IHSA denies waiver for PBL athlete in basic training

BLOOMINGTON — The Illinois High School Association board of directors on Monday voted to deny a waiver that would have allowed Paxton-Buckley-Loda senior Eddie Nuss to play in the first football game of the season despite not having participated in the mandated 12 days of practice.

Nuss, a two-way PBL starter at fullback and linebacker a year ago, is currently in Army basic training in Fort Benning, Ga., and won’t be back until Aug. 19 — just a week before the season opener at Gibson City-Melvin-Sibley.

"I’m disappointed in them,” Nuss’ father, Pat, said of the IHSA. “It’s not like he’s on vacation. He’s not running around doing something illegal. He’s doing something good for the country.”

The Nuss family had an attorney draw up a signed waiver releasing the IHSA from any liability, but the board of directors still voted unanimously to deny it on grounds of its “concern for the person’s well-being,” IHSA executive director Marty Hickman said.

“There’s this overriding safety issue,” said Hickman, citing that two kids in the nation have already died following football practices this year. “Our sports medicine committee continues to feel that being in shape and being in football shape are two different things. We’ve had this issue a number of times. It’s been brought to the board’s attention, and they’ve consistently said that they’re not interested in modifying this policy.”

Pat Nuss thought the ruling and reasoning behind it were ridiculous.

“Four days a week, (Eddie) runs five miles with his gear and pack on. That’s an  extra 20-30 pounds in 100-plus degrees,” said Pat, an Army veteran himself. “He’ll be in better shape than any kid on the football field when he’s out of basic training.”

Despite the signed waiver, the IHSA still expressed concern over potentially being liable. Hickman said the IHSA’s attorney told the board that Pat Nuss signing off on his son’s rights “would not necessarily fully protect us in the event of an injury.”

“Maybe something more from the person” would protect the IHSA, Hickman said. “But really at the end of the day, it’s a combination of that and concern for safety that led the board to believe our currently policy should be enforced.”

Pat Nuss wasn’t the only person upset by the decision. State Sen. Shane Cultra, R-Onarga, helped bring the issue to the IHSA board and was not pleased with the principle behind the ruling.

“I think it’s terrible,” Cultra said. “Here he is serving our country. He’s probably in the best shape of his life.

“What’s it send to our veterans and the people who served our country? Here a kid is doing the right thing, taking his military training over the summer, but he can’t get back in time and they’re going to penalize him? I don’t think it’s right ... I think some allowances need to be made. It doesn’t make any sense.”

The decision is final on the IHSA’s end. Pat Nuss said the only thing he could do is attempt to appeal the decision through an injunction via the court system, but he can’t afford to pay “thousands of dollars.”

For such a policy to change, a by-law amendment proposal would need to be submitted for next year and then voted on by the IHSA membership, Hickman said.

“Certainly our membership could entertain that.,” Hickman said. “But that’s also happened in the past and that really hasn’t gone anywhere, primarily because our sports medicine committee continues to be concerned about the safety of young kids getting into football shape ... We think there’s value to the 12 days of practice.”

For Nuss, not playing will hurt even more because the game is against the rival Falcons, his father said. Or as GCMS head coach Mike Allen mentioned earlier this summer when the issue first came to light, “He’s a Nuss, he lives to play this game.”

But for now, PBL can only do one thing: focus on what’s in its control.

“It is what it is. It’s unfortunate. There’s nothing we can do,” Panthers head coach Jeff Graham said. “I can’t sit here and dwell about it. I just have to prepare Eddie when he gets back, preapre this football team and move forward.”

Comments

The Paxton Record embraces discussion of both community and world issues. We welcome you to contribute your ideas, opinions and comments, but we ask that you avoid personal attacks, vulgarity and hate speech. we reserve the right to remove any comment at its discretion, and we will block repeat offenders' accounts. To post comments, you must first be a registered user, and your username will appear with any comment you post. Happy posting.

Login or register to post comments

Jam wrote on August 10, 2011 at 10:08 am

The IHSA is pretty consistent about these matters. It is in the big picture only one football game in a season of many games and hopefully a playoff. In fact PBL should put a picture of Memorial Stadium in the locker room and make that their goal for the season. Win in the playoffs and the season is longer yet.

tcasey4 wrote on August 12, 2011 at 5:08 pm

This is a very interesting scenario from a sports law standpoint. What are the student athlete's options? If he has already appealed the ruling of the director to the board of directors then he has exhausted his administrative remedies. He could pursue relief from the court system, the question is will there be a capable attorney in Illinois that steps up to the plate on this. I would think that this would be an excellent pro bono opportunity for an attorney to give back to a soldier in training.

The possible legal challenges to the IHSA ruling include at a minimum:
(a) The rule requiring the 12 day prior practice participation is arbitrary and capricious.
(b) The rule requiring the 12 day prior practice participation is a violation of equal protection (may be a stretch but could argue suspect class based on his military status)
(c) The rule requiring the 12 day prior practice participation is a violation of the student athletes 1st amendment right to freedom of association (again infringing upon his right to enter into the military without having adverse state action against him)
(d) The rule requiring the 12 day prior practice participation is a violation of the IHSA's policy of non-discrimination (see IHSA Administrative Procedures, Guidelines, and Policies Paragraph 28 - Statement on Non-Discrimination, indicating IHSA will not discriminate based on veteran status concerning participation in any programs or services offered by IHSA)

The success of any of these challenges is questionable but the student athlete may benefit
from seeking help from an attorney on these issues. Further, as a member of the armed services he should seek help from Army JAG Officers to see if they can provide legal assistance in this matter at a lower cost or for free since he is a member of the militairy.

May violate state statute:
(775 ILCS 5/1‑102) (from Ch. 68, par. 1‑102)
Sec. 1‑102. Declaration of Policy. It is the public policy of this State:
(A) Freedom from Unlawful Discrimination. To secure for all individuals within Illinois the freedom from discrimination against any individual because of his or her race, color, religion, sex, national origin, ancestry, age, order of protection status, marital status, physical or mental disability, military status, sexual orientation, or unfavorable discharge from military service in connection with employment, real estate transactions, access to financial credit, and the availability of public accommodations.

dwlloyd810 wrote on August 13, 2011 at 4:08 pm

Obviously Army basic training standards are significantly superior to IHSA standards, so what is the real reason the waiver was not granted? Why did the IHSA feel it was necessary to give an obviously false explanation about concerns about safety? I suppose the IHSA administration gave a standard reply without considering the specific situation. In that case, the IHSA needs to be held accountable for their failure to diligently consider waiver applications. Maybe the IHSA administration has a biased view of military service. In that case the IHSA is in violation of the law, and needs to be held accountable for their illegal actions. Maybe if enough people demand answers from the IHSA, they will reconsider their inappropriate decision. The public needs to hold them accountable. If you agree, tell the IHSA how you feel. Go to their website, (www.ihsa.org) select "contact information," find an appropriate contact, and tell them how you feel.

Bilbal44 wrote on August 13, 2011 at 8:08 pm

You are missing a point of greater importance.
Should a person who has been thru' the rigors of Army basic training and HARD physical conditioning, be allowed to play against younger high school boys, whose physical conditoning has not been enhanced and paid for by the U.S. government.
The idea of one trained to peak physical fitness "...to be ALL you can be..." pitted against average high school athletes, is hardly a contest amoung equals and probably a physical danger to all he opposes in regulation play.
Consider Your son butting heads, being blocked, or tackled by this young 'Fighting Machine' , then consider the wisdom of disqualifying him from all high school contact sports.
The IHSA may have saved many unsuspecting athletes and their families, a great deal of physical and emotional pain.
If the IHSA bans military trained players from all contact sports, the entire state of Illinois will be well served.

The publishers are encouraged to use this as editorial comment, and to pass it on to the IHSA .

Thank you.

Coach Hoffman wrote on August 16, 2011 at 2:08 pm

With complete respect for the young man's service and as a veteran I have to agree with the board. There is a difference in the conditioning and it is wise to protect the young man against his and his father's ignorance about the difference.

Self-serving Sate Senator Cultra qualifies for imbecile-of-the-week.

The boy is not being penalized, he is being cared for!

SportsMinded wrote on August 16, 2011 at 3:08 pm

If the restriction is on being football ready then provide a test that provides a pass/fail to the athlete being football ready or not. Simple fix.....but insure that over 50% of the football players can pass the test.

shayan1 wrote on April 23, 2013 at 10:04 pm

Another great post, I appreciate all the work you put into this site, helping out others with your fun and creative works. http://www.tipsforfreedating.com