PDA

View Full Version : Interesting story....Tough decision for Duncanville ISD Athletic Director



kaorder1999
03-27-2009, 12:45 PM
Parents aim to get Duncanville track athletes reinstated

02:16 AM CDT on Thursday, March 26, 2009

By DAMON L. SAYLES / The Dallas Morning News
dsayles@dallasnews.com

DESOTO – A group of concerned parents, along with volunteers and summer track coaches, are working to get Duncanville track and field athletes reinstated after they were suspended for the remainder of the season by school administrators.

The parental group met Wednesday in nearby DeSoto to discuss plans to meet with Duncanville ISD officials, including athletic director Kevin Ozee and head track coach Derek Dorris, after Ozee issued 60-day suspensions to seven athletes – Kennedy Daugherty, Issac Ogunlade, Gabe Castillo, Reggie Reed, Jacolby Sternes, Jonathon Cook and Aaron Frazier. Group coordinator Boutique Banks-Adkison is requesting a meeting with officials expeditiously, as the District 7-5A track meet is in less than two weeks.

Ozee said he suspended the athletes after they competed at the Lancaster Invitational Meet of Champions on March 14, despite being instructed by Dorris not to compete because of unfavorable weather conditions. Ozee said the athletes entered the event as unattached competitors, or athletes who enter without affiliation to a school. That, according to UIL rules, is a violation.

"We're going to go on a chain of command," Banks-Adkison said. "I was told we need to talk to Kevin Ozee first, then talk to superintendent Alfred Ray. We'll go whatever route we need to go to get this situated, because it's not fair to these athletes who have worked so hard."

Section 1207 (d) of the UIL Constitution and Contest Rules state high school students "shall not be permitted to enter unattached" in any UIL member-sponsored athletic event.

"I'm getting criticized because it's pretty harsh, but the kids were warned about doing this at the beginning of the season," Ozee said. "We try to educate them about the UIL rules. I feel terrible for the kids, but I've got an entire program to run. We can't turn a blind eye to this."

Dorris did not return phone calls Wednesday.

Most of the suspended athletes, and some of their teammates still on the team, were at Wednesday's meeting. Of the seven suspended, Daugherty, Castillo, Ogunlade and Frazier are seniors.

"Once I heard it was 60 days, I mean, the season's over after that. It was no point in even staying out there," Castillo said. "This was what I was depending on for a scholarship."

Among the supporters in attendance was William Henderson, who volunteered his coaching services with Duncanville's program last season. Henderson has watched the athletes grow at the school and through summer track.

"This track team had the potential to be special," Henderson said. "We haven't been told what rule was violated. If rules were broken, I think 60 days is a little bit harsh."

Parents said they were upset with the ruling and that they didn't receive correspondence via a letter until days after the incident. Duncanville was on spring break the week following the Lancaster meet.

"I feel for him, because I know it's my son's passion," said Sharon Willis, Reed's mother. "He's been walking around trying to figure out what happened. No one's really telling him anything."

Cook's mother, Emma, added: "You hate it for the seniors. They're trying to go to college with [track]."

Ozee said the violation was reported last Monday and has been turned in to the UIL compliance office. The UIL did not return late Wednesday calls.

Three of the seven were a part of the 4x400 relay team that has the state's top recorded time. Akeem Banks, a relay member and Banks-Adkison's son, thought the team was in the clear because they did not compete wearing Duncanville paraphernalia, and the team's scores were not counted in the final standings.

"We were pretty much told we could run," Banks said, "but they wouldn't post our times."

Athletes who violate the UIL's "unattached participation" rule may sustain a penalty of suspension from competition for a maximum of three years, according to the constitution. The rule also states a penalty for violation shall be assessed against the high school sponsoring the meet.

Lancaster boys track and field coach and meet director Greg Williams has declined to comment until after he has heard something directly from the UIL.

kaorder1999
03-27-2009, 12:46 PM
pretty interesting story. I cant wait to see how the UIL handles it. The parents are saying that 60-days is too much of a punishment when the UIL could actually sispend a kid for 3 years from competing. Hmmm.....

44INAROW
03-27-2009, 01:18 PM
I don't understand:doh: They were told NOT to participate, They did participate which is (according to the article) against UIL rules - along with the fact disobeying their coach. Rules are put in place, why is it consistantly "the coaches fault" when kids break the rules?

Johnny Utah
03-27-2009, 01:22 PM
Great point 44. What if they competed but got hurt?? Who's fault then?? What if they competed when told not to due to the weather and one was struck by lightning? Who's fault then??

44INAROW
03-27-2009, 01:31 PM
Originally posted by kaorder1999


Ozee said he suspended the athletes after they competed at the Lancaster Invitational Meet of Champions on March 14, despite being instructed by Dorris not to compete because of unfavorable weather conditions. Ozee said the athletes entered the event as unattached competitors, or athletes who enter without affiliation to a school. That, according to UIL rules, is a violation.

"We're going to go on a chain of command," Banks-Adkison said. "I was told we need to talk to Kevin Ozee first, then talk to superintendent Alfred Ray. We'll go whatever route we need to go to get this situated, because it's not fair to these athletes who have worked so hard."

Section 1207 (d) of the UIL Constitution and Contest Rules state high school students "shall not be permitted to enter unattached" in any UIL member-sponsored athletic event.

"Once I heard it was 60 days, I mean, the season's over after that. It was no point in even staying out there," Castillo said. "This was what I was depending on for a scholarship."

consequences of your actions Mr Castillo - you made the decision to run AGAINST the rules.



"This track team had the potential to be special," Henderson said. "We haven't been told what rule was violated. If rules were broken, I think 60 days is a little bit harsh."

Mr Henderson, you were told NOT to run - that is the rule you broke..

kaorder1999
03-27-2009, 01:38 PM
it just amazes me how people try to justify certain actions. In their heads, they did nothing wrong and that amazes me!

44INAROW
03-27-2009, 01:47 PM
As long as parents and/or coordinators, such as Ms Boutique Banks-Adkison fight the battles, the kids will never learn their actions have consequences. This is not to say that parents shouldn't support their children when they think they've been "done wrong". But, based on the facts given, these young men made an unfortunate decision and they need to live with the consequences.

kaorder1999
03-27-2009, 01:48 PM
just kind of a big WOW for me!

LH Panther Mom
03-27-2009, 08:48 PM
Originally posted by 44INAROW
I don't understand:doh: They were told NOT to participate, They did participate which is (according to the article) against UIL rules - along with the fact disobeying their coach. Rules are put in place, why is it consistantly "the coaches fault" when kids break the rules?
:hand: That's asking a whole lot of folks! :doh: ;)

kepdawg
03-27-2009, 09:15 PM
Originally posted by Ernest T Bass
Part of this story was left out. We were at this track meet. The Lancaster coaches told them that it would be fine as long as they didn't wear Duncanville jerseys and their scores wouldn't be posted.

That's in the story, but Duncanville athletes should follow the direction of Duncanville coaches not Lancaster coaches.

westcoast54
03-27-2009, 10:07 PM
Originally posted by Ernest T Bass
Well, the way I understood it at the meet, the Duncanville coach never actually said "Don't compete", he just pulled the team out b/c of the weather. The kids wanted to run anyway, so they went and the Lancaster coach(running the meet) told them it would be ok. I dont think they were ever actually told "We're pulling out of the meet, but you can't go on your own either". So, when they went, and the Lancaster coach gave them the stipulations, they figured they were ok.
It won't hurt my feelings if we don't see those guys again. They gave us all we wanted. But, Id hate to see them pay for what was really someone else's mistake. I can promise you that I could go up to a kid from another school and tell him something like that, and he'd believe me b/c Im a coach and I should know what Im talking about. The Lancaster coach shouldn't come out of this unscathed.

Sorry....but if the coach pulls the "TEAM" out of the meet I would think that common sense would tell you that the coach doesn't want you to compete.

44INAROW
03-27-2009, 10:24 PM
I don't know how they do it "up north" but down here, teams pay to participate in track meets. I don't know if it's done that way across the state or not. I wonder who paid the entrance fee for the participants? Also, out of respect to the Duncanville coach, it seems to me the Lancaster coach should have told the boys that he appreciated the fact they wanted to participate but they need to have their coach sign them up. Just my 2 cents.

westcoast54
03-28-2009, 11:39 AM
Originally posted by 44INAROW
I don't know how they do it "up north" but down here, teams pay to participate in track meets. I don't know if it's done that way across the state or not. I wonder who paid the entrance fee for the participants? Also, out of respect to the Duncanville coach, it seems to me the Lancaster coach should have told the boys that he appreciated the fact they wanted to participate but they need to have their coach sign them up. Just my 2 cents.

We pay entry fees up here too. I agree that the Lancaster coaches should have told them to have their coach sign them up. I bet there is some money missing when Duncanville gets their entry fee back for those four taking part in the meet.

Trashman
03-28-2009, 12:11 PM
Sounds like there is more to this than meets the eye. Based on the story, I agree that they should have been suspended, but 60 days sounds a little harsh. :(

Emerson1
03-28-2009, 12:18 PM
Originally posted by Trashman
but 60 days sounds a little harsh. :(
Considering a positive drug test only gets you 30

OldBison75
03-28-2009, 02:50 PM
Who said what dose not matter much. The fact is, the boys violated UIL rules after being pulled from the meet by the coach. The coach now has to take disciplinary action to try and salvage the season for the rest of the team. Taking no action would probably be an admission of the coach condoning rules violations that the UIL will probably sanction probation on the coach and school. If he punishes the boys, he angers the families and maybe saves the chance for the remainder of the team to compete and win some medals at the district and regional competitions. The host team coach will probably be sanctioned too for allowing the boys to participate. So, 60 days is not bad considering they will be disallowed by UIL to compete for UIL sanctioned track for this season anyhow. If they just accept the decision of the coach that the track meet would pose a injury risk, don't compete behind his back, and don't put the other coach in a position to violate UIL rules, this would be a non-issue.

Z motion 10 out on 2
03-28-2009, 07:54 PM
Tough deal. The kids should not have run.

westcoast54
03-28-2009, 10:24 PM
Originally posted by Ernest T Bass
Unfortunately, it does matter. The UIL handbook clearly states that it's the responsibility of the coaches to know and adhere to the UIL rules, and to educate the kids and parents about the rules. The only people involved who knew that it was a UIL violation were the Duncanvile coach and the Lancaster coach.
There is alot of gray area in this situation, but I dont think being suspended for the remainder of the season is the answer.

There's NO gray area! Coach pulled the TEAM out of the meet. Told the kids they were NOT running. Where's the gray area? And YES, I deal with teenager's every day. In fact I've done it for fifteen years as a coach and 17 as a parent. I applaud the Duncanville coach. He's doing the right thing.

SHSBulldog00
03-28-2009, 10:30 PM
60 days is extremely long. Anything else happen to lead to this suspension?