The Chronicle

Issue date: 9/3/08 Section: Columns
Last update: 9/3/08 at 7:39 AM EST

Matt Graham

Andrew Giuliani's lawsuit in response to his "unfair" dismissal from the men's golf team reeks of absurdity. Even from the filing's played-down summary of the conduct that led to his dismissal, it is clear that he was a cancer to the team-one who believed that his behavior would go unpunished. It is hard to construct a more transparently bogus account of events than one that includes statements such as, "during a football game... Andrew played harder than some of the other boys wanted to play."

Although the initial appearance of frivolity is unsettling, the most disturbing thing about the lawsuit is that it may not actually be frivolous at all. The filing accurately summarizes the acceptable conditions for dismissal outlined in Duke's Athletic Policy Manual, Student-Athlete Handbook and other documents that govern student-athlete behavior (referred to as "the contract"). These conditions for dismissal are the failure to pay the agreed amount for schooling, failure to submit to drug tests, a charge with a serious felony or other conduct specifically enumerated in a student-athlete's agreements with the University.

Conspicuously absent from this list is a provision for the removal of a student-athlete due to failure to conform to basic standards of personal conduct. As hard as it is to believe, Duke's codified athletic policy only provides for removal of a student's athletic eligibility because of a short list of transgressions including felony charges, NCAA violations, academic cheating, drugs or alcohol. Page 11 of the Student-Athlete Handbook contains an extremely vague one-line reference to team rules, but no language refers to the extent or force of those rules. There should be specific stipulations pertaining to the coach's power to create and enforce team standards or at least a clause clarifying that coaches are free to dismiss athletes for violations of rules not specifically described by athletic policy. The absence of clear language pertaining to team rules or general misconduct is an inexcusable oversight.

The Athletic Policy Manual claims to have been revised in May 2007, but such negligence calls into question whether it has ever been subjected to any sort of scrutiny at all. Appropriate behavior is such a basic expectation that it should not have to be codified anywhere, but the legal system does not work that way. Rules are enforced as they are written, which is why prudently conceived policy guards against loopholes like the one Giuliani's case attempts to exploit.

Continued...

Page 1 of 2 next >

Article Tools