INDIANAPOLIS—The NCAA Division II Management Council Subcommittee on Infractions and Membership Committee Appeals (hereinafter referred to as Infractions Appeals Subcommittee)  has upheld finding of impermissible inducement violation and the vacation penalty against Abilene Christian University.

In February 2009, the NCAA Division II Committee on Infractions issued an infractions report that included findings of violations in the track and field and football programs at Abilene Christian.  The case included a failure to monitor by the university and the head track and field coach, as well as violations involving impermissible inducements, extra benefits and official visits violations.

In addition to those self-imposed by the university, the Committee on Infractions’ penalties included two years probation, a vacation of records, recruiting restrictions and a financial penalty.

The university appealed the finding of impermissible inducement violation and the vacation of records penalty. The university asserted that the finding of violation was contrary to the evidence presented and there was procedural error and, but for the error, the Committee on Infractions would not have made the finding of violation.  Additionally, the university believed  the vacation of records penalty was excessive.

Regarding the impermissible inducement violation, the university asserted that the use of the language “assistance with correspondence work” in the Committee on Infractions report implied that academic fraud occurred.

In affirming the finding of violation, the Infractions Appeals Subcommittee noted the rationale in the public report does not include any academic fraud assertions and instead provides a “clear and robust” detail of the benefit provided by the coaches, which included access to computers and provision of postage. The Infractions Appeals Subcommittee also noted that the report only cites NCAA legislation related to offers and inducements, and does not cite any academic fraud legislation.

The university also stated that procedural error occurred when the Committee on Infractions found that two assistant coaches were “knowingly” involved in major violations of NCAA rules. It asserted that the Committee on Infractions erred in determining that the violations found were major rather than secondary. However, the Infractions Appeals Subcommittee found no basis to conclude that a procedural error occurred in this case.

In considering the university’s appeal, the Infractions Appeals Subcommittee reviewed the notice of appeal; the transcript of the university’s Committee on Infractions hearing; and the submissions by the university and the Committee on Infractions.

In reviewing the case, the Infractions Appeals Subcommittee may overturn a violation finding only if it is contrary to the evidence presented; the facts found by the committee do not constitute a violation of NCAA rules; or a procedural error affected the reliability of information that was used to support the findings. The Infractions Appeals Subcommittee may overturn a penalty if it is found to be excessive such that it constitutes an abuse of discretion.

The members of the Infractions Appeals Subcommittee who heard this case were: Ann Jirkovsky, Bellarmine University, chair; Rick Cole, Dowling College; Stephanie Harrison-Dyer, Albany State University (Georgia); Frances Nee, Indiana University of Pennsylvania; and Glenn Stokes, Columbus State University.

-30-