WILL the lawsuit filed by Scott Aying lead to a deluge of court cases against the Cesafi in the future? For similar cases, god I hope so.
For issues like this, in Cesafi or even in Manila’s UAAP, I hope they all file cases
until both leagues will be forced to drop the two-year residency rule. In the case of Manila, that residency rule even covers incoming freshmen and thankfully, the Cesafi hasn’t gone that route.
Any student can transfer schools at his own will, and student-athletes should have that luxury, too. Besides only one with no purpose in life will go to five schools in five years or even three schools in five years.
Of the hundreds of student-athletes, how many will go to the highest bidder? How many will opt to stay, thankful for a chance to finish school on a scholarship? Of the members of the league, how many is willing to offer a sweetheart deal to lure the best? How many will simply present their academic or scholastic programs to bag them.
Is the residency rule about leveling the playing field or about preventing one school from getting a monopoly of the best players money can buy?
If the Cesafi is afraid that dropping the residency rule will lead to one school getting all the best players, well, what has 13 years of protectionism for schools done in Cesafi basketball? Has it led to a level playing field?
And make no mistake, majority of the rules in Cesafi, just like in UAAP, are designed for basketball but adapted in all events.
Will chaos reign if the residency rule is dropped? How easy it is to transfer schools, especially in college? If you got the grades for it, they’d accept you, but if not, well.
And will chaos reign, as the Cesafi suspects, because the lawsuit will open to all sorts of lawsuits against decisions made by referees, umpires and officials?
No. Only a fool (a rich one) will sue a referee for a botched penalty and the likes.
And I think the Cesafi should even welcome frivolous lawsuits against its referees as it can easily fatten its pockets by winning the damages from these suits.
So what happens if the Ayings win the case, will he finally be able to play?
Or will the suspension of the high school basketball games continue next season.
By the way, this reminds me of the curious history of Cesafi, which, you could say was borne out of a lawsuit which also stemmed from a controversial high school basketball incident.
In 2000, the last season of the CAAA, UV got the top spot in the high school division, while USC, Salazar Institute of Technology and Don Bosco Technology Center tied for second with similar 3-2 records and the tie should be easily broken by applying the quotient system, right?
Salazar got the finals seat, but another quotient system was used by the late USC athletic director, giving the USC the finals seat and relegating Salazar to the battle for third.
After going back and forth, the board finally decided to follow the late USC director’s formula, giving USC the finals seat and relegating Salazar to the battle for third.
Incensed, Salazar skipped the third-place play-off and CAAA punished them with a one-year suspension. Not so fast, the Salazar owner said and sued CAAA.
Months later, CAAA was disbanded, the Cesafi was born and surprise, surprise, Salazar isn’t one of the members.
“Cesafi is a new beginning for Cebu amateur sports. We should look at the future and with the creation of Cesafi...we’ll correct the mistakes of the past,” the league’s first commissioner Baldomero Estenzo, said in the press conference announcing the new league in July, 2001.
Thirteen years later, there’s another lawsuit.
(mikelimpag@gmail.com)