UAAP Board a snake pit?

Over a week ago, the University Athletic Association of the Philippines (UAAP) Board of Trustees ordered a replay of the disputed University of the East (UE)-La Salle men’s seniors basketball game that was won by the Archers in overtime and protested by the Warriors on an alleged technical violation in the final seconds of regulation.

The game was played last Sept. 1. The technical committee, headed by Ricky Palou, met to discuss the protest and awarded the win to UE two days later. La Salle contested the technical committee’s decision–which in reality, was a recommendation to the Board.

The Board was convened to settle the issue last Sept. 9.

Word later got out that the technical committee’s recommendation went against Palou’s view. UAAP commissioner Joe Lipa reportedly sided with Palou who couldn’t imagine taking a win away from a team in the boardroom. Two committee members brushed aside what Palou and Lipa thought of the matter and voted to reverse the outcome. Only their votes counted since one representative was absent and the La Salle and UE representatives were disallowed to vote. The committee is made up of five members plus Palou who votes only to break a tie.

Although only a recommendation, it was made to appear in media that the reversal was a done deal. Apparently, Palou was instructed by a committee member to release the decision to media and the former Ateneo star, unaware of a UAAP rule stipulating that all contested protests must be decided by the Board, stuck his foot in his mouth. He has since regretted it.

The committee’s recommendation had no justifiable basis. Right there and then, Palou should have resigned. Lipa, too. Of what use are they if their expertise in basketball is ignored? They knew the recommendation was wrong. How could they stomach being steamrolled by two gentlemen whose competence in deciding matters of dispute relating to the technical aspects of the game is highly questionable?

I was told the two gentlemen based their decision for a replay on a tape showing the controversial last few seconds, ignoring the testimonies of Lipa, the game clock official and the timeout official that La Salle coach Franz Pumaren called a legitimate ceasefire but was not immediately recognized because of the noise level in the Blue Eagle gym.

By the way, there is an existing UAAP rule that allows the replay of a tape only to decide if a shot was converted in time or if it came from the two or three-point area, not if a timeout was called properly or not. It seemed that the two gentlemen chose a convenient avenue to "justify" their decision (or recommendation) and in effect, called Lipa, the game clock official, the timeout official and Pumaren himself liars.

If only the two gentlemen bothered to research what happened in the US-USSR game at the 1972 Munich Olympics, they would’ve realized the injustice of their decision.

La Salle then brought up the issue to the Board.

What transpired in the Board meeting was just as exasperating for Palou who really couldn’t care less which school wound up with the win. Palou’s only concern was to preserve the integrity of the game. That, after all, is his primary duty.

La Salle’s Lito Tanjuatco presented an irrefutable analysis of the situation in the Board meeting. He submitted a 7-page report that clearly explained why UE’s protest held no water and why La Salle did no wrong. His logical conclusion was La Salle’s win should stay.

Tanjuatco tore up UE’s basis for its protest and proved there was no technical violation on La Salle’s part to merit a reversal of the outcome or even a replay. Besides, the timeout in question did not decide the outcome of the game, he added. Tanjuatco also noted the unreliability of the video tape as a basis to pass judgment on such a case.

By no stretch of the imagination could anyone disagree with Tanjuatco. None of his points was refuted by any Board member.

When it was time to vote on the issue, the La Salle and UE representatives were asked to leave the room.

In a column last Sept. 6, I wrote that a replay would be an acceptable compromise, only because I thought the technical committee had made a fair and thorough review of the case. But when I learned the decision or recommendation was without basis and I found out what really happened in the game, I couldn’t agree to a replay because it would penalize a team for doing nothing wrong except win within the rules of fair play.

The Board announced that the vote was unanimous for a replay.

Subsequently, the truth came out. The vote was 3-2 and far from being unanimous.

Worse, the word was there was no logical explanation to justify a replay other than it was at least not a 360-degree reversal of the technical committee’s recommendation. The compromise was a face-saver for the committee at the expense of sacrificing the integrity of the game. It conveniently robbed La Salle of a win that was earned fair and square on the court.

This kind of decision-making smacks of bias, tainted logic and high-handedness.

For too long, La Salle has been on the short end of decisions made by the Board on protests involving its games.

The problem is the Board isn’t accountable to anybody and its members are basically academicians who know little of the nuances of the game. It’s not far-fetched to expect decisions that protect parochial interests more than the well-being of the league as a whole.

In a Board meeting last Thursday, Tanjuatco gave the Board a piece of his mind and said La Salle was disturbed by the apparent misrepresentation in announcing a unanimous decision for a replay when it wasn’t. He also chastised the Board for deleting Palou’s dissenting opinion in the technical committee report. The insinuation was the Board conspired to clean up its mess.

Beyond the misrepresentation, what has ticked off Tanjuatco is the Board’s seeming lack of fair play in ignoring his arguments–without bothering to refute them–and deciding on a course of action that has no logical basis. To him, that is the core issue because if a Board representing educational institutions can’t show decency in making a fair decision, just imagine its impact on impressionable young students as the future leaders of the country.

Postscript. Here’s a toast to an honorable gentleman Vic Marquez who celebrated his 69th birthday yesterday. His children Jovy, Lala, Coco, Mikey, Peewee and Chunky couldn’t ask anything more from a loving, generous and doting father. Roy Gonzalez, a successful Filipino expatriate who’s the vice president for patient health services of two large US hospitals in Chicago and Los Angeles, flew in last Friday to wish Tito Vic a happy birthday, visit his mother and relatives in Iloilo for a few days and celebrate best friend Chunky’s birthday this Saturday.