DIII Runner Not Going to Nationals Because of Clerical Mistake by His Coach

I haven't read the posts past the first page, but if you haven't you should get your AD involved immediately - he can talk to someone higher up than who you've been dealing with. Your coach made a mistake, that's it, it happens all the time and he did the right thing by trying to correct it, the NCAA is being too inflexible and you should be allowed in. If you sign a contract for $1 but mistakenly put in $1,000,000 you're not on the hook for the million - it's a mistake -everyone does it. Sometimes a mistake is made that can't be corrected, this is not one of those cases, the NCAA should just switch you to the event you're supposed to be in. You've got to get into contact with someone higher up than the automaton you've been dealing with.

Some minor functionary at an organization whos purpose is to serve the student athlete had the opportunity to correct a minor mistake, the result of which would be to recognize that student athlete's accomplishments, letting him partcipate in a championship event, and that minor functionary chose not to? What a load of crap.

Hoovis 2 wrote:

But, in life, there are always cases that need special consideration. Your wife just had a massive heart attack and you are racing her to the hospital. A police officer pulls you over for speeding.

For those who think a rule is a rule and must be applied in all cases, maybe a closer analogy would be this: a coach has a heart attack sitting at computer just before he makes his entries. Survives, but misses the entry deadline. Calls the NCAA from his hospital bed the next day. Of course the NCAA would allow late entries in this case. So, there is no "absolute" rule. There are always special circumstances. The question is where the line is, and the NCAA has traditionally drawn the line rigidly, even when to do makes them ridiculous. Just as the NCAA could determine that a coach wasn't faking a heart attack and allow late entries, they could examine this situation and see that it was a clerical mistake and not a case of a coach looking for an advantage (as in the hypothetical middle-distance runner).

Someone going to the meet might want to display a poster or two in the stands or a nice "Where's Nick?" banner on the backstretch.

Kinko's wrote:

Someone going to the meet might want to display a poster or two in the stands or a nice "Where's Nick?" banner on the backstretch.

In additon to a banner, someone needs to write up a press release (sound like that's been done already) and print up enough copies for everyone attending the meet and hand them out to people as they enter the stadium. You can even add something like there will be a chant of "Let Nick Run" before the 10K and we would like your support in this matter. Just imagine the field not stepping to the line during the set command and the crowd chantting "let Nick Run" It might not get Nick in the race but it would make for a good SI article and get things changed in the future.

here's an email sent to the ncaa concerning the ludwig situation (not the same, but still unfair), and the response i was given.

(here's what was originally sent to the ncaa)

ms. X,

are you aware that an athlete by the name of steve ludwig is being held out of the track and field national championship meet because of a minor and irrelevant rule that was broken by the school?

steve is ranked #4 on the national list for the 800m, and would be a contender for the national championship, but is being punnished for something he had no control over.

he is a student athlete at uw-parkside, a d2 school in wisconsin. it appears there was confusion as to what the penalty was for not having at least 14 athletes compete in at least 4 meets. the coach had paid a fine in the past for this offense, but was not allowed to pay the fine this year, and was told his athlete could not compete. this is an unfair judgement, and needs to be corrected. steve ludwig should not be held out of this race. an appeal has already been denied.

i am very disappointed with this situation, and although i am not directly involved, feel a major injustice is being done. steve has worked hard and should not be kept out of the meet. he deserves to be there.

is there any way you can help with this?

with all due respect,

X

(here's the response from the ncaa)

X,

I am very aware of this matter. Unfortunately the rule is not

irrelevant and very important to assure member institutions follow the

selection criteria for all athletes being considered for the national

championship. All 88 NCAA championships have criteria that must be

followed for consideration. If not, teams and athletes will not be

considered even if they are ranked highly in an event or within their

region. This is only fair to the other 151 men's track programs that

sponsors track and field and who have done all that they can to make

sure the criteria is met so that their athletes can be considered for

the national championship.

I will not go into this matter any further based on the circumstances of

last year. The committee is fully aware and accountable for all

decisions made in selecting participants into the championship and

holding institutions responsible for meeting selection criteria set.

For additional information I suggest you talk with the Athletics

Director or head coach at the University of Wisconsin- Parkside. Even

more, go onto the NCAA website and review the criteria listed in the

Division II Track and Field Handbook.

http://www.ncaa.org/library/handbooks/trackOutdoor/2006/2006_d2_m_w_odtr

ack_champ_handbook.pdf

Like you, we are also very disappointed that Mr. Ludwig will not be able

to participate. Like Mr. Ludwig, I am sure there are other individuals

who are not able to qualify due to their institutions track program not

meeting the minimum requirements and are very disappointed as well.

X,

NCAA

(here's what was sent back to the ncaa in response)

X,

My main concern is for the athlete, not the structure of the sport they participate in. On that note, I understand why the rule set in place, but still feel that the punishment is misdirected. In the past, a fine was apparently paid as an appropriate and acceptable solution to the problem. I do not understand why this option was not available this year.

Making the point that this has happened before and will happen again to many more athletes makes the situation seem even more unfortunate.

I do not necessarily need a response to this email. I just wanted to bring up the point that this situation seems to me, and many others, to be contradictive, counterproductive, and unjust.

It hardly seems the NCAA is demonstrating "the highest levels of integrity and sportsmanship" as the mission statement suggests, and I don't think the rule itself has "respect for institutional autonomy and philosophical differences" if the purpose of it is to make all the programs similar (some schools have had to cut back on certain programs because of budget problems, and that is part of the reason Parkside could not meet the 14 person requirement).

Although the argument seems futile, and I don't expect a reversal, I hope you can understand my point.

The end doesn't justify the means.

Thank you for your time,

X

In answer to your questions:

1) Yes, email confirmation for entries came within 20 seconds of finishing your entry for nationals.

2) Yes, the rules for the national meet entry is publicized well, we received several emails reminding us, and there was a link the last two weeks about the delcaration process on the site where D3 coaches register and declare.

3) Registration isn't really the right term, but it's close enough. The declaration period for Nationals was confined to a single day this year. From 9 am to 5 pm (it may have been 8 am to 5 pm). But this is the day after all contests had been concluded.

Late entries for about 3 hours AFTER they close have been accepted, but they come with consequence.

And someone TOTALLY hit the nail on the head earlier about declaring and then saying "OOPS I didn't mean to do that" Some years, some events go down to 30th on the performance list, because everyone opts out. What if your kid is 28th, and you don't declare him/her and then see that 29th and 30th did, and got in! Can you say "oops" and make it all better?

I would just like to thank you, whoever you may be for caring on my behalf as an athlete. Also to anyone else that has done or tried to do something about the situation, but has remained unseen or heard, thank you.

Typical bureaucrat pointed you to the rulebook, instead of thinking about a unique situation. Just like all bureaucrats think, completely inside the box. In fact, they don't even realize the box has an exterior.

I feel bad for End and Ludwig, but the only thing that will change this is a continuous public pummeling of the organization by its constituent members. If incidents such as these are forgotten two weeks after the fact, then no good will come from minimal efforts to fix it. It took 20,000,000 illegal immigrants for the public to realize there was an issue, how many cases like this before the problem is seriously addressed?

Thanks.

If the coach received an email confirmation, and the games committee (the NCAA in this case) has the right to declare a reasonable entry deadline, then there is really no case at all here.

Letting him in would be unethical on the part of the NCAA.

Unfortunate for Nick, and I truely hate that the mistake was made, but nevertheless the NCAA is doing everything they can to assure that these mistakes are not made.

Bottom line: The coach should enter early and by all means review the confirmation email showing what you just entered (or declared).

The coach made the declaration error, the NCAA is following their guidelines (correctly), and the athlete is paying for it (unfortunate).

Sometimes life isn't fair....welcome to the world most of us work in and the one many of you soon will.

Do you understand what the term integrity means??? How about the concept of its meaning?

You are right, the NCAA should do everything in their power to assure that these mistakes are not made...but guess what "mr. life isn't fair", it keeps happening!!!

The NCAA has to uphold full participation in the sport by establishing a "unique circumstance clause" to close the loop on "unforseen" problems such as this...it's a risk management concept that can and should be involved with administration policies...div III athletics is founded upon full participation and for the betterment of student-athletes, but yet the NCAA does not take in consideration of the student-athlete due to an "adminstrative error" and because of their "in-action", even though they did not cause that action, cases such as this will keep occuring into the future. Stepping in and doing the right thing is not wrong and this would NOT lead to a slippery slope precedent, because the NCAA HAS THE FINAL SAY IN EVERYTHING BECAUSE IT IS A PRIVATE ORGANIZATION.

Yeah, you're right, life isn't fair for true idealists of the sport who want to uphold its true and ideal integrity.... unlike you.

So let me get this straight. Ludwig's coach has broken this rule before, been fined, and yet he continued to break this rule. He's what we call a habitual offender. If someone continues to break the same rule or law over and over, it makes sense if the penalties increase. Obviously the coach did not learn his lesson.And I bet the fine is significatly less than the cost of funding a full program. Must be nice to focus on only a small handful of athletes and pay a few bucks at the end of the year. Sucks that an athlete had to get caught up in this...but how can you effectively punish the coach/program without having an effect on the athlete?

ncaa's response wrote:

the coach had paid a fine in the past for this offense, but was not allowed to pay the fine this year, and was told his athlete could not compete. this is an unfair judgement, and needs to be corrected. steve ludwig should not be held out of this race. an appeal has already been denied.

Just wanted to quote this for emphasis. We all know coaches who will do this (or have done this). Not everyone is as nice and full of intergrity as those on this thread want to believe.

disagree wrote:

And someone TOTALLY hit the nail on the head earlier about declaring and then saying "OOPS I didn't mean to do that" Some years, some events go down to 30th on the performance list, because everyone opts out. What if your kid is 28th, and you don't declare him/her and then see that 29th and 30th did, and got in! Can you say "oops" and make it all better?

The NCAA however has the responsibility to provide a "fair and sportsmanlike" environment. That's straight from their mission statement.

Regardless of your jaded ramblings, the NCAA is in the wrong here in the end.

The coach made a point to declare him in the 10K...he wasn't "opting out" of the 10K....I wonder if the coach submitted his 10k time 30:xx as the 5k time...if that is the case...there was an obvious intent to declare him in the 10K. Bottom line is that the coach MADE A DECLARATION..if he didn't make a declaration...I'd totally would agree with you.

What you are failing to understand is that this is not an unforeseen problem. The problem is foreseen in so much as they have taken preventative steps to see that this doesn't happen.

They sent a confirmation email confirming the declaration!

What do you suggest? Calling every coach and asking, "Are you sure this is what you really wanted?"

You're right, the coach made a declaration...IN A DIFFERENT EVENT. He botched it, and the deadline had passed when he realized the error. So go ahead, hang up a banner, chant "let Nick run," email everyone and their brother, it's not going to change anything.

unethical my ass wrote:

The coach made a point to declare him in the 10K...he wasn't "opting out" of the 10K....I wonder if the coach submitted his 10k time 30:xx as the 5k time...if that is the case...there was an obvious intent to declare him in the 10K. Bottom line is that the coach MADE A DECLARATION..if he didn't make a declaration...I'd totally would agree with you.

I suggest we do not punish the athlete for a mistake by the coach.

The coach wasn't opting out, in fact he did the right thing by not declaring him for the 5000-a race he knew the athlete wasn't going to race, and thus potentially taking a spot from someone else who would run the race if it went down far enough on the provisional list.

I'm really amazed at all the rules are rules people and ask if you were the athlete and this happened to you, if you'd feel the same way? I highly doubt you'd think it's fair to stay home because of a mistake discovered early and easily fixed.

The life isn't fair argument is probably the dumbest justification for doing something unfair I've ever heard. This mistake was easily fixable and the NCAA is messed up not to fix it.