Fair Play: Volleyball coaches vs. Cesafi: Round 1
WALKING out in a sports event is a big mistake, except maybe when teams are trying to prevent an escalation of violence.
Only sore losers, those who want to win at all costs, or people with the mentality of a toddler walk out.
Unless their lives are in danger—which if it were, meant a failure of the organizers—teams should leave the walking, on the court.
There was no threat to life or limb in the Cebu Schools Athletic Foundation Inc. volleyball event--only to egos. But for the University of Southern Philippines Foundation, University of the Visayas and the University of San Carlos, walking out was the only option they thought they have.
Their protest against the University of San Jose-Recoletos was denied.
And like spurned prima donnas who didn’t get their first class seats, they walked out of their semifinal matches.
They wanted to stress a point, they said.
What point?
That it’s their way or the highway?
This brouhaha started when the three schools said Jade Dionson of USJ-R shouldn’t be playing. USJ-R coach Grace Antigua appealed the decision to Commissioner Felix Tiukinhoy, and he granted her request.
Dionson used to study at USPF but left for two years to work, then transferred to USJ-R.
His two-year absence makes his case unique. The Cesafi has a rule requiring transferees to have a one-year residency before they get to play again. This was designed to discourage player piracy.
UV claims a similar case happened in chess and their player was disqualified. Tiukinhoy said the major difference between the two is Antigua appealed the earlier disqualification, UV didn’t.
Tiukinhoy said the residency rule doesn’t apply to Dionson. His isn’t a case of player piracy. He was inactive for two years and since Cesafi doesn’t have a specific rule regarding cases like him, he interpreted the rule in a way that benefits the athlete.
Everyone happy? Nope. The other coaches didn’t like it.
“It reeks of inconsistency,” they said so they fired another appeal, this time to the Cesafi president.
But before Cesafi president Rolly Villa could decide, they walked out.
That showed they weren’t really after his decision, they just wanted to walk out.
The USPF coach must think the decision of Villa, the USPF president, doesn’t matter.
Before Villa could even decide on their protest, they walked out.
The Philippine Football Federation has the perfect rule against walkouts. Under the PFF’s catalogue of punishments, teams who walk out of a tournament get an automatic ban, face further sanctions and lose their right to appeal.
Why? Because by walking out, you show you are no longer willing to listen.
You no longer respect the authority of the organizers.
You no longer care what happens to the tournament.
Last Monday, the USPF coach said he was going to consult a lawyer for another interpretation of Cesafi’s residency rule.
Why? They already walked out. Why are they still chasing ghosts?
By walking out, the coaches showed they no longer respect Cesafi and its rules, why then, do they still insist these rules be interpreted their way?
If they really do get to consult a lawyer and that lawyer gives them the same interpretation as Tiukinhoy’s, would they walk out on him too? Would they find lawyer after lawyer until they hear what they want to hear?
And even if they get the Fortun brothers, whose interpretation matters in the Cesafi anyway?
That of the lawyers’? Or of the commissioner’s?
And if Tiukinhoy has no right to decide on this, what is he there for?
Only sore losers, those who want to win at all costs, or people with the mentality of a toddler walk out.
Unless their lives are in danger—which if it were, meant a failure of the organizers—teams should leave the walking, on the court.
There was no threat to life or limb in the Cebu Schools Athletic Foundation Inc. volleyball event--only to egos. But for the University of Southern Philippines Foundation, University of the Visayas and the University of San Carlos, walking out was the only option they thought they have.
Their protest against the University of San Jose-Recoletos was denied.
And like spurned prima donnas who didn’t get their first class seats, they walked out of their semifinal matches.
They wanted to stress a point, they said.
What point?
That it’s their way or the highway?
This brouhaha started when the three schools said Jade Dionson of USJ-R shouldn’t be playing. USJ-R coach Grace Antigua appealed the decision to Commissioner Felix Tiukinhoy, and he granted her request.
Dionson used to study at USPF but left for two years to work, then transferred to USJ-R.
His two-year absence makes his case unique. The Cesafi has a rule requiring transferees to have a one-year residency before they get to play again. This was designed to discourage player piracy.
UV claims a similar case happened in chess and their player was disqualified. Tiukinhoy said the major difference between the two is Antigua appealed the earlier disqualification, UV didn’t.
Tiukinhoy said the residency rule doesn’t apply to Dionson. His isn’t a case of player piracy. He was inactive for two years and since Cesafi doesn’t have a specific rule regarding cases like him, he interpreted the rule in a way that benefits the athlete.
Everyone happy? Nope. The other coaches didn’t like it.
“It reeks of inconsistency,” they said so they fired another appeal, this time to the Cesafi president.
But before Cesafi president Rolly Villa could decide, they walked out.
That showed they weren’t really after his decision, they just wanted to walk out.
The USPF coach must think the decision of Villa, the USPF president, doesn’t matter.
Before Villa could even decide on their protest, they walked out.
The Philippine Football Federation has the perfect rule against walkouts. Under the PFF’s catalogue of punishments, teams who walk out of a tournament get an automatic ban, face further sanctions and lose their right to appeal.
Why? Because by walking out, you show you are no longer willing to listen.
You no longer respect the authority of the organizers.
You no longer care what happens to the tournament.
Last Monday, the USPF coach said he was going to consult a lawyer for another interpretation of Cesafi’s residency rule.
Why? They already walked out. Why are they still chasing ghosts?
By walking out, the coaches showed they no longer respect Cesafi and its rules, why then, do they still insist these rules be interpreted their way?
If they really do get to consult a lawyer and that lawyer gives them the same interpretation as Tiukinhoy’s, would they walk out on him too? Would they find lawyer after lawyer until they hear what they want to hear?
And even if they get the Fortun brothers, whose interpretation matters in the Cesafi anyway?
That of the lawyers’? Or of the commissioner’s?
And if Tiukinhoy has no right to decide on this, what is he there for?
Comments
What can Ched do about this? And what legal basis are you talking about?