senator pia cayetano on new UAAP rule on residency : “unconstitutional; unjust and cruel to athletes”

we are posting in full statement by senator pia cayetano:

Dear UAAP Board,

Many athletes, former athletes, and parents of athletes are in an uproar over the recent decision of the UAAP board to require graduating high school students to sit out 2 years if they come from a UAAP high school and go to a different UAAP college.

Forgive my ignorance, but what is the 2-year residency requirement for other than to curtail the freedom of the young athlete to choose the college where he wants to study and play?

In the USA, transferring college athletes have a 1-year residency rest before they can play for their new school – only 1 year, and it doesn’t apply to high school students who choose to go to a different college. The 1-year residency rule requires an athlete to sit out one year of competition because transferring student-athletes suffer academically over time. The year-in-residence is meant to help the athlete acclimatize to the new school and adjust academics-wise. [1] So what’s your 2-year rule for?

A student-athlete’s choice of university is influenced not only by athletics, but also by academics, campus life, and personal situation [2], and the 2-year residency encumbers their freedom of choice.

In my humble opinion as an athlete, a parent of both a college and a high school athlete, and a lawyer, the 2-year residency that is currently applied to transferring college students, as well as any residency rule for high school students, deny athletes of their rights to develop their full potential. It goes against the Constitutional mandate to promote sports especially among our youth, and is an unreasonable limit on an athlete’s freedom of choice as well as academic freedom to choose which college to enter into.

Section 19, Article 14, of the 1987 Constitution states that:

“(1) The State shall promote physical education and encourage sports programs, league competitions, and amateur sports, including training for international competitions, to foster self-discipline, teamwork, and excellence for the development of a healthy and alert citizenry.”

Will the new rule help achieve this?

To excel in sports, one needs to be in constant training of both the body and the mind. Do you know what it’s like for an athlete to sit out two seasons? Athletes thrive on competition. That’s what gets us going. That’s what all the hard training is about. Its what makes it all worth while. To make an athlete sit out two seasons? That just kills the dream. Para sa isang atleta, para mo na ring sinabi na wag ka na lang maglaro. Is this what you want to achieve? Seriously?

I am against any kind of residency rule for graduating high school students. For transferring college students, the 1 year residency rule will suffice. Anything more than that is injustice to an athlete.

I will end this letter by citing a provision in our Bill of Rights against cruel and unjust punishment. For an athlete, this 2 year residency rule is cruel and unjust punishment!

source : http://www.mydailyrace.com/?p=2566

 

read : new UAAP rule on residency is unjust, unfair and harms high school athletes

new UAAP rule on residency is unjust, unfair and harms high school athletes

social media was ablaze in the last few days on this new rule of the UAAP on residency:

HIGH school players who will transfer to another UAAP school in college will now have to wait for two years before becoming eligible to play in the league.

The UAAP board on Tuesday approved the recommendation of its amendments committee to increase the residency requirements for transferring high school players from one year to two years.

The new rule, which got the vote of the board during its regular monthly, meeting will take effect immediately and will cover the current batch of graduating high school players in the UAAP.

source : http://www.spin.ph/sports/basketball/news/blow-to-pingoy-astransferees-required-to-undergo-two-year-residency-under-new-uaap-rule

apparently this rule was invented as a reaction to the recruitment war between the Ateneo and FEU on a star high school player of FEU, a two-time MVP in the high school league.

( read here :   http://www.spin.ph/sports/basketball/news/blow-to-pingoy-astransferees-required-to-undergo-two-year-residency-under-new-uaap-rule and here http://www.spin.ph/sports/basketball/news/new-residency-rule-wont-stop-pingoys-switch-to-ateneo-insists-dad)

we think the new rule is all wrong :

• this new rule benefits only the UAAP schools, not anyone else, not the high school athletes and not the league. and the benefit to the schools is just temporary, all it does is delay the playing time and does not totally protect the schools from losing their top high school players to other schools. the obvious intent of the new rule is to prevent or strongly discourage high school athletes from moving to another school for college.  it’s a selfish, misguided rule just for the benefit of the schools.
• it does the most harm to the high school athletes as they are unjustly deprived of playing the sport they love and have labored for for another year. the one year residency to begin with is wrong and extending it for another year makes it doubly wrong.  these high school athletes have been competing, honing and practicing their skills throughout high school and to many it started during their grade school days, this rule puts a two-year stop to that regimen, to that success formula. any athlete know that sustained and continued playing time, specially in competition play and training are key to sports greatness. all athletes know – you stop competitive playing and you don’t improve and to some lose some of your skills while others who continue progress more.
• putting in place rules that have the effect of barring or impeding a high school student from pursuing his college education in the school of his choice is wrong and immoral, specially if this is being done just to protect the school’s college sports program.  the fact is schools have differing quality of education, the same as having differing quality of sports programs. high school students, including athletes choose the best that they can have (and afford). putting in barriers for the students to choose the best or better education and sports program is wrong for the schools to do so.
• it does not make sense that the league is stopping high school students from pursuing greater things for their education and the sport they love.
• the new rule does not make the UAAP league any better nor does it do anything positive to sports, all it does is give the schools some kind of fake psychological benefit.
• the new rule is definitely discriminatory against universities who do not have coed high schools like la salle and ateneo. this will mean their women recruits for the women sports in the UAAP sill need to wait it out for two years. not having female students in their high schools automatically mean they will need to recruit from high school girls.

there is something very wrong with UAAP schools looking for ways to improve their chances at winning games in the league not by improving their sports programs but by imposing rules that discriminate other schools and do nothing but harm high school athletes.

winning UAAP games is best done by winning in the courts during games, not in meeting rooms by creating unfair, discriminatory, harmful and selfish self serving rules. this new UAAP rule does not help the league in any way, all it does is hurt the future and dreams of high school athletes.

read more here : Twitter ablaze as #NewUAAPRule stuns UAAP fans http://www.rappler.com/sports/23150-twitter-ablaze-as-newuaaprule-stuns-uaap-fans