eligibility for HS while playing TB

The association is in no way banning a girl from playing a sport outside of school. She can play all she wants, but by the rules set forth by the state, she can't play for the school in games if she "chooses" to play independently during a season or over the 50% by dates.

You either choose to play by the rules or not, nothing is mandatory or forced. Their is no discrimination.

I still see no case, but always willing to listen.

Bottom line is that students are being banned from eligibility for participating in legal activities outside of school.

When I said this, GD, I didn't mean that students are being banned from travel ball. I meant that they're being banned from school ball BECAUSE of participating in travel ball, a legal activity.

I also don't think that ''you have a choice to play by the rules or not'' is a good legal defense.

To be clear, I'm not saying it's a good rule or bad rule. I've not been in a state where this was the rule. It might be a popular rule among coaches and parents who want to prevent someone from training a high school team year-round.

I'm approaching this purely from a legal standpoint. In some states, for example, you must sit out a year if you transfer from one high school to another. In Georgia, there is no sit-out rule. One reason given is the fear that it won't stand up in court. How can you prevent a kid from participating in school sports just because he/she moved into another district?

So my question is mostly an academic one. I wonder if it would stand up to legal challenge. Maybe you are right, that it would. I'm just not convinced yet. It might be that no one is bothered enough in those states to challenge it. I might ask a couple of folks from the local high school association and get their opinion. Interesting topic.

I might also add that each state seems to be different in terms of the importance that it places on competitive balance vs. the freedom of the students to do what they want.

In Georgia, for example, the state high school association seems very unwilling to make rules that restrict what student-athletes can do for the sake of making make the playing field more even. There is no multiplier to move private schools into higher classes. Private schools and public schools competed together until a small group of publics threatened to secede from the association last year. But private schools still play with the publics in the top five classes, and they thoroughly dominate sports. One private school won something like 11 of a possible 13 spring-sports state titles last year, competing mostly against public schools.

Also, student-athletes can transfer easily and remain eligible. You don't have to sit out a year like in some states. State titles in basketball cannot be won without at least one major transfer. The state association is not interested in checking that. They've never considered rules to keep teammates on club teams from being on the same high school team. There are rules against recruiting, but they're almost impossible to enforce. The attitude seems to be ''this is a free country.''

All of which is fine. Not criticizing. Just makes me wonder whether what goes in one state, where the state association commonly makes rules for competitive balance, would not fly in another, where any attempt at restricting player eligibility would get a lot of lawyers involved.

Just a theory.

Upon further research, it appears that they can't event practice together. Its the period of the year that the kid is enrolled in that school. If a player moves into a district that would exceed the 5 player max...someone has to go until the schools SB season is over. The student that is found in violation is deemed intelligible for the remainder of the year in ALL sports!!!

It is interesting.

The purpose of the rule is to actually protect the athlete. What it tries to eliminate is the school having the power to persuade/pressure its players to only play for the school team year round, a "HS travel team". Let's take the dead periods when a HS coach can't be involved, all a smart HS coach would have to do is have a backup coach for those few weeks to take his place and carry out his normal activities. He technically would still be "the man", but not officially.

I believe the 50% rule was added in TN in the 2000's because of this^^^^^^^.

Each state is different for sure, I can't tell you how many weekends DD turned down to play with Mississippi TB teams during our HS season. Mississippi doesn't have the school rules we do.

I also don't think that ''you have a choice to play by the rules or not'' is a good legal defense.

Click to expand...

Look at it this way. Let's say your DD is 15 but you feel she should be able to play 12u in ASA. It's a rule that she can't, you know that going into it.

In Georgia, for example, the state high school association seems very unwilling to make rules that restrict what student-athletes can do for the sake of making make the playing field more even. There is no multiplier to move private schools into higher classes. Private schools and public schools competed together until a small group of publics threatened to secede from the association last year. But private schools still play with the publics in the top five classes, and they thoroughly dominate sports. One private school won something like 11 of a possible 13 spring-sports state titles last year, competing mostly against public schools.

Click to expand...

How do you classify school athletics? By student body size? It would have to be a huge private school to reach our top athletic division.

Players from the same HS team can not go to to a clinic/camp together if they number over 4. However, in the State of Illinois, they can play on the same travel team. There are entire teams in the State of Illinois comprised of players from one HS. In fact, my dd played on a team that was comprised of all players from one HS and she was the only one from another HS.

Cannonball said:

Players from the same HS team can not go to to a clinic/camp together if they number over 4. However, in the State of Illinois, they can play on the same travel team. There are entire teams in the State of Illinois comprised of players from one HS. In fact, my dd played on a team that was comprised of all players from one HS and she was the only one from another HS.

Coach James, there should be a place on line where this is laid out by Indiana's High School Association. I can't see how they can bar any incoming freshman since there is no guarantee that they will make any HS team.

Click to expand...

I argued that point several times. They insisted that it includes incoming freshmen, regardless of whether or not they have made the team yet.

The following if from the Indiana Athletic Association rules:

Rule 15-3 During Summer–Summer begins with Monday of Week 49 (June 9, 2014), or the close of the school year, whichever comes first Student athletes who are playing on an IHSAA high school softball team may not begin participation on a non-school team until their high school team is eliminated from the IHSAA tournament series, or if they are not released from their high school softball team. During the summer, unlimited numbers of players from the same high school team may participate on a non-school softball team until the end of summer, which is Monday of Week5 (August 5, 2014)

Read more:

http://www.ihsaa.org/Portals/0/girls%20sports/softball/Participation%20Rules%20For%20Softball.pdf

Coach, If you read the link I posted, the seems to be a date that the limitations begin. If these students participate in groups larger than 5 including incoming freshmen after a date then they are breaking the rules. Rule 15-3 is cited above. Read all of the rules and see what you think.

Cannonball said:

Coach, If you read the link I posted, the seems to be a date that the limitations begin. If these students participate in groups larger than 5 including incoming freshmen after a date then they are breaking the rules. Rule 15-3 is cited above. Read all of the rules and see what you think.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the link... I had already read that part several times. I was hoping for a loop hole of calling my practices as an "open gym" available to everyone but obviously not advertised... and I was looking for a blurred definition of the 5 kids. Something like no more than 5 can participate within the same game. That way we'd just rotate who has to sit from game to game. But it looks as though their eligibility will be compromised if we push it. So I now have to decide who has to go until next summer.