Is it true the Lacrosse player from Lightridge HS was Bullied or not?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Wrong. See “In-County Residence Changes” in the policy here: https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/loudoun/Board.nsf/files/CQES8L717565/$file/8155.pdf |
Anonymous
Rather than read through a long-winded document can you simply highlight the point you want to make. |
Anonymous
She did. She said PP was wrong about the policy, then literally highlighted the policy. She did the reading for you. It’s not hard to understand. |
Anonymous
| This whole discussion is beginning to get a bit snippy. |
Anonymous
|
I have a question I don’t understand how this young lady who’s been in the same school system for a long period of time and had the same friends and same teammates, all of a sudden one day say she’s being bullied, not to say she’s not being telling the truth , but feel the need to pack up and change Schools based on some ignorant comments.
|
Anonymous
Here's the problem. You are looking for truthfulness but the school system verified her claim or at least saw its plausibility by granting her the waiver to transfer schools. Then an independent org, VHSL, denied her claim and said she can't play sports. The parents want to know who's in charge, sports or education. They don't think both should be independent of each other. |
Anonymous
| Why is this still being discussed? |
Anonymous
Probably because people have an opinion. People can agree with the decision or not. But the bottom line is the point other posters have made. If LCPS determined there was cause for the girl to be granted a transfer waiver something wasn’t great at her previous school. Knowing the importance of lacrosse in this girl’s life this should have been a coordinated all or nothing scenario—either granted both waivers or neither. But it sounds like the parents should have just rented a place in the preferred zone which would have been cheaper and less stressful for their daughter. I’m guessing they didn’t since it sounds like a field hockey player (they were state champs so an even stronger sports program) at the same school was granted the school and sports waiver this year so maybe they thought they’d receive the same. |
Anonymous
|
Anonymous
Others have mentioned the importance of this already, but upfront the VHSL states, “Parents or guardians are responsible for understanding all potential consequences of changing schools by special permission.” VHSL further states, “Under VHSL rules, subsequent student-requested transfers (or returning to a regular school of assignment) will generally result in 365 days of ineligibility unless there is an actual corresponding change of residence of the parents or guardian.” LCPS seems to add to this by stating, “A waiver may be considered for transfers that are required or mandated by the school system or are for the welfare of the student or school system but not for athletic/activity reasons.” So one has to assume the parents of this student understood the potential risks as it related to playing sports when changing schools. Assuming the parents understood and accepted the risk of their daughter potentially not playing sports when they decided to change schools the VHSL clearly lays out the process they needed to follow for initiating an athletic transfer waiver, stating “The student must be enrolled in the new school before making a request.” I interpret this to mean LCPS has to grant the student a waiver to attend the requested school first, and this triggers the VHSL transfer process. So, this covers why school acceptance by LCPS is separate from an athletic waiver by the VHSL. One covers the county and the other the fairness of sports across the state. As part of the formal review process the steps include, “The Supervisor of Athletics will contact school staff at the previous school to validate the request and purpose. The information collected will be submitted to the Superintendent Designee for review and consideration.” In this case it appears whatever information was gathered led those tasked with making the final decision to believe the requested change was driven by sports, and not the welfare of the student. One interesting area of the policy relates to players meeting with coaches prior to enrolling at their new school. The policy states, “you may not meet with a coach outside of your school’s attendance zone to discuss your child playing at their school. No member school or group of individuals representing the school shall subject a student from another school to undue influence by encouraging him/her to transfer from one school to another for League activities.” Others have mentioned the relationship between the student and her club lacrosse coach. It probably is not a stretch to think the coach, parents, and player discussed the potential of attending the new school prior to all of this happening. If so, this rule alone may have been reason to deny a waiver request in this case. It certainly doesn’t work in their favor. All of this comes back to the parents should have known the risks associated with their actions, and should not have expected a rubber-stamp approval by the VHSL. |
Anonymous
| Your argument is based on “but not for athletic/activity reasons.” she didn’t transfer for those reasons. The waiver wasn’t granted for those reasons. |
Anonymous
No one said it was granted for athletics. LCPS cannot grant waivers for this reason, only VHSL can. It sounds like LCPS can grant a waiver for student welfare, but this does not automatically mean it applies to playing sports. LCPS specifically carves sports out of their decision and leaves sports eligibility up to VHSL once they have allowed the student to change schools. VHSL is responsible for fairness of sports across VA, not just Loudoun County. VHSL determined this waiver did not meet the standards to grant the waiver. And I’m sure it didn’t help the cause that Indy’s coach and parents probably discussed all of this prior to applying for a waiver, which goes against VHSL’s waiver policy. This case should be closed. The student’s parents, and Indy, bear the blame here, not VHSL. |
Anonymous
Got it. You think the VHSL supercedes the school board's authority. The parents tried to argue the reverse and lost. It's ridiculous and weird the athletic portion of VA education is the ultimate authority. |
Anonymous
No one believes the VHSL supersedes the LCPS. One represents the county and another all of Virginia athletics. Even LCPS notes in its own policy VHSL is responsible for athletic decisions. And the VHSL review process cannot even begin until a determination has been made on an athlete changing schools. I have no idea what information was used as the basis for VHSL’s decision, but if there was a perception or evidence the Indy coach and parents and/or student discussed this topic prior to the waiver then case closed based on this one aspect of the VHSL waiver policy. Those are the rules and the Indy coach should have known them and instructed the family appropriately. |
Anonymous
3 games against non-LoCo opponents. |