JC appeals ISSA sanctions over Jamone Lyle, says procedure was unfair

KINGSTON, Jamaica — Jamaica College (JC) has appealed sanctions imposed by the Inter-Secondary Schools Sports Association (ISSA) over the eligibility of footballer Jamone Lyle, with the school’s Board of Management Chairman Lance Hylton describing the penalties as “unsupportable, extreme and excessive”. In an update to the school community, seen by Observer Online on Thursday, Hylton said JC lodged its appeal within 24 hours of the disciplinary hearing on October 13 and is awaiting the outcome ahead of Friday’s Walker Cup final. The sanctions followed a ruling that JC fielded an ineligible player after Lyle was found to have a professional contract with Waterhouse Football Club, making him ineligible for schoolboy football under ISSA regulations. JC was subsequently removed from the Walker Cup, banned from next year’s competition and ordered to forfeit its Manning Cup second-round match against St Catherine, which it had won 3-2. The result was reversed to a 3-0 victory for St Catherine. READ: JC booted from Walker Cup for fielding ineligible player Jamone Lyle The decision also paved the way for Kingston College (KC) to face Mona High in Friday’s Walker Cup final, after Mona lost to JC in the semi-final on penalties. Hylton said the school received a letter from ISSA on October 12 informing Principal Wayne Robinson that a complaint had been made concerning Lyle’s eligibility. The hearing was scheduled for the following day at 2:00 pm. According to Hylton, the letter provided no prior notification of the complaint and did not identify the complainant or provide further particulars of the charge. He said the school’s leadership, football management and coaching staff immediately mobilised to prepare written submissions for the hearing, with assistance from the Jamaica College Public Relations Committee. Hylton added that ISSA’s rules did not permit the school to have a lawyer or anyone other than the coach or his replacement to accompany the principal to provide representation or support. “ISSA’s harsh ruling followed with blinding speed…We consider the sanctions unsupportable, extreme and excessive,” he said. Hylton said the school intends to address aspects of the hearing as part of its appeal, although he did not disclose the details of its submissions. JC is challenging both the application of ISSA’s rules and whether Lyle’s purported contract with Waterhouse constitutes a valid and enforceable agreement. Hylton said the school’s interpretation of the relevant rule is that it prohibits players from being under contract with clubs, whether through professional agreements or other contractual arrangements. However, he argued that the rules have not been consistently enforced over the years, pointing to what he described as widespread contractual arrangements involving schoolboy footballers. He also said JC does not concede that a valid contract exists in Lyle’s case and intends to pursue that argument on appeal. “We regard the treatment of JC as unfair,” the board chairman said. “In our view, the treatment of both the school and the player, who appears to have entered into the purported contract without independent representation, is particularly harsh when many well-known contractual arrangements have attracted no sanctions.” He said JC had lodged complaints concerning other contractual arrangements. A central part of the school’s position is that it was never informed by Waterhouse that Lyle had signed a professional contract or that the club was restricting him from playing for JC. The dispute follows a disciplinary letter from Waterhouse dated October 9, in which the club said it had fined Lyle $60,000 for unauthorised participation in a Manning Cup match on October 7. Waterhouse alleged that Lyle ignored instructions from head coach Donovan Duckie and General Secretary Richard McCallum not to play for JC, in breach of his professional contract and the club’s rules. Hylton said JC was particularly concerned that a professional club would have a minor sign an agreement purporting to prevent him from continuing to play for his school. Lyle, who turned 17 in July, has represented JC since he was 12 and was at a significant stage of his schoolboy football career, Hylton said. The chairman added that the school had seen no indication that Lyle received independent legal representation during the process. He also said information available to JC suggested that the player did not have a parent or guardian in Jamaica supporting him through the process, including a disciplinary hearing with Waterhouse. Hylton stressed that the school had received no written communication informing it of the purported restriction or instructing it to stop the player from participating. He further questioned whether the restriction could be enforced against a minor, citing legal precedents concerning contracts entered into by minors, including a case involving former England footballer Wayne Rooney. JC intends to pursue that issue as part of its appeal. Hylton has called on Waterhouse president Donovan White to withdraw and retract a statement that the school had been informed about Lyle’s contractual status. He said the principal was adamant that he had received no telephone call or other communication from White on the matter. Hylton also called on the Waterhouse president to identify whom he claimed to have informed, when the communication took place and how it was delivered. According to Hylton, the school has received no response to that request. The chairman also addressed questions from stakeholders about why the school had not sought an injunction to challenge ISSA’s ruling. He said the disciplinary letter referred to ISSA’s rule against members taking the association to court, adding that the school had previously been warned that seeking an injunction could result in a ban from all sporting activities under ISSA’s jurisdiction. Hylton described the restriction as constitutionally objectionable and cited the cases of Butler v KSAFA and Royale Lakes Football Club Limited v St Catherine Football Association in support of the school’s position on access to the courts. Quoting from Chief Justice Bryan Sykes’ judgment in Butler v KSAFA, Hylton argued that membership of an association should not require individuals to surrender their fundamental right to seek judicial redress. He said, however, that the school faces a difficult decision because court action could trigger an immediate ban while proceedings continue, potentially affecting students across all its sporting programmes. “For now, we have decided that it is not a risk worth taking at this stage,” Hylton said in the update, while making clear that court action remains an option. Hylton said the immediate priority is the appeal lodged within 24 hours of the October 13 hearing, with the school awaiting a decision ahead of Friday’s final. The chairman maintained that JC had been treated unfairly and expressed regret that the controversy had overshadowed the school’s football achievements. He thanked members of the school community for their research, assistance and support, while urging stakeholders to continue submitting questions and suggestions.