A judge ruled last week that the Institute of Technology football team at Syracuse Central did not have to forfeit a game and exit the playoffs over an alleged ineligible player in the team's final regular season game.
The ruling comes after Syracuse (N.Y.) City School District petitioned the State Supreme Court to intervene in an effort to have the Institute of Technology football team placed back in the sectional playoffs.
A judge ruled last week that the Institute of Technology football team at Syracuse Central did not have to forfeit a game and exit the playoffs over an alleged ineligible player in the team's final regular season game.Â
The ruling comes after Syracuse (N.Y.) City School District petitioned the State Supreme Court to intervene in an effort to have the Institute of Technology football team placed back in the sectional playoffs.Â
The school district was informed last week by the section that ITC had used an ineligible player during its 22-14 quarterfinal victory over Vernon Verona Sherrill and had been forced to forfeit the game. According to the New York State Public High School Athletic Association's rules, any player that has been ejected must sit out the next game.Â
Arguments were heard by Onondaga County Supreme Court Justice Robert Antonacci II.
According to Syracuse.com. at the end of the nearly two-and-half-hour hearing, Antonacci brought the lawyers into his chambers for his decision. The decision was not announced in the courtroom by the judge.
Antonacci called the section's decision to punish ITC was based on a “arbitrary and capricious” standard, saying “you know it when you see it.” Antonacci also said that ITC did everything it could to act with due diligence.
According to Spectrum Local News, the player's ineligibility was in dispute due to the status of an ejection that occurred in ITC's regular-season finale against Indian River on Oct. 25. In the petition, the Syracuse City School District claims video shows that the player ejected "committed no foul on the play," and the referee who threw the penalty flag leading to the ejection was "not part of the action the official was observing at the time."
The district is also arguing that an official's report of the ejection had not been filed by game time against VVS, and that due to this, the petition claims, Section III executive director Jason Czarny said an appeal of the ejection was moot because "without an officials' report, the ejection did not occur."Â
Antonacci reportedly opened the hearing by saying, “Can we all agree (the player) was nowhere near the play.”
The section released a statement Friday afternoon.
“We are aware of Judge Antonacci’s decision and respect it fully,” the statement read. “It is unfortunate that this situation played out in the manner that it did, and that it results in a number of our student-athletes being confused and upset – justifiably so."
