One-Case Causes
August 27, 2013
One of the characteristics I look for in leaders is the ability and courage to ignore certain problems. To not get worked up about every little thing and even some bigger things. To stay focused on long-term goals and objectives in the midst of fad and frenzy. To distinguish the merely hot topics from the much more important topics.
“One-care causes” – projects or campaigns launched to address an isolated incident, even of high profile – can drain the resources and distract an organization from the larger and longer lasting issues that demand even more attention than we may be devoting to them.
We must not confuse one incident with a trend. We shouldn’t assume that an isolated situation demands an immediate solution, or that every single problem needs a top-down, systemic remedy.
Sometimes a problem – ineligibility, forfeit, unsportsmanlike act – really is limited to a particular student or school, or confined to a single coach, contest or community. And in those situations, leadership means leaving them alone and letting the matter be handled by people closer to those situations.
Controlling Authority
September 22, 2017
On occasion, someone who does not like a rule of sports applied to his or her child’s situation will suggest that the Michigan High School Athletic Association has misunderstood or misapplied the rule ... and then proceeds to tell us (or a court of law) what the rule really says or means.
At such times, we are tempted to quote from the Honorable Frank H. Easterbrook’s Foreword to Reading Law by Antonin Scalia and Bryan A. Garner. Judge Easterbrook, who retired in 2013 from the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, wrote: “The text’s author, not the interpreter, gets to choose how language will be understood and applied.”
The true and intended meaning and application of MHSAA rules and regulations are determined at the time they are adopted by their authors – MHSAA Representative Council and staff – not at the time they are challenged by those who find the meaning and application inconvenient.
For this reason, courts customarily, and correctly, do not intervene ... do not substitute their judgment for that of the authors and administrators of the rules.
The controlling case in Michigan, by the Michigan Court of Appeals in 1986, held that courts are not the proper forum for making or reviewing decisions concerning the eligibility of students in interscholastic athletics.