Menu

Time To Reevaluate The Suspension Of Student Athletes During COVID-19


The coronavirus has had a major impact on college campuses throughout the U.S. Most institutions have transitioned to online-only instruction, while also significantly altering their non-academic side of college life. With few traditions in higher education looming larger than that of college sports, campuses around the country lost a piece of themselves, their vibrancy, when various athletic conferences decided to cancel their winter and spring athletic seasons last March.

Fortunately, colleges and universities have been receptive to amending some of their rules, and on March 30, the NCAA announced it would extend eligibility an additional year for most athletes participating in spring sports whose seasons were shortened. But, how will this postponement of seasons and realignment of eligibility requirements affect the student athletes who were serving a suspension for violating the NCAA drug testing protocols? Per the NCAA’s Drug Testing Program, under Section 3.0 Causes of Loss of Eligibility, each year every student athlete is required to sign a Drug Testing Consent form wherein the student athlete consents to the testing for substances banned by the NCAA. Per Section 3.2, if a student athlete tests positive for a banned substance, he or she is subject to loss of eligibility, the penalties of which are legislated under NCAA bylaws.

18.4.1.4.1 Penalty — Banned Drug Classes Other Than Cannabinoidsand Narcotics. A student athlete who tests positive is subject to the following: 

(a) The student athlete shall be ineligible for competition in all sports until he or she has been withheld from the equivalent of one season of regular-season competition … ; 

(b) A student athlete who tests positive during a year in which he or she did not use a season of competition, shall be charged with the loss of one season of competition in all sports. A student athlete who tests positive during a year in which he or she used a season of competition, shall be charged with the loss of one additional season of competition in all sports unless he or she uses a season of competition in the next academic year; and 

(c) The student athlete shall be ineligible for intercollegiate competition for 365 consecutive days after the collection of the student athlete's positive drug-test specimen and until he or she tests negative pursuant to the NCAA Drug Testing Program's policies and procedures.

After reading Section 18.4.1.4.1, what is the actual length of the suspension for a student athlete who has violated the NCAA’s drug program? Subsection (a) states ‘a suspension of one season of regular season competition,’ while Subsection (c) states ‘student athlete shall be ineligible for intercollegiate competition for 365 days … .’ During normal, non-COVID times, any discrepancy or inconsistency between the two rules may not be a concern, or for that matter, even exist. A violating student athlete could easily serve out his or her suspended regular season of competition within a calendared, 365-day year. But since COVID-19 is the new normal, and with athletic programs forgoing competition, what happens to the length of a student athlete’s period of ineligibility when there are no scheduled athletic competitions?

The NCAA has determined that only games played during a COVID-shortened season will be considered when calculating compliance with Subsection (a) and that the violating student athlete must then serve out the remainder of the regular season games during the next season, even if the next season is outside of Subsection (c)’s 365-day time frame.

But is this a fair interpretation of the rules? Should the period of ineligibility be ‘tolled’ during the time of no play or should the student athlete be allowed back onto the field of play after the expiration of the 365-day time period? Is the tolling of the suspension period by the NCAA necessarily in the best interest of the student athlete?

This unprecedented health crisis has caused the student athlete to experience a series of unique situations. The NCAA must understand that most, if not all, student athletes are experiencing high levels of stress and anxiety worrying about whether or not they will ever be afforded the opportunity to again play college sports, the status of their scholarships, and what the world will afford them after graduation. The NCAA needs to be mindful of and sympathetic to what these young athletes are going through when it comes disciplining them for a rules infraction. In actuality, the NCAA needs to develop a more student-centered approach when interpreting and enforcing its rules and bylaws, the goal of which being to get the student athlete back on the field of play, sooner, rather than later, as a way for them to cope with this current health crisis.

Keep in mind, the argument is not that student athletes should not be punished when they violate an NCAA rule or policy, but that the NCAA, as the sole interpreter and enforcer, in this rare time of COVID-19, needs to put the student athlete first when it comes to how it interprets and enforces such rules and policies.

Robert J. Romano is assistant professor of sport management at St. John’s University.