In a landmark decision, an Ohio judge today ruled in favor of Oklahoma State lefthander Andrew Oliver in his lawsuit against the NCAA. Erie County judge Tyge M. Tone ruled that the NCAA cannot restrict a player’s right to have legal representation when negotiating a professional contract and awarded an injunction to restore Oliver’s eligibility. The decision invalidated the NCAA’s "no agent" and "restitution" rules
"I’m ecstatic," said Rick Johnson, Oliver’s lawyer, on Thursday night. "We wanted three things–to have those two rules thrown out and to have Andy’s eligibility restored–and we got all of them . . . To have a complete win–hardly ever do you win everything. To have a complete win is as unusual in law as it is anywhere else. Having a complete win here is not an anomaly–it shows you how one-sided the argument is here. The NCAA is a bully, and they’ve been beating up on these kids and these schools for years, and everybody’s been taking it. I can’t believe people put up with it, I really can’t."
Oliver was originally ruled ineligible by Oklahoma State (under NCAA pressure) on the eve of OSU’s 2008 regional opener for violating the NCAA’s "no agent" rule (NCAA Bylaw 12.3.2.1) as a high school senior, when the Twins drafted him in the 17th round and his advisors had contact with the organization on his behalf. Essentially, Oliver was punished for having his advisor/lawyer, Tim Barratta, present during a contract negotiation. But as Tone pointed out in his decision, the NCAA bylaws permit student-athletes to have attorneys, and the NCAA is not authorized to prevent attorneys from providing their clients with competent legal service.
"For a student-athlete to be permitted to have an attorney and then to tell that student athlete that his attorney cannot be present during the discussion of an offer from a professional organization, is akin to hiring a doctor but the doctor is told by the hospital board and the insurance company that he (the doctor) cannot be present when the patient meets with a surgeon because the conference may improve his patient’s decision making power," Tone wrote in the decision. "Bylaw 12.3.2.1 is unreliable (capricious) and illogical (arbitrary) and indeed stifles what attorneys are trained and retained to do."
Thursday’s ruling means Oliver will likely be able to participate in Oklahoma State’s season opener against Brigham Young on Feb. 20, and Oklahoma State need not fear consequences of the "restitution" rule. Under that rule, the NCAA could penalize OSU after the fact for any games Oliver participates in if today’s ruling were to be reversed later on appeal. But Tone wrote in the decision that the "restitution" rule (also known as NCAA Bylaw 19.7) is "overreaching and interferes with the judicial power of the court system."
Oklahoma State, which filed an appeal with the NCAA to restore Oliver’s eligibility in the fall, issued a statement Thursday night in response to the decision.
“We are reviewing the decision from the court in Ohio and will determine a course of action at the appropriate time,” OSU director of communications Gary Shutt said in the statement.
The NCAA issued its own statement through spokeswoman Stacey Osburn:
"We are disappointed in the judge’s ruling. The bylaws related to agent relationships are important principles our colleges and universities have established to protect and preserve amateurism standards. We intend to seek a review of the decision by a higher court, and we are hopeful these significant standards will be preserved."
Tone addressed the "amateurism" issue in his decision.
"This Court appreciates that a fundamental goal of the member institutions and the Defendant is to preserve the clear line of demarcation between amateurism and professionalism," the judge wrote. "However, to suggest that Bylaw 12.3.2.1 accomplishes that purpose by instructing a student-athlete that his attorney cannot do what he has hired him or her to do, is simply illegitimate . . . no entity, other than that one designated by the state, can dictate to an attorney where, what, how or when he should represent his client. With all due respect, surely that decision shall not be determined by the NCAA and its member institutions, no matter what the Defendant utters is the purpose of the rule."
The jury trial phase of the case, to determine any monetary damages the NCAA might owe Oliver, will begin on March 20.
In the meantime, Oliver can focus again on baseball.
"Andy’s delighted to have his life back," Johnson said. "This is not just him–this is a team sport. He’s delighted to have his team’s life back, his coaches’ life back. It’s not just Andy that lost his postseason last year, it’s his whole team, and he’s just delighted that now there’s no uncertainty about who was right and wrong. The NCAA ruined 35 kids’ dreams last year. That’s a lot of harm."
|
Comments will be monitored prior to being added to the site. Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be rejected. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. We have chosen to open up commenting to everyone, so comment away! We want to hear from each and every one of you! Leave a comment. |
About This Blog
Categories
Archives
Syndicate This Blog
Blogs
BaseballAmerica.com
Search This Blog
either way. Rules are rules and he broke them. Why is the perception of A-Rod so bad, hey at least he didn’t break the MLB rules in 2001-2003. Remember it was not banned then.
Posted by John | February 13, 2009 at 12:21 pm | ShortcutWhat this ruling does is teach the kids that they can break the rules. And if they cry hard enough, they will get their way. The fact is this has been in NCAA rule since I can remember and he broke it. He should be punished, as well as the team as the rule says. You want to point a finger, point one at the coach and the Athletic department at Oklahoma for not explaining the rules to their players. That is what THEY are supposed to do, that is why if the rules are broken the team eligibility is in jeopardy.
This teaches the youth that if they cry long enough or act as if they didn’t know what they were doing was wrong Cry, and you will be forgiven. It is unfortunate, but it figures you would have to leave a republican state where real Cowboys who take responsibility for their actions have to seek ruling from Ohio… Swing state-
Finally, someone put the NCAA in it’s place. They’ve had ridiculous rulings for years. Like the one football recruit who died and his parents couldn’t afford a funeral; so one of the boosters offered to pay for it and the NCAA said the school he was affiliated with would get in trouble. Maybe this is the first step in taking down that terrible monster. Plus getting Oliver back will make the Big 12 even more interesting.
Posted by Beau McDaniel | February 13, 2009 at 10:25 pm | ShortcutFinally, a sane and logical answer to the need of protecting a student athletes intrests.
Posted by Bill Rehman | February 15, 2009 at 10:50 am | ShortcutThe NCAA’s only intrest should be maintaing an athlete’s amatuer status. By definition, a professional is a player who is financially compensated for his performance. A player should not have to risk making poor career descions for his future in order to protect his amatuer status for today.
As an amatuer baseball coach of over 20 years, I have been faced with questions from athletes and parents regarding these types of descions.
Just as I do not want a lawyer advising my player on hitting mechanics, it is not in my players’ intrest to take contract negotiating advice from me.
If the NCAA focuses on enforcing academic eligibilty and graduation success, both the institution and the student athlete are better served.
NCAA would not allow my son at DBU to be redshirtd with only 2 innings pitched. The NCAA is not interested in helping kids and their future.
Posted by Bing Bingham | February 15, 2009 at 6:35 pm | ShortcutSo if I’m interpreting this correct, any amateur baseball player can retain an agent and meet with and negotiate with them and have them negotiate with a MLB team on their behalf so long as the agent calls themselves a “lawyer” and not an “adviser or “agent”?
Posted by Steve | February 16, 2009 at 10:07 am | Shortcut[...] Tigers second round pick, Andy Oliver was involved in a pickle of a lawsuit over the past [...]
Posted by American Football NFL » Detroit Tigers Draft Links | June 10, 2009 at 6:01 pm | Shortcut[...] ecstatic,” Johnson told Aaron Fitt of Baseball America. “We wanted three things–to have those two rules thrown out [...]
Posted by Paxton’s attorney may be key to understanding lawsuit « BluGrass Baseball | December 3, 2009 at 8:51 am | Shortcut[...] the Oliver decision actually said was that the NCAA has no power to regulate attorneys. While Judge Tyge M. Tone spoke [...]
Posted by The Bylaw Blog | Why Do You Keep Withholding? | March 3, 2010 at 1:19 pm | Shortcut