Ethics in sports

The University Athletic Association of the Philippines (UAAP) Board suspended De La Salle University (DLSU) from all sports for one year last Friday. Negligence was cited as the main reason for the suspension.

DLSU had publicly revealed in October 2005 it had unknowingly fielded two ineligible players in 2004 when it won the UAAP basketball championship. The school then conducted its own investigation, returned the trophy it won and applied for a one-year leave of absence from basketball competitions.

The UAAP was headed towards punishing DLSU long before the decision was made. It became very obvious especially after the secretary general of the league and member of the investigating committee Dr. (or is it Atty.?) Ricardo Matibag of Adamson University was quoted to have said in an interview with the internationally regarded and multi-awarded Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism (PCIJ) that, DLSU, unlike other schools had this attitude of "winning at all cost."

The said interview appeared in The STAR late last year. When I called up Matibag to confirm whether he uttered those disparaging and unethical remarks, Matibag denied having said them. He rejected my suggestion for him to call the attention of both the PCIJ and The STAR to the alleged oversight.

Matibag cavalierly said that to make the correction would just exacerbate matters. Apparently Matibag did not think much of the reputation of a school that, among other things, had been in existence for close to 100 years and was the first educational institution in the Philippines to receive a Level IV accreditation by the Philippine Accrediting Association of Schools, Colleges and Universities (PAASCU). PAASCU members include all the leading private educational institutions in the country.

Neither did it matter to Matibag that he was a member of the investigating committee and secretary general of the UAAP. It was necessary for him to maintain objectivity at all times and not create any impression of prejudging the case. The UAAP for its part neither corrected the alleged misquote nor did it publicly admonish Matibag. Why? Because they believed Matibag’s statement that PCIJ was in error. Given PCIJ’s track record (and, if you wish, Matibag’s), whom should one believe? Perhaps Matibag just wanted to reinforce the statement that "misery loves company." Adamson was suspended some years back albeit under very different (and damning) circumstances.

There are several losers in this whole episode. Two of these are justice and sportspersonship which are principles and qualities that sports, particularly collegiate sports, profess to uphold and develop.

In a press briefing yesterday afternoon, Jose Tanjuatco, one of two DLSU representatives to the UAAP Board detailed how justice was not served in the DLSU case.

Speaking in his personal capacity, Tanjuatco stated, among other things that the report of the UAAP Fact Finding Committee, which was discussed by the Board, did not: 1) reach a conclusion as to who are the guilty parties; 2) specify charges against DLSU; and 3) provide for a recommendation for the UAAP Board of Trustees.

When he and Daniel Jose (the other DLSU representative) were asked to leave the meeting room by the Board, Tanjuatco asked for clarification on what will be voted upon. He also reminded the Board of Section 9, Article II of the UAAP Constitution and by-laws: "Any member of the Board may file charges against a Member University by filing a written complaint. The Board of Trustees shall call a special meeting of the Board to consider the charges."

Before Tanjuatco left the room, he was assured that the Board would specify the charges so that DLSU would have the opportunity to defend itself. Instead of producing a formal complaint, the UAAP convicted DLSU.

That is a case of conviction without any hearing. It was also an act of treachery. It penalized truth-telling. The fact that DLSU so, to speak, turned itself in, did not matter at all.

Harsh and out of proportion, for the other DLSU teams and athletes had nothing to do with this act of "negligence." The various sports in which DLSU is the defending titlist (among them, ladies volleyball, badminton, soccer, lawn tennis; and men’s lawn tennis) will not have the number one team seeing action this coming season. The eventual winners will therefore get an empty affirmation of their talents and whatever they brought into the playing field since they won the championship with the help of off-court secret conference room meetings. The authentic tradition of sports requires that you win or lose in the playing arena and nowhere else.

Sportspersonship was another casualty. In his paper, "Ethical Dilemmas in American Sport," D. Stanley Eitzen refers to three cases of sportspersonship, one of which involved a basketball team in Alabama that won the state championship – the first ever for the school.

A month or so (after winning the championship), the coach found out that he had unknowingly used an ineligible player. No one else knew of the problem. Moreover, the player in question was in the game only a minute or two and had not scored. The coach notified the state high school authorities and, as a result, the only state championship in the school’s history was forfeited.

For DLSU, this is certainly a humbling but not a humiliating experience. The many innocent victims of this decision have stated that, as student-athletes, studying in DLSU is privilege enough. Membership in a champion team and wearing a DLSU team uniform are bonuses. So, let’s just move on, they say. There is no need therefore to appeal the decision to a biased Board. DLSU was, like Someone else, crucified for telling the truth but it will have its own resurrection in due time.

One insight gained from all these is that the UAAP Board acted unanimously for suspension because it wanted to present a united front: all for one and one for all. In terms however of the hierarchy of principles, what value do we assign to the universal and fundamental human value of fairness and respect for the rights of others?

While an institution like the UAAP is assumed to have a collective set of ideals, each member brings with him his own set of values that should influence his own way of deciding on great ethical issues that confront him. What role did these values play that Friday evening? Well, so much for being a role model for others.