baltimoresun.com sports blogs  Subscribe to this feed
Stay connected