"Why Can't My Son Play Tennis?" A call for high school athletic associations to revamp the 50% rule

Journal of Law and Education, Jan 2002 by Yahyawi, Samer

In addition to the "injury exception," the second solution that needs to be implemented is publication of the association's rules and the interpretations of those rules. Coaches should not have to second-guess what the rules might actually mean. What is most shocking is that IHSAA places the burden of knowing all the rules and what they mean on the student-athletes, coaches and high schools. As the Pearson case described, the IHSAA did not publish its interpretation of the 50% rule in either its IHSAA Bulletin or in any other publication.36 Since Indiana high schools have to abide by IHSAA rules and standards, it is only fair and appropriate to give written notice and clarification of what those rules and standards actually entail.

Finally, courts need to relax the standard of review when assessing the decisions of athletic associations regarding the eligibility of student-athletes. When courts recognize that a rule is ambiguous, they should allow the reasonable interpretations of the high school staff to trump the interpretation of the athletic association, even if athletic associations have applied the rule consistently. The court in Pearson should have overturned the decision of the IHSAA on the theory that if the IHSAA, on its own, admits to an ambiguity in one of the rules, like the IHSAA did in Pearson," any reasonable interpretations of the rules made by high school staff would govern the court's decision and the outcome of the lawsuit.

III. Conclusion

As this article has indicated, the rules promulgated by the IHSAA must be reviewed to become equitable to all parties. If a violation of a rule has occurred, the rules must be enforced to ensure fairness to all participants. Nonetheless, athletic associations, like the IHSAA, should revamp the 50% rule to allow reasonable interpretations of the rule, and to account for students who could not participate due to injury or a medical condition. Otherwise, the 50% rule should be eliminated entirely.

Also, athletic associations at the very least need to clarify the rules and standards that they incorporate into their by-laws by publishing their interpretations in a manual or bulletin for all high school coaches and student-athletes to read. Also, courts need to be willing to "go against the grain" and develop a new standard for judicial review that interferes with the association's eligibility decisions.

What is so vital to remember is that sports and extracurricular activities are all that some students have to succeed in life. Sports and extracurricular activities provide a clear nexus between education and future opportunities. There are countless stories of young boys and girls earning athletic scholarships to universities all around the country. But for these scholarships, some students would not have been able to afford college tuition, fees, text books and most importantly, the education that one receives from an institution of high learning. We should not strip away a student's ability to engage in high school sports and thus, strip away his or her future because the student did not engage in more than 50% of their sporting competitions during the season.