Just some comments, I'm not flaming (at leat trying not too!):
 
Eeyore quoth:
 
>  The most obvious thing is the interviewing of witnesses by Walsh.  This
>is one of those things that people mean when they complain about the NCAA
>abusing due process.  What did Shawn Walsh do?  As one of the prime
>defendents, he and/or his attorney's interviewed potential witnesses; from
>what's been posted, this is all that really is known.  Within the legal
>system, this is a fundamental right (at least, I'm pretty sure it is.  Any
>lawyers in the house?).
 
Yes, it is a fundamental right, but you must first understand when this
right becomes excercisable. First of all, realize that this situtation has
never taken on any "legal" ramifications in the sense of the US Government.
Anyything that has occurred has been in violation of NCAA rules. Therefore,
the NCAA has the right to set whatever "laws" it deems proper, and enforce
them as well.
 
In this case, the NCAA *told* Walsh and the University (as well their
attorneys) that they did not have permission to speak to any witnesses
before representatives from the NCAA could properly evaluate and interview
the witnesses themselves. If this were a problem being taken to court, the
prosecution could request the judge to sign a similar injunction against
the defense. In a general sense, the only time the defense has legal right
to interview the witness (and prepare them for trial) is after depositions
and
affadvaits have been collected.
 
In most cases handled by the legal system, the defendents are not allowed
any contact with any witnesses. Only the attorneys may contact them.
 
Walsh, by speaking with witnesses before any NCAA contact, had the
opportunity to convince them to withhold information. I'm not saying Walsh
actually did this, but the opportunity was there.
 
[snip]
>                                Unlike the legal system, the NCAA (or the
>University of Maine) can't compel testimony, so it tries to prevent these
>meetings from taking place.  Even before the questions about the integrity
>and impartiality of the NCAA begin, it seems to me that we have a real
>problem here.
 
Just my opinion, but I don't think that this is necessarily a problem
regarding enforcement of NCAA rules. If a university or college wishes to
paricipate in NCAA athletics, then they must abide stricly by NCAA rules
and regulations. If they don't, they are then subject to whatever
procedures the NCAA feels are necessary. In this case, this means
preventing contact between Walsh and potential witnesses.
 
This is not to say that the NCAA doesn't have its problems, especially in
regards to situations such as this. However, every single Do and Don't is
clearly stated by the NCAA, as are its procedures and penalties for dealing
with various situations. What many feel is the major problem is that the
NCAA will take a microscope to some programs, and a blindfold to others.
 
The saying goes "It ain't a crime if you don't get caught." Maine got caught.
 
>  I still maintain that we'd be better off dropping the pretense of
>amateurism, which is just as hollow at the collegiate level as it was at
>the Olympics.
 
Agreed, but this all depends on the individual program and the sport
itself. While big-time hockey factories such as UMaine, BU, Minnesota, LSS
etc. are indeed skating a thin line between amateur and professional
programs, many other programs (often less-successful ones, as well as other
sports) are very much existing on the amateur level.
 
>                             There is the problem of simple integrity; the
>athletes are being abused.  The payment for their services is a scholarship
>that many of them are too busy to get the full advantage of; then there are
>the players who aren't on scholarship, who receive no recompense for their
>efforts.  People can talk about the privilege of playing sports; that's
>what IM and club sports are for.
 
Yes, except that most students have to pay additional fees for Intramural-
and Club-level sports. As a past member of the BU Cycling and Snowboarding
teams (both NCAA sanctioned sports, but at BU held Club status), I shelled
out over 1,500 clams every year to participate in a sport I loved.
 
Additionally, if you ask a lot of IM and Club athletes, you'll find out
that very often they spend just as much time practicing and competing as
the NCAA Varsity athletes.
 
A question: Do people out there in Hockey-L feel that college pucksters
cannot take "full advantage" of their scholarships? Or do people feel that
being "given" anything from a minimal scholarship to a full ride is an
advantage in itself? Sometimes I feel that athletes get treated unfairly,
but hey, that's the way the world works, and getting "screwed by the
system" and taken advantage of by the people in power is just another one
of life's lessons.
 
IMHO, if you're getting upwards of $100,000 in scholarships, deal wth it.
 
[big snip]
>What worries me more is the procedure the NCAA uses to go about it's
>investigations; most of them would be thown out by the courts for due
>process violations if they showed up there.
[snip]
>There just is no other way that theould run an investigation.
 
Of course there isn't any other way they could run an investigation! Once
upon a time, schools were expected to police themselves. When this got out
of hand (schools began taking other schools to court!), the NCAA was formed
to serve as a general governing board.
 
Just imagine what would happen if the NCAA worked like the legal system:
 
-- Championships won using ineligible players would be revoked, 10 years later
 
-- We'd have "scholarship chasers" in addition to "ambulance chasers"
 
-- First- and second-year student athletes might get thrown in jail for
underage drinking when doused by champagne after winning a championship
 
-- Recruiting trips would be arranged by lawyers (ooops - that already happens)
 
-- NHL teams would sue the colleges if a draft prospect got got injured
 
-- High-sticking, hitting from behind, and fighting (sorry, "roughing)
would lead to 2-year long personal injury cases, 5 years after the incident
 
-- Ice-T's newest album: "Ref Killer"
 
-- The courts would start DNA testing on sticks, footballs, and
basketballs, because private laywers would start claiming "It wasn't really
Blaine Lacher in goal in the championship... it was Patrick Roy!"
 
-- ESPN would buy out Court TV, name it ESPN3, aka "The Triad"
 
-- The Boosters wouldn't have enough money to bribe Supreme Court
Justices...  then again, them NHL squads have that kind of money
 
-- Lance Ito might end up deciding Walsh's fate
 
 
Jus' trying to inject a little humor :-}
 
 
 
greenie
 
S P O O N ! !
(go BU)
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.