Eligibility - KC Hockey - Fitzpatrick |
(
Eligibility Ruling
) |
2013-14 SeasonOctober 25, 2013
To: Wade Kolmel, Keyano College RE: KC Men’s Hockey, Tommy Fitzpatrick Facts: Tommy Fitzpatrick is a member of the Keyano College Men’s Hockey team. He has played in four (4) games for KC this season, two (2) losses to SAIT and two (2) victories over Portage College. From 2009-2012, Mr. Fitzpatrick played three (3) seasons at a Division III NCAA school. Prior to that, he spent the 2008-2009 season playing for Brock University in the CIS. The purpose of this ruling is to determine Mr. Fitzpatrick’s ACAC eligibility. Of note, Mr. Fitzpatrick played professionally following the 2011-2012 season. KC has provided a copy of an undated letter from the NCAA school, indicating that had Mr. Fitzpatrick not played professionally (which ended his NCAA eligibility), he would have been eligible to return for one (1) more season of eligibility. KC relies on this letter to support its assertion that Mr. Fitzpatrick is eligible to compete in the ACAC. I have also been provided with a copy of a summary of the facts prepared by KC, which confirms that it was aware of Mr. Fitzpatrick’s three (3) years of participation at the NCAA school preceded by one (1) season at Brock. Ruling: The relevant ACAC Operating Code Section is copied below. From Article I Section 5: 1.4.3. Play in Non-CCAA Jurisdictions: The student-athlete who has completed his/her post-secondary eligibility within any non-CCAA four (4) year post-secondary jurisdiction (e.g. NCAA, NAIA) shall not be eligible for a fifth year of participation. (Added September, 2007) I have confirmed with the Athletic Director of the NCAA school that its athletes are entitled to four (4) years of eligibility. I have further confirmed that Mr. Fitzpatrick’s season of CIS participation counts against his four (4) years of NCAA eligibility. As such, when Mr. Fitzpatrick enrolled at the NCAA school, he should have had three (3) remaining seasons of eligibility. He then proceeded to use three (3) seasons of NCAA eligibility. From our investigation, it appears that the NCAA school either did not know about Mr. Fitzpatrick’s season of CIS play or that the NCAA school was under the mistaken impression that Mr. Fitzpatrick played for a club team while at Brock. Which of those alternatives is accurate is not relevant to my ruling beyond the fact that, when the NCAA school confirmed to KC that Mr. Fitzpatrick would have been eligible to return had he not turned pro, it is clear that the NCAA school was not taking into account Mr. Fitzpatrick’s CIS participation and thus their conclusion was erroneous. Rule 1.4.3 states that a student athlete who “has completed his/her post-secondary eligibility within any non-CCAA four (4) year post-secondary jurisdiction” is not eligible for a 5th year of participation. Both the NCAA school in question and Brock University are four (4) year institutions and both are clearly non-CCAA institutions. Mr. Fitzpatrick’s ACAC eligibility comes down to an interpretation of the phrase “has completed.” KC’s position is that it ought to be able to rely on the letter from the NCAA school, which states that Mr. Fitzpatrick (absent turning pro) would have been eligible to return for one (1) more season, as proof that Mr. Fitzpatrick had not completed his post-secondary eligibility and is thus eligible within the ACAC. I am afraid that I cannot agree with such an assertion. In my opinion, I need to look beyond the mere words in the letter in question to ascertain the true facts upon which Mr. Fitzpatrick’s ACAC eligibility should be determined. The facts are clear that Mr. Fitzpatrick participated in a total of four (4) seasons at non-CCAA four (4) year post-secondary jurisdictions. According to the NCAA school, Mr. Fitzpatrick’s one (1) season of CIS participation counts against NCAA eligibility, meaning that Mr. Fitzpatrick’s NCAA eligibility was, in fact, exhausted following the 2011-2012 season. As a result, it is my opinion that Mr. Fitzpatrick does not comply with Rule 1.4.3. To look at the erroneous letter from the NCAA school in a vacuum and to rely on the error to declare Mr. Fitzpatrick eligible notwithstanding the fact that he does not comply with the spirit of Rule 1.4.3 would be in violation of the principles of fairness and would be an affront to members of the ACAC. KC was aware of Mr. Fitzpatrick’s four (4) seasons of non-CCAA participation. The school was also aware of Rule 1.4.3. Rather than rely on the error contained in the letter it received from the NCAA school, KC should have asked for an interpretation from the Commissioner before allowing Mr. Fitzpatrick to compete within the ACAC, pursuant to Article I Section 5 Rule 7.2 of the ACAC Operating Code. In determining the appropriate sanctions for this breach by KC, I have relied on Article I Section 5 Rule 10.1 of the ACAC Operating Code, which reads as follows: 10.1. Use of an Ineligible Student-Athlete
Based on the above, I hereby direct the ACAC Office to change the results of the two (2) KC victories over Portage College to reflect forfeits by KC and to adjust the league standings accordingly. In addition, KC is also fined $500, payable forthwith to the ACAC Office. Sincerely, Bill Hendsbee |