It's game over for Mansfield High football
BY JAMES SCHNEIDER and PETER GOBIS SUN CHRONICLE STAFF
Tuesday, December 2, 2008 2:41 AM EST
Mansfield football players raise the Don Currivan trophy after beating Foxboro in the Thanksgiving Day game. (Staff file photo by Mike George)
Player found to be ineligible; team forfeits playoff against Feehan
MANSFIELD - The Mansfield High School football team has been forced to forfeit tonight's scheduled MIAA Division 2 playoff game against Bishop Feehan High after officials learned that Mansfield had used an ineligible player through the course of the 2008 season.
The 11th-hour decision was made by the MIAA Football Committee and administrators at Mansfield High. The game against Feehan had been scheduled for 5:15 p.m. at Bridgewater-Raynham Regional High School.
According to school sources, Mansfield High School today will seek a court order to allow the team to play this evening.
The MIAA decision to forfeit was made after the Hornets concluded their two-hour practice session at Alumni Field early Monday evening and was not immediately made known to members of the Mansfield team.
Mansfield Coach Mike Redding declined to name the player.
"The Mansfield High School football program had a player participate in two games. Each game was about three plays at the very end of the game," Redding said. "The player in question, without the knowledge of the coaching staff or the athletic department, had entered his fifth year of high school. When the coaching staff became aware of the student's fifth year, which was around the Thanksgiving Day holiday, on the next school day, Dec. 1, they self-reported it to the athletic director, who reported it to the MIAA in hopes that we would have a meeting or conference to sort out the facts.
"At this point, Mansfield has had no opportunity to sit down with all of the parties involved, to put together an official report and find out if an actual violation has taken place."
Efforts by The Sun Chronicle to reach first-year Athletic Director Patrick Burns were unsuccessful.
The player in question had transferred into the Mansfield school system at the outset of the academic year. However, his transcript and the paperwork for eligibility to be cleared for a waiver was never processed by Mansfield High School.
Notice of the ineligible player surfaced prior to the Thanksgiving football game in which Mansfield beat Foxboro. Subsequently, Burns contacted the MIAA for a clarification and received word of the forfeiture late Monday.
"I thought that I had heard it all - until now," said Dighton-Rehoboth Regional High football coach Dave Driscoll, the 2006 President of the Mass. Football Coaches Association. "I've never heard of such a situation - and why did someone just find out a day before the game?"
Also unconfirmed was a court order to be sought by Mansfield High School to appeal the MIAA's decision to have the Hornets forfeit the game.
"There was no preparation time, no chance to scout or get film," Paul Wetzel of the MIAA said when reached at home. "We felt the safety issue was (also) very important.
"It's not the player's fault," Wetzel said. "It's the school administration's. The punishment is what it is."
By the MIAA decisions, North Attleboro is declared the Hockomock League champion with a 7-1 league record.
"I don't know the details, but we don't enjoy it," said Bishop Feehan High School President Chris Servant, who with Principal Bill Runey and Athletic Director Paul O'Boy, received word of the forfeiture just before 7 p.m. Monday.
The forfeiture sends the defending MIAA Division 2 Super Bowl champion Shamrocks (9-1) into Saturday's title game at Gillette Stadium in Foxboro against the winner of the other MIAA Division 2 playoff game between Walpole and Reading.
"We certainly don't feel good about this, but what's strange is this final hour decision," Servant said. "Did somebody blow the whistle on this?"
Because Mansfield was ruled ineligible to represent the Hockomock League and compete in the Division 2 playoff game, there loomed the possibility that the runner-up Rocketeers of North Attleboro would instead represent the league and have a rematch game with Bishop Feehan.
However, the opportunity never presented itself according to North coach Kurt Kummer.
"We could have played, we would have played, but the MIAA said that we can't - they had made their decision," Kummer said. "The MIAA had made the decision that Bishop Feehan would get a bye to the Super Bowl."
It was North's contention that because they had finished second to Mansfield during the course of the Hockomock League season, they would ably represent the league.
"Nobody was purposely cheating to gain an advantage," Kummer said. "But, how do you now tell the kids on the Mansfield High football team, hours before the game, that they can't compete for a championship. And if not them, why not us?"
Administrators, according to Servant, found it difficult to discern that an ineligible player - for whatever reason, living out of town, age or academics - would not have been discovered earlier in the season, less than a day before a Final Four playoff game.
"If he was ineligible for game No. 1, would he not be ineligible for games 2, 3 and 4?" Servant asked. "It doesn't make sense."
View Comments » No comments posted.
« Hide Comments
sillyme wrote on Dec 2, 2008 5:01 PM:
GO MANSFIELD!!!!!!!!!! "
SILLYME wrote on Dec 2, 2008 4:59 PM:
THEY ARE PLAYING "
ajohnson32 wrote on Dec 2, 2008 4:58 PM:
sillyme wrote on Dec 2, 2008 4:54 PM:
offended wrote on Dec 2, 2008 4:50 PM:
joetheplumber wrote on Dec 2, 2008 4:36 PM:
offended wrote on Dec 2, 2008 4:19 PM:
fbwizard wrote on Dec 2, 2008 3:59 PM:
We may disagree about the extent of the violation but the bottom line is that they did wrong and should pay the price. That would be the best lesson these kids could ever learn. The greater problem here is the cult mentality that goes along with support of some of the local high school programs (including my alma mater of Feehan, which has not covered itself in glory at times either), which encourages blind devotion to them and a willingness to try to excuse almost anything (as evidenced by the emotions of some that have posted here). "
joetheplumber wrote on Dec 2, 2008 3:55 PM:
Let the boys play tonight and suspend the coach and AD. "
mansfieldGridAlum wrote on Dec 2, 2008 3:47 PM:
They are playing these games to give these kids an opportunity most programs would never get. the KIDS are getting exposure. If Coach Redding wanted to leave, he had MANY opportunities in the past. If you knew the people involved you would find out all the TIME spent trying to help these kids get to a position to better themselves thru continuing education. NOT JUST football.
but its a fact, sports can be a vehicle to bigger and better things for these kids. So its exposure for the STUDENTS! "
mansfieldGridAlum wrote on Dec 2, 2008 3:42 PM:
a student has four years of eligibilty as long as he/she is no older than 18 at the time the season begins. "
fbwizard wrote on Dec 2, 2008 3:40 PM:
Another admittedly unsubstantiated allegation, but food for thought: is it possible that someone had the goods on this violation, was threatening to expose it, and the AD/coach came forward to inoculate themselves?
Some programs would have voluntarily forfeited the games. That is a lot to ask in this case I agree but that would demonstrate true contrition.
All that said, I think the game should be played until this is all sorted out. If the MIAA wins they can strip Mansfield of the title. The problem with not playing is if Mansfield is acquitted there's no going back and playing the game after the fact. "
mansfieldGridAlum wrote on Dec 2, 2008 3:38 PM:
you people out there are trying to make it out that he was some sort of "ringer"
Get the Facts! Coach Redding is trying to set an example. He spoke up
He did not have to. No one would have ever known. You people are crucifying a guy who has integrity. I cant believe how quick everyone out there is to make this out to be cheating. You all realize that if the rule followed the NCAA. He would have been elegible. "
mansfieldGridAlum wrote on Dec 2, 2008 3:35 PM:
sinbad wrote on Dec 2, 2008 3:17 PM:
bfshamrocks09 wrote on Dec 2, 2008 3:10 PM:
BT1957 wrote on Dec 2, 2008 2:48 PM:
na2 wrote on Dec 2, 2008 2:39 PM:
na2 wrote on Dec 2, 2008 2:28 PM:
jose21 wrote on Dec 2, 2008 2:10 PM:
And to Hojo - I hope you're under 18 buddy... "
Scooterlibby wrote on Dec 2, 2008 1:59 PM:
mnsfld08 wrote on Dec 2, 2008 1:42 PM:
How many times has this gone unreported I wonder? "
ajohnson32 wrote on Dec 2, 2008 1:36 PM:
kaptin wrote on Dec 2, 2008 1:29 PM:
sinbad wrote on Dec 2, 2008 1:03 PM:
cc1219 wrote on Dec 2, 2008 12:48 PM:
Mark M. Farinella wrote on Dec 2, 2008 12:45 PM:
cc1219 wrote on Dec 2, 2008 12:44 PM:
fbwizard wrote on Dec 2, 2008 12:39 PM:
ajohnson32 wrote on Dec 2, 2008 12:30 PM:
rockomom wrote on Dec 2, 2008 12:27 PM:
realist wrote on Dec 2, 2008 12:21 PM:
To go to court or say it doesn't matter in this case because they did not mean to break the rule isn't the issue. The rules are there, everyone agreed to them and now they want to change them? "
swoopy99_2000 wrote on Dec 2, 2008 12:19 PM:
sinbad wrote on Dec 2, 2008 11:50 AM:
Attlegal wrote on Dec 2, 2008 11:43 AM:
ajohnson32 wrote on Dec 2, 2008 11:22 AM:
curmudgeon wrote on Dec 2, 2008 11:22 AM:
Rather than to refuse to return phone call or go into a bunker mentally. "
sinbad wrote on Dec 2, 2008 11:16 AM:
curmudgeon wrote on Dec 2, 2008 11:09 AM:
hardhearted wrote on Dec 2, 2008 11:04 AM:
As I said, sportsmanship is the big reason these sports are there. If we just wink and say ignore the rules then what are the kids going to learn? It's not how well you play it's what you can get away with? (excuse the grammatical transgression)
I wonder how many people saying the game should be played have bets on Mansfield winning? "
ajohnson32 wrote on Dec 2, 2008 10:51 AM:
skeptic wrote on Dec 2, 2008 10:49 AM:
realist wrote on Dec 2, 2008 10:45 AM:
Mansfield -- I'm sorry but rules are there. Whether it be player eligibility or twelve men on the field. Unintentional violations are not excuses.
North Attleborough -- better luck next year.
Feehan -- good luck, you have extra time to rest and prepare - no excuses. "
Mark M. Farinella wrote on Dec 2, 2008 10:43 AM:
hardhearted wrote on Dec 2, 2008 10:42 AM:
Isn't sportsmanship one of the reasons for organized high school sports? What does running to court show the students? If you don't like the rules that you agreed to in advance then find a lawyer. Accept the outcome with a little bit of grace and show the students that the rules are there and should be followed. "
BT1957 wrote on Dec 2, 2008 10:33 AM:
lindsay929 wrote on Dec 2, 2008 10:25 AM:
I doubt that the coach is privy to the kids academic file from previous schools - so why put this on the football coach and team? The AD at the school should be on top of this. The sad thing is that the administration failed and the team pays the price. I hope they let them play and sort it out later. "
sinbad wrote on Dec 2, 2008 10:05 AM:
BT1957 wrote on Dec 2, 2008 9:53 AM:
mnsfld08 wrote on Dec 2, 2008 9:50 AM:
You can't just give BF a good to the Super Bowl Free Card.
I wonder who brought this situation to light? If MHS knew about this before why didn't they resolve it earlier in the season. To think Redding would want this team to get so close and then see them have to forfeit its absurd. "
sinbad wrote on Dec 2, 2008 9:32 AM:
BT1957 wrote on Dec 2, 2008 9:22 AM:
Honor1st wrote on Dec 2, 2008 9:11 AM:
The Coach, AD, and ultimately the Principal did not carry out their responsiblities. No excuses.
I expect to see the responsible parties stand up and publicly apologize to ALL of Mansfield, but, most importantly, in front of the MHS students body. "
ajohnson32 wrote on Dec 2, 2008 9:02 AM:
BT1957 wrote on Dec 2, 2008 8:39 AM:
BT1957 wrote on Dec 2, 2008 8:33 AM:
sinbad wrote on Dec 2, 2008 8:30 AM:
Hojo20 wrote on Dec 2, 2008 8:13 AM: