Hayfield Football Coach Fired

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think some if not a lot if not all of the Hayfield transfers came there to play football. Some of them may have been recruited, some actually may have an address where they don't actually reside.

My problem here is FCPS did not find anything and VHSL didn't do a thorough investigation so they are relying on 'this looks bad' to hold them accountable. VHSL neglected to actually act on their feelings and instead tried to take to the easy way out and prosecute Hayfield with sneak tactics (the timing) and rules they have in place, that they can't explain what they actually mean. (Spirit of the Game and Proselytizing Rule) The banning and the appeals were all heard by people and committee's appointed by VHSL. That was always going to end the way it did.

Those sneak tactics backfired on VHSL big time once the Hayfield parents decided to be heard by a neutral party, the courts. You can't bring your feelings into a court room and more so you have to provide facts to substantiate your claims.

I watched the judge ask the VHSL lawyer point blank question about their process and how it applied to Hayfield and the lawyer could not answer appropriately.

Snippets from court that hurt VHSL:
- VHSL lawyer says they aren't worried about the Spirit of the Game violation. The judge replies, well why are we here and why was this presented.
- Judge asked the VHSL lawyer, what does Proselytizing Rule mean. VHSL lawyer responds, 'That's a good question'.
- Judge tells the VHSL lawyer you've accused Hayfield of recruiting, I see nothing in your bylaws that defines recruiting. So what and how did they violate this?
- Judge tells the VHSL lawyer that you mentioned a track violation that Hayfield self reported. What does that have to do with the football team and why didn't you suspend the track team?
- Judge says to VHSL lawyer, you mentioned 31 students transferred from Freedom High School and 14 of them transferred to Hayfield. Where are the other 17? Have they been investigated? Are the schools they attending allowed to participate in the playoffs? The VHSL laywer responds (something to the effect), we have no idea.
- Lastly and to me most detrimental to VHSL case. VHSL claims FCPS did not do enough in their investigation. Judge ask the lawyer, where is the proof you did any investigation at all. Have you interviewed parents? Have you interviewed students? Did you do residency checks? All to which the answer was NO. The Judge replied, so what did you do because FCPS has provided documentation that they've actually did all these things.
- (this is what I think showed VHSL hand) VHSL told the judge, that Hayfield parents filing this emergency injunction at the last minute leaves them in a position to disrupt their playoffs. The judge replies, VHSL you decided to notify them with one week left in the season and they followed your appeals process to which they were officially disqualified on the last day of the regular season. The judge ripped this apart basically stating VHSL chose this path of timing.

In my opinion, Overton seems like he's a great coach that has parents willing to make the sacrifice to continue to have their children coached by him. This doesn't seem like a situation where the kids even needed to be recruited by him. However I do 100% believe they more than likely cut corners and covered their tracks to get kids enrolled at Hayfield. In America's court, when you accused somebody of something as VHSL did, you actually have to have proof, which VHSL neglected to provide or in this case or even put forth effort. They relied strictly on back door meetings to punish Hayfield and it backfired.

I said all this to say, Hayfield may not be clean, but the governing body VHSL severely dropped the ball on this. Additionally, I don't even know why they would attend another court date on Dec 4th. Their argument is 'Spirit of the Game' and ' Proselytizing' neither of which they can prove. There is no way Hayfield lawyer allows them to introduce any residency claims, any collusion and all the other stuff I've read on this forum that people think will be introduced. Simply put, none of that stuff applies to the claims at which VHSL decided to punish Hayfield. Remember they were not punished for having ineligible players, VHSL actually cleared them, so that's not a claim VHSL can now use.

That’s why Hayfield will get to play the season out. Not sure why the haters are acting like way they are. I don’t think they are so talented that no other team can win.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some if not a lot if not all of the Hayfield transfers came there to play football. Some of them may have been recruited, some actually may have an address where they don't actually reside.

My problem here is FCPS did not find anything and VHSL didn't do a thorough investigation so they are relying on 'this looks bad' to hold them accountable. VHSL neglected to actually act on their feelings and instead tried to take to the easy way out and prosecute Hayfield with sneak tactics (the timing) and rules they have in place, that they can't explain what they actually mean. (Spirit of the Game and Proselytizing Rule) The banning and the appeals were all heard by people and committee's appointed by VHSL. That was always going to end the way it did.

Those sneak tactics backfired on VHSL big time once the Hayfield parents decided to be heard by a neutral party, the courts. You can't bring your feelings into a court room and more so you have to provide facts to substantiate your claims.

I watched the judge ask the VHSL lawyer point blank question about their process and how it applied to Hayfield and the lawyer could not answer appropriately.

Snippets from court that hurt VHSL:
- VHSL lawyer says they aren't worried about the Spirit of the Game violation. The judge replies, well why are we here and why was this presented.
- Judge asked the VHSL lawyer, what does Proselytizing Rule mean. VHSL lawyer responds, 'That's a good question'.
- Judge tells the VHSL lawyer you've accused Hayfield of recruiting, I see nothing in your bylaws that defines recruiting. So what and how did they violate this?
- Judge tells the VHSL lawyer that you mentioned a track violation that Hayfield self reported. What does that have to do with the football team and why didn't you suspend the track team?
- Judge says to VHSL lawyer, you mentioned 31 students transferred from Freedom High School and 14 of them transferred to Hayfield. Where are the other 17? Have they been investigated? Are the schools they attending allowed to participate in the playoffs? The VHSL laywer responds (something to the effect), we have no idea.
- Lastly and to me most detrimental to VHSL case. VHSL claims FCPS did not do enough in their investigation. Judge ask the lawyer, where is the proof you did any investigation at all. Have you interviewed parents? Have you interviewed students? Did you do residency checks? All to which the answer was NO. The Judge replied, so what did you do because FCPS has provided documentation that they've actually did all these things.
- (this is what I think showed VHSL hand) VHSL told the judge, that Hayfield parents filing this emergency injunction at the last minute leaves them in a position to disrupt their playoffs. The judge replies, VHSL you decided to notify them with one week left in the season and they followed your appeals process to which they were officially disqualified on the last day of the regular season. The judge ripped this apart basically stating VHSL chose this path of timing.

In my opinion, Overton seems like he's a great coach that has parents willing to make the sacrifice to continue to have their children coached by him. This doesn't seem like a situation where the kids even needed to be recruited by him. However I do 100% believe they more than likely cut corners and covered their tracks to get kids enrolled at Hayfield. In America's court, when you accused somebody of something as VHSL did, you actually have to have proof, which VHSL neglected to provide or in this case or even put forth effort. They relied strictly on back door meetings to punish Hayfield and it backfired.

I said all this to say, Hayfield may not be clean, but the governing body VHSL severely dropped the ball on this. Additionally, I don't even know why they would attend another court date on Dec 4th. Their argument is 'Spirit of the Game' and ' Proselytizing' neither of which they can prove. There is no way Hayfield lawyer allows them to introduce any residency claims, any collusion and all the other stuff I've read on this forum that people think will be introduced. Simply put, none of that stuff applies to the claims at which VHSL decided to punish Hayfield. Remember they were not punished for having ineligible players, VHSL actually cleared them, so that's not a claim VHSL can now use.

That’s why Hayfield will get to play the season out. Not sure why the haters are acting like way they are. I don’t think they are so talented that no other team can win.

VHSL's concern should be (probably is) that if they let this slide, individual coaches and perhaps even entire schools around the state will start going past just gray areas in the rules and into outright cheating on the issue of recruiting and player residency and the like. I mean who doesn't want to play for, say, the best coach in their district/region for their sport? How many parents whose kids really want to play in college wouldn't be tempted to pull some shenanigans if they thought those shenanigans would improve the chances. Obviously many would pass - but if "everyone" is doing it after the Hayfield thing, then many won't.

If VHSL's rules on this are ambiguous and don't hold up in court, they need to get some lawyers in there and fix them, or this problem keeps getting worse and there keep being lawsuits over this school's X team and that school's Y team.

[Anonymous]

I can’t believe y’all still talking about this. Like move on already.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think some if not a lot if not all of the Hayfield transfers came there to play football. Some of them may have been recruited, some actually may have an address where they don't actually reside.

My problem here is FCPS did not find anything and VHSL didn't do a thorough investigation so they are relying on 'this looks bad' to hold them accountable. VHSL neglected to actually act on their feelings and instead tried to take to the easy way out and prosecute Hayfield with sneak tactics (the timing) and rules they have in place, that they can't explain what they actually mean. (Spirit of the Game and Proselytizing Rule) The banning and the appeals were all heard by people and committee's appointed by VHSL. That was always going to end the way it did.

Those sneak tactics backfired on VHSL big time once the Hayfield parents decided to be heard by a neutral party, the courts. You can't bring your feelings into a court room and more so you have to provide facts to substantiate your claims.

I watched the judge ask the VHSL lawyer point blank question about their process and how it applied to Hayfield and the lawyer could not answer appropriately.

Snippets from court that hurt VHSL:
- VHSL lawyer says they aren't worried about the Spirit of the Game violation. The judge replies, well why are we here and why was this presented.
- Judge asked the VHSL lawyer, what does Proselytizing Rule mean. VHSL lawyer responds, 'That's a good question'.
- Judge tells the VHSL lawyer you've accused Hayfield of recruiting, I see nothing in your bylaws that defines recruiting. So what and how did they violate this?
- Judge tells the VHSL lawyer that you mentioned a track violation that Hayfield self reported. What does that have to do with the football team and why didn't you suspend the track team?
- Judge says to VHSL lawyer, you mentioned 31 students transferred from Freedom High School and 14 of them transferred to Hayfield. Where are the other 17? Have they been investigated? Are the schools they attending allowed to participate in the playoffs? The VHSL laywer responds (something to the effect), we have no idea.
- Lastly and to me most detrimental to VHSL case. VHSL claims FCPS did not do enough in their investigation. Judge ask the lawyer, where is the proof you did any investigation at all. Have you interviewed parents? Have you interviewed students? Did you do residency checks? All to which the answer was NO. The Judge replied, so what did you do because FCPS has provided documentation that they've actually did all these things.
- (this is what I think showed VHSL hand) VHSL told the judge, that Hayfield parents filing this emergency injunction at the last minute leaves them in a position to disrupt their playoffs. The judge replies, VHSL you decided to notify them with one week left in the season and they followed your appeals process to which they were officially disqualified on the last day of the regular season. The judge ripped this apart basically stating VHSL chose this path of timing.

In my opinion, Overton seems like he's a great coach that has parents willing to make the sacrifice to continue to have their children coached by him. This doesn't seem like a situation where the kids even needed to be recruited by him. However I do 100% believe they more than likely cut corners and covered their tracks to get kids enrolled at Hayfield. In America's court, when you accused somebody of something as VHSL did, you actually have to have proof, which VHSL neglected to provide or in this case or even put forth effort. They relied strictly on back door meetings to punish Hayfield and it backfired.

I said all this to say, Hayfield may not be clean, but the governing body VHSL severely dropped the ball on this. Additionally, I don't even know why they would attend another court date on Dec 4th. Their argument is 'Spirit of the Game' and ' Proselytizing' neither of which they can prove. There is no way Hayfield lawyer allows them to introduce any residency claims, any collusion and all the other stuff I've read on this forum that people think will be introduced. Simply put, none of that stuff applies to the claims at which VHSL decided to punish Hayfield. Remember they were not punished for having ineligible players, VHSL actually cleared them, so that's not a claim VHSL can now use.

DP. Speaking as a lawyer (since a lot of us are lawyers), vague rules with somewhat-or-entirely undefined terms are known by all parties but can be problematic in litigation. The point is, how often have these terms been litigated? Not often, so they have not been narrowly defined. By this lawsuit, these parents are only making problems for themselves, ultimately, as VHSL will write more narrowly written terms that will have exceptions and caveats, instead of broader terms that are just understood by everyone (and spend time and money doing it). Along the same vein, why do you think VHSL can and should have lots of expensive lawyers sitting around, drafting rules and litigating?

FWIW, you sound like a litigator yourself. Long on arguing, not long on following rules, understanding rules, or understanding long-term impact of behavior in a system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some if not a lot if not all of the Hayfield transfers came there to play football. Some of them may have been recruited, some actually may have an address where they don't actually reside.

My problem here is FCPS did not find anything and VHSL didn't do a thorough investigation so they are relying on 'this looks bad' to hold them accountable. VHSL neglected to actually act on their feelings and instead tried to take to the easy way out and prosecute Hayfield with sneak tactics (the timing) and rules they have in place, that they can't explain what they actually mean. (Spirit of the Game and Proselytizing Rule) The banning and the appeals were all heard by people and committee's appointed by VHSL. That was always going to end the way it did.

Those sneak tactics backfired on VHSL big time once the Hayfield parents decided to be heard by a neutral party, the courts. You can't bring your feelings into a court room and more so you have to provide facts to substantiate your claims.

I watched the judge ask the VHSL lawyer point blank question about their process and how it applied to Hayfield and the lawyer could not answer appropriately.

Snippets from court that hurt VHSL:
- VHSL lawyer says they aren't worried about the Spirit of the Game violation. The judge replies, well why are we here and why was this presented.
- Judge asked the VHSL lawyer, what does Proselytizing Rule mean. VHSL lawyer responds, 'That's a good question'.
- Judge tells the VHSL lawyer you've accused Hayfield of recruiting, I see nothing in your bylaws that defines recruiting. So what and how did they violate this?
- Judge tells the VHSL lawyer that you mentioned a track violation that Hayfield self reported. What does that have to do with the football team and why didn't you suspend the track team?
- Judge says to VHSL lawyer, you mentioned 31 students transferred from Freedom High School and 14 of them transferred to Hayfield. Where are the other 17? Have they been investigated? Are the schools they attending allowed to participate in the playoffs? The VHSL laywer responds (something to the effect), we have no idea.
- Lastly and to me most detrimental to VHSL case. VHSL claims FCPS did not do enough in their investigation. Judge ask the lawyer, where is the proof you did any investigation at all. Have you interviewed parents? Have you interviewed students? Did you do residency checks? All to which the answer was NO. The Judge replied, so what did you do because FCPS has provided documentation that they've actually did all these things.
- (this is what I think showed VHSL hand) VHSL told the judge, that Hayfield parents filing this emergency injunction at the last minute leaves them in a position to disrupt their playoffs. The judge replies, VHSL you decided to notify them with one week left in the season and they followed your appeals process to which they were officially disqualified on the last day of the regular season. The judge ripped this apart basically stating VHSL chose this path of timing.

In my opinion, Overton seems like he's a great coach that has parents willing to make the sacrifice to continue to have their children coached by him. This doesn't seem like a situation where the kids even needed to be recruited by him. However I do 100% believe they more than likely cut corners and covered their tracks to get kids enrolled at Hayfield. In America's court, when you accused somebody of something as VHSL did, you actually have to have proof, which VHSL neglected to provide or in this case or even put forth effort. They relied strictly on back door meetings to punish Hayfield and it backfired.

I said all this to say, Hayfield may not be clean, but the governing body VHSL severely dropped the ball on this. Additionally, I don't even know why they would attend another court date on Dec 4th. Their argument is 'Spirit of the Game' and ' Proselytizing' neither of which they can prove. There is no way Hayfield lawyer allows them to introduce any residency claims, any collusion and all the other stuff I've read on this forum that people think will be introduced. Simply put, none of that stuff applies to the claims at which VHSL decided to punish Hayfield. Remember they were not punished for having ineligible players, VHSL actually cleared them, so that's not a claim VHSL can now use.

That’s why Hayfield will get to play the season out. Not sure why the haters are acting like way they are. I don’t think they are so talented that no other team can win.

VHSL's concern should be (probably is) that if they let this slide, individual coaches and perhaps even entire schools around the state will start going past just gray areas in the rules and into outright cheating on the issue of recruiting and player residency and the like. I mean who doesn't want to play for, say, the best coach in their district/region for their sport? How many parents whose kids really want to play in college wouldn't be tempted to pull some shenanigans if they thought those shenanigans would improve the chances. Obviously many would pass - but if "everyone" is doing it after the Hayfield thing, then many won't.

If VHSL's rules on this are ambiguous and don't hold up in court, they need to get some lawyers in there and fix them, or this problem keeps getting worse and there keep being lawsuits over this school's X team and that school's Y team.

100% agreed. If that is a concern for VHSL, they need to dedicate their resources to updating their rulebook to not allow these violations. At the end of the day it seems like Hayfield used VHSL's own rules to their advantage, which I'm sure others have/are as well, but they did it to a level that highlights the inconsistencies. If VHSL really wants to solve their problems they will update their rules to be black and white with no grey area. However, I'm not convinced VHSL wants to remove the grey area as their would more than likely as their would more than likely have unintended victims (take that how you want), but they can't have it both ways and pick and chose when to enforce.

Hayfield has definitely set a precedent that you should challenge all ambiguous rules that don't actual require any facts to punish. This would not be the case if the rules were blank and white.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some if not a lot if not all of the Hayfield transfers came there to play football. Some of them may have been recruited, some actually may have an address where they don't actually reside.

My problem here is FCPS did not find anything and VHSL didn't do a thorough investigation so they are relying on 'this looks bad' to hold them accountable. VHSL neglected to actually act on their feelings and instead tried to take to the easy way out and prosecute Hayfield with sneak tactics (the timing) and rules they have in place, that they can't explain what they actually mean. (Spirit of the Game and Proselytizing Rule) The banning and the appeals were all heard by people and committee's appointed by VHSL. That was always going to end the way it did.

Those sneak tactics backfired on VHSL big time once the Hayfield parents decided to be heard by a neutral party, the courts. You can't bring your feelings into a court room and more so you have to provide facts to substantiate your claims.

I watched the judge ask the VHSL lawyer point blank question about their process and how it applied to Hayfield and the lawyer could not answer appropriately.

Snippets from court that hurt VHSL:
- VHSL lawyer says they aren't worried about the Spirit of the Game violation. The judge replies, well why are we here and why was this presented.
- Judge asked the VHSL lawyer, what does Proselytizing Rule mean. VHSL lawyer responds, 'That's a good question'.
- Judge tells the VHSL lawyer you've accused Hayfield of recruiting, I see nothing in your bylaws that defines recruiting. So what and how did they violate this?
- Judge tells the VHSL lawyer that you mentioned a track violation that Hayfield self reported. What does that have to do with the football team and why didn't you suspend the track team?
- Judge says to VHSL lawyer, you mentioned 31 students transferred from Freedom High School and 14 of them transferred to Hayfield. Where are the other 17? Have they been investigated? Are the schools they attending allowed to participate in the playoffs? The VHSL laywer responds (something to the effect), we have no idea.
- Lastly and to me most detrimental to VHSL case. VHSL claims FCPS did not do enough in their investigation. Judge ask the lawyer, where is the proof you did any investigation at all. Have you interviewed parents? Have you interviewed students? Did you do residency checks? All to which the answer was NO. The Judge replied, so what did you do because FCPS has provided documentation that they've actually did all these things.
- (this is what I think showed VHSL hand) VHSL told the judge, that Hayfield parents filing this emergency injunction at the last minute leaves them in a position to disrupt their playoffs. The judge replies, VHSL you decided to notify them with one week left in the season and they followed your appeals process to which they were officially disqualified on the last day of the regular season. The judge ripped this apart basically stating VHSL chose this path of timing.

In my opinion, Overton seems like he's a great coach that has parents willing to make the sacrifice to continue to have their children coached by him. This doesn't seem like a situation where the kids even needed to be recruited by him. However I do 100% believe they more than likely cut corners and covered their tracks to get kids enrolled at Hayfield. In America's court, when you accused somebody of something as VHSL did, you actually have to have proof, which VHSL neglected to provide or in this case or even put forth effort. They relied strictly on back door meetings to punish Hayfield and it backfired.

I said all this to say, Hayfield may not be clean, but the governing body VHSL severely dropped the ball on this. Additionally, I don't even know why they would attend another court date on Dec 4th. Their argument is 'Spirit of the Game' and ' Proselytizing' neither of which they can prove. There is no way Hayfield lawyer allows them to introduce any residency claims, any collusion and all the other stuff I've read on this forum that people think will be introduced. Simply put, none of that stuff applies to the claims at which VHSL decided to punish Hayfield. Remember they were not punished for having ineligible players, VHSL actually cleared them, so that's not a claim VHSL can now use.

That’s why Hayfield will get to play the season out. Not sure why the haters are acting like way they are. I don’t think they are so talented that no other team can win.

VHSL's concern should be (probably is) that if they let this slide, individual coaches and perhaps even entire schools around the state will start going past just gray areas in the rules and into outright cheating on the issue of recruiting and player residency and the like. I mean who doesn't want to play for, say, the best coach in their district/region for their sport? How many parents whose kids really want to play in college wouldn't be tempted to pull some shenanigans if they thought those shenanigans would improve the chances. Obviously many would pass - but if "everyone" is doing it after the Hayfield thing, then many won't.

If VHSL's rules on this are ambiguous and don't hold up in court, they need to get some lawyers in there and fix them, or this problem keeps getting worse and there keep being lawsuits over this school's X team and that school's Y team.

100% agreed. If that is a concern for VHSL, they need to dedicate their resources to updating their rulebook to not allow these violations. At the end of the day it seems like Hayfield used VHSL's own rules to their advantage, which I'm sure others have/are as well, but they did it to a level that highlights the inconsistencies. If VHSL really wants to solve their problems they will update their rules to be black and white with no grey area. However, I'm not convinced VHSL wants to remove the grey area as their would more than likely as their would more than likely have unintended victims (take that how you want), but they can't have it both ways and pick and chose when to enforce.

Hayfield has definitely set a precedent that you should challenge all ambiguous rules that don't actual require any facts to punish. This would not be the case if the rules were blank and white.

We shall see. Fwiw, sportsmanship ≠ suing when you get banned and lose two appeals. Sorry not sorry.

(Bringing lawyers and lawsuits into things rarely makes anything better. Hayfield should be careful and hope they don't get more than they asked for.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Forgotten in all of this is the fact that Overton has made a career out of cheating and flaunting the rules. A couple of highlights:

In 2021 Freedom Principal Inez Bryant directed Overton to not dress a player because he was ineligible. Overton ignored him, twice. Overton then claimed it was an "honest mistake" (as if that clown knows what honesty is).

Investigations against Overton while he was at Freedom recommended that he face disciplinary action for other violations including use of county property for his own financial gain.

He was caught doing the exact same thing Potomac and had to pay several fines.

After Reid's "investigation" nearly 10 of Overton's illegal recruits were deemed ineligible based on residency, confirming someone had them lie and that the investigation was a sham.

A number of Overton's transfers broke the law by claiming they were homeless to get enrolled even faster.

Overton lied about his qualifications and certifications to get the security job and was still hired for the head of security role at Hayfield. And, even after word got out that he hadn't taken a required 60 hour course to get in compliance, the school's administration still ignored the issue for over 90 days.

Overton hired a coach who offered drugs to a minor and he faced no disciplinary action for such a gross oversight.

Overton threatened a mother online.

Nearly $30K from a "fundraiser" Overton promoted is unaccounted for.

The company that Overton hired for the above-mentioned "fundraiser" is run by his friend and isn't registered to actually collect funds in VA.

Overton's sham nonprofit, Playmakers Elite Athletic Training, had its status automatically terminated by the Commonwealth in 2023 and is in violation of the law for continuing to operate for at least another year after that. Virginia Attorney General’s Office or a local Commonwealth Attorney’s office should and could prosecute at any time.

Overton hasn't filed 990s for his sham nonprofit ever.

Overton has proudly compared himself to Bobby Knight (this might be the only time in his life he demonstrated a shed of self-awareness by comparing himself to a Trumper who was verbally and physically abusive to others).

Overton has consistently thrown his own players under the bus. Most recently he disputed the timing of a DeMatha transfer into Hayfield and directly contradicted the transfer's (truthful) accounting of the timeline which initially put his eligibility in doubt.

Overton tried requiring that team fees be paid only in cash or via cash app and had to be made directly to him or the "team mom," in violation of state law and FCPS regulations.

Overton allowed his staff to publicly humiliate a returning member of the Hayfield team, with the staffer ripping the player's belongings ripped out of his locker in front of team members while berating him verbally with abusive language that was racial and sexual in nature.

I’d say you know a lot about this Overton guy to not be Overton. Wonder how close you are to the situation

NP here.
A lot of this is public (or at least has been widely shared).

I’m aware of a lot that’s been shared, but I’m also aware a lot of this is propaganda n witch hunt. But ok believe whatever makes you feel good

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can’t believe y’all still talking about this. Like move on already.

yet here you are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some if not a lot if not all of the Hayfield transfers came there to play football. Some of them may have been recruited, some actually may have an address where they don't actually reside.

My problem here is FCPS did not find anything and VHSL didn't do a thorough investigation so they are relying on 'this looks bad' to hold them accountable. VHSL neglected to actually act on their feelings and instead tried to take to the easy way out and prosecute Hayfield with sneak tactics (the timing) and rules they have in place, that they can't explain what they actually mean. (Spirit of the Game and Proselytizing Rule) The banning and the appeals were all heard by people and committee's appointed by VHSL. That was always going to end the way it did.

Those sneak tactics backfired on VHSL big time once the Hayfield parents decided to be heard by a neutral party, the courts. You can't bring your feelings into a court room and more so you have to provide facts to substantiate your claims.

I watched the judge ask the VHSL lawyer point blank question about their process and how it applied to Hayfield and the lawyer could not answer appropriately.

Snippets from court that hurt VHSL:
- VHSL lawyer says they aren't worried about the Spirit of the Game violation. The judge replies, well why are we here and why was this presented.
- Judge asked the VHSL lawyer, what does Proselytizing Rule mean. VHSL lawyer responds, 'That's a good question'.
- Judge tells the VHSL lawyer you've accused Hayfield of recruiting, I see nothing in your bylaws that defines recruiting. So what and how did they violate this?
- Judge tells the VHSL lawyer that you mentioned a track violation that Hayfield self reported. What does that have to do with the football team and why didn't you suspend the track team?
- Judge says to VHSL lawyer, you mentioned 31 students transferred from Freedom High School and 14 of them transferred to Hayfield. Where are the other 17? Have they been investigated? Are the schools they attending allowed to participate in the playoffs? The VHSL laywer responds (something to the effect), we have no idea.
- Lastly and to me most detrimental to VHSL case. VHSL claims FCPS did not do enough in their investigation. Judge ask the lawyer, where is the proof you did any investigation at all. Have you interviewed parents? Have you interviewed students? Did you do residency checks? All to which the answer was NO. The Judge replied, so what did you do because FCPS has provided documentation that they've actually did all these things.
- (this is what I think showed VHSL hand) VHSL told the judge, that Hayfield parents filing this emergency injunction at the last minute leaves them in a position to disrupt their playoffs. The judge replies, VHSL you decided to notify them with one week left in the season and they followed your appeals process to which they were officially disqualified on the last day of the regular season. The judge ripped this apart basically stating VHSL chose this path of timing.

In my opinion, Overton seems like he's a great coach that has parents willing to make the sacrifice to continue to have their children coached by him. This doesn't seem like a situation where the kids even needed to be recruited by him. However I do 100% believe they more than likely cut corners and covered their tracks to get kids enrolled at Hayfield. In America's court, when you accused somebody of something as VHSL did, you actually have to have proof, which VHSL neglected to provide or in this case or even put forth effort. They relied strictly on back door meetings to punish Hayfield and it backfired.

I said all this to say, Hayfield may not be clean, but the governing body VHSL severely dropped the ball on this. Additionally, I don't even know why they would attend another court date on Dec 4th. Their argument is 'Spirit of the Game' and ' Proselytizing' neither of which they can prove. There is no way Hayfield lawyer allows them to introduce any residency claims, any collusion and all the other stuff I've read on this forum that people think will be introduced. Simply put, none of that stuff applies to the claims at which VHSL decided to punish Hayfield. Remember they were not punished for having ineligible players, VHSL actually cleared them, so that's not a claim VHSL can now use.

DP. Speaking as a lawyer (since a lot of us are lawyers), vague rules with somewhat-or-entirely undefined terms are known by all parties but can be problematic in litigation. The point is, how often have these terms been litigated? Not often, so they have not been narrowly defined. By this lawsuit, these parents are only making problems for themselves, ultimately, as VHSL will write more narrowly written terms that will have exceptions and caveats, instead of broader terms that are just understood by everyone (and spend time and money doing it). Along the same vein, why do you think VHSL can and should have lots of expensive lawyers sitting around, drafting rules and litigating?

FWIW, you sound like a litigator yourself. Long on arguing, not long on following rules, understanding rules, or understanding long-term impact of behavior in a system.

The argue your point, I don't think THESE parents are creating more problems for themselves as any rules re-defined and wrote by VHSL likely wont apply to this group of SENIORS. That being said, if their are rules in place that discourage future parents from doing exactly what these parents did, I don't think they would have done them. Example, If there was a rule that states, 'If a coach is hired by a new school, no player on his previous roster can participate on his new roster the following year". I highly doubt the parents willing to move to continue to play with the coach would knowingly doing so knowing there is a black and white rule stating your child will be ineligible. If they still choose to move, if the coach/school still chooses to allow that kid to participate, they have no grounds to stand on and have to adhere to any punishment for actually break a rule.

Personally, I don't think VHSL should have lots of expensive lawyers sitting around, drafting rules and litigating, however if they'd rather operate under the current ambiguous rules that were more than likely written a decade ago, prior to society continuing to progress, so be it. If this has showing us anything it that VHSL rules need to be update, otherwise they will continue to find themselves in situations that their rules don't support. Additionally, we all have opinions on this situation, but lets be 100% clear aside from the public outcry and internet (anonymous) bashing/assumptions, Hayfield has not been technically found to have done any 'wrongdoing' by VHSL or FCPS.

Yes, I actively practice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think some if not a lot if not all of the Hayfield transfers came there to play football. Some of them may have been recruited, some actually may have an address where they don't actually reside.

My problem here is FCPS did not find anything and VHSL didn't do a thorough investigation so they are relying on 'this looks bad' to hold them accountable. VHSL neglected to actually act on their feelings and instead tried to take to the easy way out and prosecute Hayfield with sneak tactics (the timing) and rules they have in place, that they can't explain what they actually mean. (Spirit of the Game and Proselytizing Rule) The banning and the appeals were all heard by people and committee's appointed by VHSL. That was always going to end the way it did.

Those sneak tactics backfired on VHSL big time once the Hayfield parents decided to be heard by a neutral party, the courts. You can't bring your feelings into a court room and more so you have to provide facts to substantiate your claims.

I watched the judge ask the VHSL lawyer point blank question about their process and how it applied to Hayfield and the lawyer could not answer appropriately.

Snippets from court that hurt VHSL:
- VHSL lawyer says they aren't worried about the Spirit of the Game violation. The judge replies, well why are we here and why was this presented.
- Judge asked the VHSL lawyer, what does Proselytizing Rule mean. VHSL lawyer responds, 'That's a good question'.
- Judge tells the VHSL lawyer you've accused Hayfield of recruiting, I see nothing in your bylaws that defines recruiting. So what and how did they violate this?
- Judge tells the VHSL lawyer that you mentioned a track violation that Hayfield self reported. What does that have to do with the football team and why didn't you suspend the track team?
- Judge says to VHSL lawyer, you mentioned 31 students transferred from Freedom High School and 14 of them transferred to Hayfield. Where are the other 17? Have they been investigated? Are the schools they attending allowed to participate in the playoffs? The VHSL laywer responds (something to the effect), we have no idea.
- Lastly and to me most detrimental to VHSL case. VHSL claims FCPS did not do enough in their investigation. Judge ask the lawyer, where is the proof you did any investigation at all. Have you interviewed parents? Have you interviewed students? Did you do residency checks? All to which the answer was NO. The Judge replied, so what did you do because FCPS has provided documentation that they've actually did all these things.
- (this is what I think showed VHSL hand) VHSL told the judge, that Hayfield parents filing this emergency injunction at the last minute leaves them in a position to disrupt their playoffs. The judge replies, VHSL you decided to notify them with one week left in the season and they followed your appeals process to which they were officially disqualified on the last day of the regular season. The judge ripped this apart basically stating VHSL chose this path of timing.

In my opinion, Overton seems like he's a great coach that has parents willing to make the sacrifice to continue to have their children coached by him. This doesn't seem like a situation where the kids even needed to be recruited by him. However I do 100% believe they more than likely cut corners and covered their tracks to get kids enrolled at Hayfield. In America's court, when you accused somebody of something as VHSL did, you actually have to have proof, which VHSL neglected to provide or in this case or even put forth effort. They relied strictly on back door meetings to punish Hayfield and it backfired.

I said all this to say, Hayfield may not be clean, but the governing body VHSL severely dropped the ball on this. Additionally, I don't even know why they would attend another court date on Dec 4th. Their argument is 'Spirit of the Game' and ' Proselytizing' neither of which they can prove. There is no way Hayfield lawyer allows them to introduce any residency claims, any collusion and all the other stuff I've read on this forum that people think will be introduced. Simply put, none of that stuff applies to the claims at which VHSL decided to punish Hayfield. Remember they were not punished for having ineligible players, VHSL actually cleared them, so that's not a claim VHSL can now use.

This about sums it up, but I’m sure oh nm

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some if not a lot if not all of the Hayfield transfers came there to play football. Some of them may have been recruited, some actually may have an address where they don't actually reside.

My problem here is FCPS did not find anything and VHSL didn't do a thorough investigation so they are relying on 'this looks bad' to hold them accountable. VHSL neglected to actually act on their feelings and instead tried to take to the easy way out and prosecute Hayfield with sneak tactics (the timing) and rules they have in place, that they can't explain what they actually mean. (Spirit of the Game and Proselytizing Rule) The banning and the appeals were all heard by people and committee's appointed by VHSL. That was always going to end the way it did.

Those sneak tactics backfired on VHSL big time once the Hayfield parents decided to be heard by a neutral party, the courts. You can't bring your feelings into a court room and more so you have to provide facts to substantiate your claims.

I watched the judge ask the VHSL lawyer point blank question about their process and how it applied to Hayfield and the lawyer could not answer appropriately.

Snippets from court that hurt VHSL:
- VHSL lawyer says they aren't worried about the Spirit of the Game violation. The judge replies, well why are we here and why was this presented.
- Judge asked the VHSL lawyer, what does Proselytizing Rule mean. VHSL lawyer responds, 'That's a good question'.
- Judge tells the VHSL lawyer you've accused Hayfield of recruiting, I see nothing in your bylaws that defines recruiting. So what and how did they violate this?
- Judge tells the VHSL lawyer that you mentioned a track violation that Hayfield self reported. What does that have to do with the football team and why didn't you suspend the track team?
- Judge says to VHSL lawyer, you mentioned 31 students transferred from Freedom High School and 14 of them transferred to Hayfield. Where are the other 17? Have they been investigated? Are the schools they attending allowed to participate in the playoffs? The VHSL laywer responds (something to the effect), we have no idea.
- Lastly and to me most detrimental to VHSL case. VHSL claims FCPS did not do enough in their investigation. Judge ask the lawyer, where is the proof you did any investigation at all. Have you interviewed parents? Have you interviewed students? Did you do residency checks? All to which the answer was NO. The Judge replied, so what did you do because FCPS has provided documentation that they've actually did all these things.
- (this is what I think showed VHSL hand) VHSL told the judge, that Hayfield parents filing this emergency injunction at the last minute leaves them in a position to disrupt their playoffs. The judge replies, VHSL you decided to notify them with one week left in the season and they followed your appeals process to which they were officially disqualified on the last day of the regular season. The judge ripped this apart basically stating VHSL chose this path of timing.

In my opinion, Overton seems like he's a great coach that has parents willing to make the sacrifice to continue to have their children coached by him. This doesn't seem like a situation where the kids even needed to be recruited by him. However I do 100% believe they more than likely cut corners and covered their tracks to get kids enrolled at Hayfield. In America's court, when you accused somebody of something as VHSL did, you actually have to have proof, which VHSL neglected to provide or in this case or even put forth effort. They relied strictly on back door meetings to punish Hayfield and it backfired.

I said all this to say, Hayfield may not be clean, but the governing body VHSL severely dropped the ball on this. Additionally, I don't even know why they would attend another court date on Dec 4th. Their argument is 'Spirit of the Game' and ' Proselytizing' neither of which they can prove. There is no way Hayfield lawyer allows them to introduce any residency claims, any collusion and all the other stuff I've read on this forum that people think will be introduced. Simply put, none of that stuff applies to the claims at which VHSL decided to punish Hayfield. Remember they were not punished for having ineligible players, VHSL actually cleared them, so that's not a claim VHSL can now use.

That’s why Hayfield will get to play the season out. Not sure why the haters are acting like way they are. I don’t think they are so talented that no other team can win.

VHSL's concern should be (probably is) that if they let this slide, individual coaches and perhaps even entire schools around the state will start going past just gray areas in the rules and into outright cheating on the issue of recruiting and player residency and the like. I mean who doesn't want to play for, say, the best coach in their district/region for their sport? How many parents whose kids really want to play in college wouldn't be tempted to pull some shenanigans if they thought those shenanigans would improve the chances. Obviously many would pass - but if "everyone" is doing it after the Hayfield thing, then many won't.

If VHSL's rules on this are ambiguous and don't hold up in court, they need to get some lawyers in there and fix them, or this problem keeps getting worse and there keep being lawsuits over this school's X team and that school's Y team.

100% agreed. If that is a concern for VHSL, they need to dedicate their resources to updating their rulebook to not allow these violations. At the end of the day it seems like Hayfield used VHSL's own rules to their advantage, which I'm sure others have/are as well, but they did it to a level that highlights the inconsistencies. If VHSL really wants to solve their problems they will update their rules to be black and white with no grey area. However, I'm not convinced VHSL wants to remove the grey area as their would more than likely as their would more than likely have unintended victims (take that how you want), but they can't have it both ways and pick and chose when to enforce.

Hayfield has definitely set a precedent that you should challenge all ambiguous rules that don't actual require any facts to punish. This would not be the case if the rules were blank and white.

We shall see. Fwiw, sportsmanship ≠ suing when you get banned and lose two appeals. Sorry not sorry.

(Bringing lawyers and lawsuits into things rarely makes anything better. Hayfield should be careful and hope they don't get more than they asked for.)

Very low risk for the Hayfield parents. If they would have lost the petition and the playoffs had actually started without them, there's nothing to actually 'fight' for and I feel like they would have moved on. Remember, majority of the kids mentioned in their petition are seniors. There high school football careers will be over in 4 weeks, win or lose.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some if not a lot if not all of the Hayfield transfers came there to play football. Some of them may have been recruited, some actually may have an address where they don't actually reside.

My problem here is FCPS did not find anything and VHSL didn't do a thorough investigation so they are relying on 'this looks bad' to hold them accountable. VHSL neglected to actually act on their feelings and instead tried to take to the easy way out and prosecute Hayfield with sneak tactics (the timing) and rules they have in place, that they can't explain what they actually mean. (Spirit of the Game and Proselytizing Rule) The banning and the appeals were all heard by people and committee's appointed by VHSL. That was always going to end the way it did.

Those sneak tactics backfired on VHSL big time once the Hayfield parents decided to be heard by a neutral party, the courts. You can't bring your feelings into a court room and more so you have to provide facts to substantiate your claims.

I watched the judge ask the VHSL lawyer point blank question about their process and how it applied to Hayfield and the lawyer could not answer appropriately.

Snippets from court that hurt VHSL:
- VHSL lawyer says they aren't worried about the Spirit of the Game violation. The judge replies, well why are we here and why was this presented.
- Judge asked the VHSL lawyer, what does Proselytizing Rule mean. VHSL lawyer responds, 'That's a good question'.
- Judge tells the VHSL lawyer you've accused Hayfield of recruiting, I see nothing in your bylaws that defines recruiting. So what and how did they violate this?
- Judge tells the VHSL lawyer that you mentioned a track violation that Hayfield self reported. What does that have to do with the football team and why didn't you suspend the track team?
- Judge says to VHSL lawyer, you mentioned 31 students transferred from Freedom High School and 14 of them transferred to Hayfield. Where are the other 17? Have they been investigated? Are the schools they attending allowed to participate in the playoffs? The VHSL laywer responds (something to the effect), we have no idea.
- Lastly and to me most detrimental to VHSL case. VHSL claims FCPS did not do enough in their investigation. Judge ask the lawyer, where is the proof you did any investigation at all. Have you interviewed parents? Have you interviewed students? Did you do residency checks? All to which the answer was NO. The Judge replied, so what did you do because FCPS has provided documentation that they've actually did all these things.
- (this is what I think showed VHSL hand) VHSL told the judge, that Hayfield parents filing this emergency injunction at the last minute leaves them in a position to disrupt their playoffs. The judge replies, VHSL you decided to notify them with one week left in the season and they followed your appeals process to which they were officially disqualified on the last day of the regular season. The judge ripped this apart basically stating VHSL chose this path of timing.

In my opinion, Overton seems like he's a great coach that has parents willing to make the sacrifice to continue to have their children coached by him. This doesn't seem like a situation where the kids even needed to be recruited by him. However I do 100% believe they more than likely cut corners and covered their tracks to get kids enrolled at Hayfield. In America's court, when you accused somebody of something as VHSL did, you actually have to have proof, which VHSL neglected to provide or in this case or even put forth effort. They relied strictly on back door meetings to punish Hayfield and it backfired.

I said all this to say, Hayfield may not be clean, but the governing body VHSL severely dropped the ball on this. Additionally, I don't even know why they would attend another court date on Dec 4th. Their argument is 'Spirit of the Game' and ' Proselytizing' neither of which they can prove. There is no way Hayfield lawyer allows them to introduce any residency claims, any collusion and all the other stuff I've read on this forum that people think will be introduced. Simply put, none of that stuff applies to the claims at which VHSL decided to punish Hayfield. Remember they were not punished for having ineligible players, VHSL actually cleared them, so that's not a claim VHSL can now use.

That’s why Hayfield will get to play the season out. Not sure why the haters are acting like way they are. I don’t think they are so talented that no other team can win.

VHSL's concern should be (probably is) that if they let this slide, individual coaches and perhaps even entire schools around the state will start going past just gray areas in the rules and into outright cheating on the issue of recruiting and player residency and the like. I mean who doesn't want to play for, say, the best coach in their district/region for their sport? How many parents whose kids really want to play in college wouldn't be tempted to pull some shenanigans if they thought those shenanigans would improve the chances. Obviously many would pass - but if "everyone" is doing it after the Hayfield thing, then many won't.

If VHSL's rules on this are ambiguous and don't hold up in court, they need to get some lawyers in there and fix them, or this problem keeps getting worse and there keep being lawsuits over this school's X team and that school's Y team.

100% agreed. If that is a concern for VHSL, they need to dedicate their resources to updating their rulebook to not allow these violations. At the end of the day it seems like Hayfield used VHSL's own rules to their advantage, which I'm sure others have/are as well, but they did it to a level that highlights the inconsistencies. If VHSL really wants to solve their problems they will update their rules to be black and white with no grey area. However, I'm not convinced VHSL wants to remove the grey area as their would more than likely as their would more than likely have unintended victims (take that how you want), but they can't have it both ways and pick and chose when to enforce.

Hayfield has definitely set a precedent that you should challenge all ambiguous rules that don't actual require any facts to punish. This would not be the case if the rules were blank and white.

We shall see. Fwiw, sportsmanship ≠ suing when you get banned and lose two appeals. Sorry not sorry.

(Bringing lawyers and lawsuits into things rarely makes anything better. Hayfield should be careful and hope they don't get more than they asked for.)

FWIW, losing 2 appeals by 2 committee's hand selected by the single person that levied the punishment, doesn't exactly scream fair.

In the real world, appeals are heard by totally unbiased parties if for no other reason to not be influenced by previous bias on known information. VHSL has a structure set up where the punishment is levied by THEM. An initial appeal is set up by THEM. The additional appeal is set up by THEM. I bet if we dive a little deeper into situations that were appealed on VHSL ruling, they are very consistent with this appeal structure and final ruling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some if not a lot if not all of the Hayfield transfers came there to play football. Some of them may have been recruited, some actually may have an address where they don't actually reside.

My problem here is FCPS did not find anything and VHSL didn't do a thorough investigation so they are relying on 'this looks bad' to hold them accountable. VHSL neglected to actually act on their feelings and instead tried to take to the easy way out and prosecute Hayfield with sneak tactics (the timing) and rules they have in place, that they can't explain what they actually mean. (Spirit of the Game and Proselytizing Rule) The banning and the appeals were all heard by people and committee's appointed by VHSL. That was always going to end the way it did.

Those sneak tactics backfired on VHSL big time once the Hayfield parents decided to be heard by a neutral party, the courts. You can't bring your feelings into a court room and more so you have to provide facts to substantiate your claims.

I watched the judge ask the VHSL lawyer point blank question about their process and how it applied to Hayfield and the lawyer could not answer appropriately.

Snippets from court that hurt VHSL:
- VHSL lawyer says they aren't worried about the Spirit of the Game violation. The judge replies, well why are we here and why was this presented.
- Judge asked the VHSL lawyer, what does Proselytizing Rule mean. VHSL lawyer responds, 'That's a good question'.
- Judge tells the VHSL lawyer you've accused Hayfield of recruiting, I see nothing in your bylaws that defines recruiting. So what and how did they violate this?
- Judge tells the VHSL lawyer that you mentioned a track violation that Hayfield self reported. What does that have to do with the football team and why didn't you suspend the track team?
- Judge says to VHSL lawyer, you mentioned 31 students transferred from Freedom High School and 14 of them transferred to Hayfield. Where are the other 17? Have they been investigated? Are the schools they attending allowed to participate in the playoffs? The VHSL laywer responds (something to the effect), we have no idea.
- Lastly and to me most detrimental to VHSL case. VHSL claims FCPS did not do enough in their investigation. Judge ask the lawyer, where is the proof you did any investigation at all. Have you interviewed parents? Have you interviewed students? Did you do residency checks? All to which the answer was NO. The Judge replied, so what did you do because FCPS has provided documentation that they've actually did all these things.
- (this is what I think showed VHSL hand) VHSL told the judge, that Hayfield parents filing this emergency injunction at the last minute leaves them in a position to disrupt their playoffs. The judge replies, VHSL you decided to notify them with one week left in the season and they followed your appeals process to which they were officially disqualified on the last day of the regular season. The judge ripped this apart basically stating VHSL chose this path of timing.

In my opinion, Overton seems like he's a great coach that has parents willing to make the sacrifice to continue to have their children coached by him. This doesn't seem like a situation where the kids even needed to be recruited by him. However I do 100% believe they more than likely cut corners and covered their tracks to get kids enrolled at Hayfield. In America's court, when you accused somebody of something as VHSL did, you actually have to have proof, which VHSL neglected to provide or in this case or even put forth effort. They relied strictly on back door meetings to punish Hayfield and it backfired.

I said all this to say, Hayfield may not be clean, but the governing body VHSL severely dropped the ball on this. Additionally, I don't even know why they would attend another court date on Dec 4th. Their argument is 'Spirit of the Game' and ' Proselytizing' neither of which they can prove. There is no way Hayfield lawyer allows them to introduce any residency claims, any collusion and all the other stuff I've read on this forum that people think will be introduced. Simply put, none of that stuff applies to the claims at which VHSL decided to punish Hayfield. Remember they were not punished for having ineligible players, VHSL actually cleared them, so that's not a claim VHSL can now use.

That’s why Hayfield will get to play the season out. Not sure why the haters are acting like way they are. I don’t think they are so talented that no other team can win.

VHSL's concern should be (probably is) that if they let this slide, individual coaches and perhaps even entire schools around the state will start going past just gray areas in the rules and into outright cheating on the issue of recruiting and player residency and the like. I mean who doesn't want to play for, say, the best coach in their district/region for their sport? How many parents whose kids really want to play in college wouldn't be tempted to pull some shenanigans if they thought those shenanigans would improve the chances. Obviously many would pass - but if "everyone" is doing it after the Hayfield thing, then many won't.

If VHSL's rules on this are ambiguous and don't hold up in court, they need to get some lawyers in there and fix them, or this problem keeps getting worse and there keep being lawsuits over this school's X team and that school's Y team.

100% agreed. If that is a concern for VHSL, they need to dedicate their resources to updating their rulebook to not allow these violations. At the end of the day it seems like Hayfield used VHSL's own rules to their advantage, which I'm sure others have/are as well, but they did it to a level that highlights the inconsistencies. If VHSL really wants to solve their problems they will update their rules to be black and white with no grey area. However, I'm not convinced VHSL wants to remove the grey area as their would more than likely as their would more than likely have unintended victims (take that how you want), but they can't have it both ways and pick and chose when to enforce.

Hayfield has definitely set a precedent that you should challenge all ambiguous rules that don't actual require any facts to punish. This would not be the case if the rules were blank and white.

We shall see. Fwiw, sportsmanship ≠ suing when you get banned and lose two appeals. Sorry not sorry.

(Bringing lawyers and lawsuits into things rarely makes anything better. Hayfield should be careful and hope they don't get more than they asked for.)

FWIW, losing 2 appeals by 2 committee's hand selected by the single person that levied the punishment, doesn't exactly scream fair.

In the real world, appeals are heard by totally unbiased parties if for no other reason to not be influenced by previous bias on known information. VHSL has a structure set up where the punishment is levied by THEM. An initial appeal is set up by THEM. The additional appeal is set up by THEM. I bet if we dive a little deeper into situations that were appealed on VHSL ruling, they are very consistent with this appeal structure and final ruling.

In the real world, that's how organizations work. Are you thinking they should have gone to arbitration? SMH

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think some if not a lot if not all of the Hayfield transfers came there to play football. Some of them may have been recruited, some actually may have an address where they don't actually reside.

My problem here is FCPS did not find anything and VHSL didn't do a thorough investigation so they are relying on 'this looks bad' to hold them accountable. VHSL neglected to actually act on their feelings and instead tried to take to the easy way out and prosecute Hayfield with sneak tactics (the timing) and rules they have in place, that they can't explain what they actually mean. (Spirit of the Game and Proselytizing Rule) The banning and the appeals were all heard by people and committee's appointed by VHSL. That was always going to end the way it did.

Those sneak tactics backfired on VHSL big time once the Hayfield parents decided to be heard by a neutral party, the courts. You can't bring your feelings into a court room and more so you have to provide facts to substantiate your claims.

I watched the judge ask the VHSL lawyer point blank question about their process and how it applied to Hayfield and the lawyer could not answer appropriately.

Snippets from court that hurt VHSL:
- VHSL lawyer says they aren't worried about the Spirit of the Game violation. The judge replies, well why are we here and why was this presented.
- Judge asked the VHSL lawyer, what does Proselytizing Rule mean. VHSL lawyer responds, 'That's a good question'.
- Judge tells the VHSL lawyer you've accused Hayfield of recruiting, I see nothing in your bylaws that defines recruiting. So what and how did they violate this?
- Judge tells the VHSL lawyer that you mentioned a track violation that Hayfield self reported. What does that have to do with the football team and why didn't you suspend the track team?
- Judge says to VHSL lawyer, you mentioned 31 students transferred from Freedom High School and 14 of them transferred to Hayfield. Where are the other 17? Have they been investigated? Are the schools they attending allowed to participate in the playoffs? The VHSL laywer responds (something to the effect), we have no idea.
- Lastly and to me most detrimental to VHSL case. VHSL claims FCPS did not do enough in their investigation. Judge ask the lawyer, where is the proof you did any investigation at all. Have you interviewed parents? Have you interviewed students? Did you do residency checks? All to which the answer was NO. The Judge replied, so what did you do because FCPS has provided documentation that they've actually did all these things.
- (this is what I think showed VHSL hand) VHSL told the judge, that Hayfield parents filing this emergency injunction at the last minute leaves them in a position to disrupt their playoffs. The judge replies, VHSL you decided to notify them with one week left in the season and they followed your appeals process to which they were officially disqualified on the last day of the regular season. The judge ripped this apart basically stating VHSL chose this path of timing.

In my opinion, Overton seems like he's a great coach that has parents willing to make the sacrifice to continue to have their children coached by him. This doesn't seem like a situation where the kids even needed to be recruited by him. However I do 100% believe they more than likely cut corners and covered their tracks to get kids enrolled at Hayfield. In America's court, when you accused somebody of something as VHSL did, you actually have to have proof, which VHSL neglected to provide or in this case or even put forth effort. They relied strictly on back door meetings to punish Hayfield and it backfired.

I said all this to say, Hayfield may not be clean, but the governing body VHSL severely dropped the ball on this. Additionally, I don't even know why they would attend another court date on Dec 4th. Their argument is 'Spirit of the Game' and ' Proselytizing' neither of which they can prove. There is no way Hayfield lawyer allows them to introduce any residency claims, any collusion and all the other stuff I've read on this forum that people think will be introduced. Simply put, none of that stuff applies to the claims at which VHSL decided to punish Hayfield. Remember they were not punished for having ineligible players, VHSL actually cleared them, so that's not a claim VHSL can now use.

That’s why Hayfield will get to play the season out. Not sure why the haters are acting like way they are. I don’t think they are so talented that no other team can win.

VHSL's concern should be (probably is) that if they let this slide, individual coaches and perhaps even entire schools around the state will start going past just gray areas in the rules and into outright cheating on the issue of recruiting and player residency and the like. I mean who doesn't want to play for, say, the best coach in their district/region for their sport? How many parents whose kids really want to play in college wouldn't be tempted to pull some shenanigans if they thought those shenanigans would improve the chances. Obviously many would pass - but if "everyone" is doing it after the Hayfield thing, then many won't.

If VHSL's rules on this are ambiguous and don't hold up in court, they need to get some lawyers in there and fix them, or this problem keeps getting worse and there keep being lawsuits over this school's X team and that school's Y team.

100% agreed. If that is a concern for VHSL, they need to dedicate their resources to updating their rulebook to not allow these violations. At the end of the day it seems like Hayfield used VHSL's own rules to their advantage, which I'm sure others have/are as well, but they did it to a level that highlights the inconsistencies. If VHSL really wants to solve their problems they will update their rules to be black and white with no grey area. However, I'm not convinced VHSL wants to remove the grey area as their would more than likely as their would more than likely have unintended victims (take that how you want), but they can't have it both ways and pick and chose when to enforce.

Hayfield has definitely set a precedent that you should challenge all ambiguous rules that don't actual require any facts to punish. This would not be the case if the rules were blank and white.

We shall see. Fwiw, sportsmanship ≠ suing when you get banned and lose two appeals. Sorry not sorry.

(Bringing lawyers and lawsuits into things rarely makes anything better. Hayfield should be careful and hope they don't get more than they asked for.)

FWIW, losing 2 appeals by 2 committee's hand selected by the single person that levied the punishment, doesn't exactly scream fair.

In the real world, appeals are heard by totally unbiased parties if for no other reason to not be influenced by previous bias on known information. VHSL has a structure set up where the punishment is levied by THEM. An initial appeal is set up by THEM. The additional appeal is set up by THEM. I bet if we dive a little deeper into situations that were appealed on VHSL ruling, they are very consistent with this appeal structure and final ruling.

In the real world, that's how organizations work. Are you thinking they should have gone to arbitration? SMH

Absolutely not, but I do think the set up should be consistent with an unbiased party in at least 1 step in the appeal process. What's the point of an appeal if everybody along the appeals process answers/reports to the person that initiated the punishment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Forgotten in all of this is the fact that Overton has made a career out of cheating and flaunting the rules. A couple of highlights:

In 2021 Freedom Principal Inez Bryant directed Overton to not dress a player because he was ineligible. Overton ignored him, twice. Overton then claimed it was an "honest mistake" (as if that clown knows what honesty is).

Investigations against Overton while he was at Freedom recommended that he face disciplinary action for other violations including use of county property for his own financial gain.

He was caught doing the exact same thing Potomac and had to pay several fines.

After Reid's "investigation" nearly 10 of Overton's illegal recruits were deemed ineligible based on residency, confirming someone had them lie and that the investigation was a sham.

A number of Overton's transfers broke the law by claiming they were homeless to get enrolled even faster.

Overton lied about his qualifications and certifications to get the security job and was still hired for the head of security role at Hayfield. And, even after word got out that he hadn't taken a required 60 hour course to get in compliance, the school's administration still ignored the issue for over 90 days.

Overton hired a coach who offered drugs to a minor and he faced no disciplinary action for such a gross oversight.

Overton threatened a mother online.

Nearly $30K from a "fundraiser" Overton promoted is unaccounted for.

The company that Overton hired for the above-mentioned "fundraiser" is run by his friend and isn't registered to actually collect funds in VA.

Overton's sham nonprofit, Playmakers Elite Athletic Training, had its status automatically terminated by the Commonwealth in 2023 and is in violation of the law for continuing to operate for at least another year after that. Virginia Attorney General’s Office or a local Commonwealth Attorney’s office should and could prosecute at any time.

Overton hasn't filed 990s for his sham nonprofit ever.

Overton has proudly compared himself to Bobby Knight (this might be the only time in his life he demonstrated a shed of self-awareness by comparing himself to a Trumper who was verbally and physically abusive to others).

Overton has consistently thrown his own players under the bus. Most recently he disputed the timing of a DeMatha transfer into Hayfield and directly contradicted the transfer's (truthful) accounting of the timeline which initially put his eligibility in doubt.

Overton tried requiring that team fees be paid only in cash or via cash app and had to be made directly to him or the "team mom," in violation of state law and FCPS regulations.

Overton allowed his staff to publicly humiliate a returning member of the Hayfield team, with the staffer ripping the player's belongings ripped out of his locker in front of team members while berating him verbally with abusive language that was racial and sexual in nature.

I’d say you know a lot about this Overton guy to not be Overton. Wonder how close you are to the situation

NP here.
A lot of this is public (or at least has been widely shared).

I’m aware of a lot that’s been shared, but I’m also aware a lot of this is propaganda n witch hunt. But ok believe whatever makes you feel good

Awwww, how sad...another poorly-educated Overton supporter who uses words (in this case "propaganda") without knowing what they mean. But please do tell us all what is the "propaganda n witch hunt" on the list of Overton transactions that was originally shared out. I will wait.