Comments on: Kahuku’s postseason in limbo?

By: LOC1234

LOC1234 — Tue, 09 Nov 2010 21:07:26 +0000

In reply to Hachiko. no for reals!!

By: LOC1234

LOC1234 — Tue, 09 Nov 2010 21:06:37 +0000

In reply to Jesusizlife. well said!

By: zamorapark

zamorapark — Sat, 06 Nov 2010 12:11:57 +0000

The whole thing now if it is true that Kahuku did have an ineligble player, then Mililani and Leilehua should be playing for 1st and 2nd. Not Leilehua and Waianae playing for 2nd and 3rd. The player was ineligible last week this should nullify Kahuku win over Leilehua. Now I am a parent of a Waianae player and this only seems fair to all.

By: Hachiko

Hachiko — Sat, 06 Nov 2010 08:02:59 +0000

Guy better stay anonymous, lest he feel the wrath of the Red Raider nation for being a shifty snitch.

By: John

John — Sat, 06 Nov 2010 07:51:50 +0000

In reply to John. I just found out the Kid in question went 9, 9, 10, 11, 12 = 5 years. He only played his 11th and 12th year but what matters is when he started 9th grade. So in this case the ruling stands he is not eligible to play more than 4 school years. And no he's not 19 he's 18 but is considered a "fifth year" senior. If you're going to be held back let it be 7 or 8 grade...come 9th grade the clock starts!. The biggest problem is a negated season means negated rushing, passing, tackles etc. records. Jr's. and Sr's. lose their stats for this season costing scholarships. I feel for them.

By: Jesusizlife

Jesusizlife — Sat, 06 Nov 2010 05:05:18 +0000

If the dude that was ineligible is playin his fifth year in high school football, and or is 19, he should be ineligible. But if this is only his second year playing, and flunked 9th or 10th grade, i think he's still good to go. alot of players from my high school flunked either grade and still went on to play 4 years of high school football. Plus, if the player didnt know or nobody really knew what the guidelines were, then why punish the team? OIA's fault. But then again, OIA is made up of dumbshi*. LET KAHUKU PLAY!

By: lcnpierce

lcnpierce — Sat, 06 Nov 2010 04:52:26 +0000

Are they going to give all the Jr. Kindergartners the same issue? My son is AFTER the cut off, so we opted to keep him back- teacher's recommendation. And if they were kept back in 8th grade, like the article said, then this shouldn't be an issue. There aren't any 8th graders on the JV team.

By: John

John — Sat, 06 Nov 2010 03:34:33 +0000

When you enter the 9th grade the clock begins to tick and you have 4 years (9,10,11,12) to play a sport. I heard this Kid only played 11,12 but was held back in 9 or 10 grade. So if you count 9, 10, 10, 11, 12 that is 5 years and therefore a violation of the rules. Its pretty technical and a stupid rule I feel bad for the kids.

By: Gertrude Ku'uipo Takemoto Zane

Gertrude Ku'uipo Takemoto Zane — Sat, 06 Nov 2010 03:18:05 +0000

What is the issue? Isn't the OIA council who are at fault? Shouldn't they be the ones penalized for not confirming every player participating in it's Association program! Why penalize the kids! This is really not good sport's conduct by the Association! The OIA has now created dissension, discord, division, conflict in and throughtout the state!

By: Linda

Linda — Sat, 06 Nov 2010 03:10:35 +0000

Let them play…..