ImWithTheBand87

Sorry, first post here. Apologies in advance for any formatting issues... First, I'd like to clarify one point. No one is trying to punish Coppell or Duncanville by having them removed from the state contest. The Rowlett protest was not to get anyone disqualified. It was a request to have Rowlett included as a 4th state qualifier since there were rules violations by two of the bands that qualified. However, that protest was denied by the Area committee, so we can drop that portion of the discussion. Best of luck to Coppell, Duncanville, & Berkner at the State Marching Contest. They will represent Area C very well. However, I think we still have a situation here that merits discussion. I've seen lots of posts that said that the Coppell kids worked really hard & should not be punished because the rule wasn't followed, but what about the Rowlett/Sachse/Lake Highlands/Richardson kids who also worked really hard and followed the rules? The biggest issue that I have with it is the lack of accountability & consequences for violation of the rule and the UIL's handling of it (a private reprimand?). I've seen numerous posts saying that breaking the rule doesn't matter. The band was great on the field. If that's the case, then why do we bother having rules at all if we aren't going to enforce them? Previous posts have made it clear that Coppell used an assistant director to run their sound board at both Region and Area. Had they known the rule, I'm sure they wouldn't have done so, but ignorance of the rule isn't an excuse to break it & exempt you from the consequences. I think one of the problems is that there is currently no linkage between the rules in question & the punishment for breaking them. The rules in this section merely refer one to sections 27 & 29 which state that anything from a private reprimand up to a multi-year suspension are possible sanctions. How are contest administrators supposed to apply those rules during the heat of competition if there are not clear guidelines for which punishment applies to each rule violation? It's clear what happens when a timing rule is violated. Not so in this case. It's also not clear to me why this rule & any associated sanctions would apply only to the director in question when the violation has a direct impact on the overall performance. As a hypothetical, what if a team was playing in a 5A playoff game & suited up a player that was ineligible. Let's say that player plays on two special teams plays only & has no impact on the outcome of the game, but his team wins. The next week it is determined that he was ineligible. No question about it that the team would be forced to forfeit with the losing team moving on (if the situation were discovered in time). In this case, an adult had direct participation in the production of the show. Seems to me that has much more of an impact on the outcome than the football player did in the hypothetical. The rules are there for a reason, & they need to be followed. Also, what happens when a rule is broken needs to be more clearly spelled out, & IMHO the UIL needs to address this prior to future competitions.