H*****r
发帖数: 764 | 1 Okay, so it’s not really called the Cam Newton rule. At least not yet.
But we can certainly guess why the NCAA is recommending it to the Division 1
Amateurism Cabinet.
According to the Associated Press, the NCAA is looking into broadening the
definition of what classifies as an agent to include family members and
other (hopefully) soon-to-be-specified third parties in an effort to close
the loophole that allowed Newton to remain eligible last December.
NCAA bylaw 12.3.3, for which Newton was originally ruled ineligible under,
currently classifies an “athletics scholarship agent” as “Any individual,
agency or organization that represents a prospective student-athlete for
compensation in placing the prospective student-athlete in a collegiate
institution as a recipient of institutional financial aid shall be
considered an agent or organization marketing the individual’s athletics
ability or reputation.”
The NCAA later determined Cam didn’t know his father was attempting to
solicit money for his playing services, and under bylaw 14.11.1, he was
reinstated and allowed to play in the BCS National Championship.
By specifying that an athletic scholarship agent could be a family member,
it wouldn’t matter if a player didn’t know that the said family member was
shopping the athlete’s services for financial gain because the family
member would be representing that prospect for compensation.
In other words, if this rule had been instated at the time of the NCAA’s
December ruling, Cam Newton would not only have been ineligible for the BCS
Championship game, he would have been ineligible for the 2010 season.
Upon first glance, it would appear the term “any individual… that
represents a prospective student-athlete for compensation” is pretty all-
encompassing, but if there’s one thing of which the NCAA isn’t afraid, it
’s getting more specific.
UPDATED 10:10 a.m. ET on 7/27: A couple people have raised some good
questions that merit some clarification. As I noted above, common sense
would indicate that the phrase “any individual” would include a parent or
other family member.
The key word to hone in on is “represent”. Rule 12.3.3 implies — and
perhaps dangerously, assumes — that someone representing a student-athlete
or a prospect is doing so with the student-athlete’s or prospect’s
knowledge. That doesn’t necessarily mean that representation has to be
legal or official, just someone who is looking for compensation on behalf of
that student-athlete or prospect.
By expanding the definition of a scholarship agent to a family member, the
student-athlete or prospect would be “represented” regardless of whether
they knew or not | B****2
发帖数: 8892 | 2 归纳为一句话：“被代表了”也不行。因为很难说被代表者是否真的不知情。
这样是否也有可能会出现一种相反的情况：恶意陷害。例如某人可以说他代表某位对手学校的大学生运动员索要财、物。 | Y******e
发帖数: 20256 | 3 如果家里人也要陷害自己，那就没得说了，只能怨天，哈哈。 |
|
