Sports Wagering Awareness Packet

Sports Wagering
Information Packet

**The NCAA Sports Wagering Information Packet does not appear on this Web site in its entirety.  Several articles have been omitted.  Permission to print those articles has been granted to the NCAA, but we await permission to post them to the Web site.  The tables of information identified in the Michigan Study have also been omitted.  If you would like to have a complete packet sent electronically or a hard copy mailed to you, please contact Kathy Kemp at 317/917-6222, or via e-mail at kkemp@ncaa.org **


Contact information:

Bill Saum

Director of Agent, Gambling and Amateurism Activities
bsaum@ncaa.org

Deana Garner
Agent, Gambling and Amateurism Activities Representative II
dgarner@ncaa.org

Chris Howard
Agent, Gambling and Amateurism Activities Representative
choward@ncaa.org

NCAA
P.O. Box 6222
Indianapolis, Indiana  46206-6222
317/917-6222

Table of Contents


I.          NCAA Position on Gambling

II.         NCAA Bylaw 10.3 and Recent Interpretations

III.       Gambling Study and General Facts

IV.       Tout Services Memorandum

V.        Sports Wagering Poster News Release

VI.       NCAA Website -- Sports Wagering

VII.      Internet Sports Wagering Testimony before House Subcommittee on Crime

VIII.     Sports Wagering Testimony before the National Gambling Impact Study Commission

IX.       NCAA Student-Athlete Reinstatement Committee Directive

X.        Student-Athlete Reinstatement Case Precedent

XI.       The Extent and Nature of Gambling Among College Student Athletes (University of Michigan Study)


 

NCAA Position On Gambling

The NCAA opposes all forms of legal and illegal sports wagering.  Sports wagering has the poten­tial to undermine the integrity of sports contests and jeopardizes the welfare of student-athletes and the intercollegiate athletics community.  Sports wagering demeans the competition and competitors alike by a message that is contrary to the purposes and meaning of "sport."  Sports competition should be appreciated for the inherent benefits related to participation of student-athletes, coaches and institutions in fair contests, not the amount of money wagered on the outcome of the competition.

For these reasons, the NCAA membership has adopted specific rules prohibiting athletics depart­ment staff members and student-athletes from engaging in gambling activities as they relate to intercollegiate or professional sporting events.

The NCAA Position on Gambling was approved by the NCAA Administrative Committee on March 19, 1997.

NCAA institutions are encouraged to publish the NCAA Position on Gambling in game programs, alumni newsletters, and employee and student-athlete handbooks.

NCAA Bylaw 10.3
Gambling Activities

Staff members of a member conference, staff members of the athletics department of a member institution and student-athletes shall not knowingly:   (Revised:  4/22/98 effective 8/1/98)

Provide information to individuals involved in organized gambling activities concerning intercollegiate athletics competition;

Solicit a bet on any intercollegiate team;

Accept a bet on any team representing the institution;

Solicit or accept a bet on any intercollegiate competition for any item (e.g., cash, shirt, dinner) that has tangible value; or  (Revised:  9/15/97)

Participate in any gambling activity that involves intercollegiate athletics or professional athletics, through a bookmaker, a parlay card or any other method employed by organized gambling.  (Revised:  1/9/96, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)


The following official interpretations/confirmations also relate to gambling activities:

•           Soliciting or accepting a bet for a material item: The provisions of NCAA Bylaw 10.3 preclude a student-athlete from soliciting or accepting a bet for a nonmonetary material item (e.g., shirt, dinner) that has tangible value. The interpretations Committee noted, however, that institutions that compete against each other may agree to participate for a tangible item (e.g., governors cup), provided no student-athletes receive any tangible item.

•           Gambling on professional sports contests: The prohibition against student-athletes and athletics department staff members participating in gambling activities associated with professional sports events is applicable only to those sports in which the Association conducts championship competition. Division I-A football and emerging sports.  Accordingly, the provisions of Bylaw 10.3 do not apply to other types of sports wagering (e.g., horse racing, auto racing, boxing).

•           Printing of point-spread information in institutional publications: According to the provisions of Bylaw 12.01.2 (line of demarcation,), it would not be permissible for a member institution to publish in its game program an advertisement that provides specific point-spread information regarding professional sports contests.

•           Long-standing Tradition: The provisions of NCAA Bylaw 10.3 are not applicable to a long­standing demonstrated tradition in a particular sport in which student-athletes from involved institutions exchange a tangible item (e.g., exchanging of shirts in the sport of rowing) contingent on the outcome of a competition provided such activity is approved by the involved institutions. [Reference: 10.3 (gambling activities) and NCAA Interpretations Committee 11/26/96, Item No. 1)]

Gambling Study

University of Cincinnati Rules Infractions Study
(648 Division I men’s basketball and football respondents)

1.         Gambled money on other college sporting events 25.5% - 165
2.         Gambled money on a game in which you played  3.7% - 24
3.         Received money from a gambler for not playing well in a game    5% - 3

General Facts

1.         Forty-eight of 50 states have some type of legalized gambling (Utah and Hawaii do not).

2.         Nevada is the only state where legal sports wagering exists (e.g., Las Vegas, Reno, Lake Tahoe).
            The Oregon State Lottery is considered a form of sports wagering.

3.         Based upon discussions with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), illegal sports
            wagering supports organized crime activities (e.g., prostitution, loan sharking, drugs).

4.         According to the media reports, nationwide illegal sports book is $80 to $100 billion a year.

5.         According to the Nevada Gaming Commission, Las Vegas legal sports book is $2 billion a year.

6.         If there is a substantial illegal sports book in a city, a percentage is going to organized crime.

7.         General desensitizing of gambling across the United States due to legalized gambling (e.g., riverboat 
            casinos, Indiana reservation-based casinos).

_____
Tout Services

For Tout Services Information please vist the NCAA Web site at 
http://www1.ncaa.org/eprise/main/Public/enf/toutMemo.html

_____
Press Release
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Thursday, September 25, 1997
CONTACT:  Bill S. Saum, Agent and Gambling Representative

NCAA USES NEW POSTER TO EDUCATE ON SPORTS WAGERING
OVERLAND PARK, KANSAS---The NCAA has begun an initiative to educate schools on sports wagering by creating a poster for distribution to all NCAA member institutions. The poster will be used to focus attention on legal and illegal sports wagering in intercollegiate athletics. 

"Sports wagering is clearly an issue that runs counter to the philosophy of intercollegiate athletics," said Cedric W. Dempsey, NCAA executive director. "It has the potential to undermine the integrity of sports contests and jeopardize the eligibility of student-athletes and we will do everything we can to send the message that sports wagering has no place in college sports." 

The poster, which has the distinct message of "Don't Bet On It," was created by Bill Saum, NCAA agent and gambling representative, and Wayne Davis, NCAA graphics designer. Each school in Divisions I, II and III received a total of five posters in August. 

"The posters are intended to impact both student-athletes and staff members alike," said Saum. "This will help guarantee that our message against legal and illegal sports wagering in intercollegiate athletics is getting across loud and clear." 

In a study conducted by the University of Cincinnati involving 648 Division I men's basketball and football student-athletes, 25.5 percent said they had gambled money on other college sporting events, 3.7 percent had gambled money on a game in which they had played and one half of one percent received money from a gambler for not playing well in a game. 

Law enforcement agencies have estimated that 2.5 billion dollars was illegally gambled on the 1995 NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Championship game, second only to the National Football League's (NFL) Superbowl. These agencies also report that organized crime is usually associated with gambling whether legally authorized or not.  In response to this problem, the NCAA has enhanced lines of communication with the FBI, NFL, the National Basketball Association (NBA), the National Hockey League (NHL), and Major League Baseball (MLB) in sharing information related to gambling and organized crime. 

"Our athletes at the collegiate level become their athletes at the professional level," said Saum. "If we can educate student-athletes now, at the beginning of their careers, the professional sports leagues won't inherit such a huge problem." 

The explosive growth of sports wagering has caused a noticeable increase in the number of sports wagering-related cases processed by the NCAA enforcement and student-athlete reinstatement staffs in Divisions I, II and III. 

In June 1995, the NCAA Eligibility Committee determined that higher penalties should be placed on restoring a student-athlete's eligibility in cases involving gambling. The NCAA eligibility staff was instructed to implement such standards immediately. In order to determine the appropriate conditions for restoration, the staff reviews prior cases from June 1995 to the present 

The NCAA membership has also adopted a specific rule prohibiting athletics department staff members and student-athletes from engaging in gambling activities related to intercollegiate or professional sporting events. 

The Association is producing brochures, due in the spring of 1998, to help bring the message of gambling to schools, and NCAA Online, the NCAA's Web site (www.ncaa.org), will soon have information available on sports wagering as well. The NCAA also has a copy of the professional league videotape entitled "Gambling With Your Life," which is being used to educate member institutions, student-athletes, coaches and athletics administrators on sports wagering. 

"This is a serious problem that affects the world of sports as a whole," said Dempsey. "It is up to all of us involved in athletics, from amateur to professional, to work together and take a strong stand against sports wagering." 

The NCAA is a membership organization of colleges and universities that participate in intercollegiate athletics. The primary purposes of the Association is to maintain intercollegiate athletics as an integral part of the educational program and the athlete as an integral part of the student body. Activities of the NCAA membership include formulating rules of play for NCAA sports, conducting national championships, adopting and enforcing standards of eligibility and studying all phases of intercollegiate athletics. 


_____
NCAA Gambling Home Page

For additional information, please vist the NCAA Web site's Gambling/Sports Wagering page under the Enforcement and Reinstatement link on the NCAA home page: 
http://www.ncaa.org

_____

TESTIMONY OF BILL SAUM

GAMBLING AND AGENT REPRESENTATIVE

NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION

before the

SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME

HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE

February 4, 1998 

Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee.  I am pleased to appear before you today to express the National Collegiate Athletic Association’s (NCAA) support for H.R. 2380, The Internet Gambling Prohibition Act of 1997.

My name is Bill Saum and I am the NCAA’s Gambling and Agent Representative.  I am the primary staff member responsible for coordinating a comprehensive program addressing gambling issues which includes developing educational components; conducting investigations involving sports wagering violations; and fostering relationships with various groups and organizations including local, state and federal governments.  The NCAA has a clear, direct policy regarding sports wagering.  The NCAA opposes all forms of legal and illegal sports wagering due to of its potential to undermine the integrity of sports contests and jeopardize the welfare of the entire college athletic community.  Wagering on college sports is inconsistent with the basic concept of amateurism and is contrary to the basic purposes of athletic competition.  The NCAA membership has adopted specific rules prohibiting athletics department staff members and student-athletes from sports wagering.  These same rules apply to the NCAA national office staff.

Despite federal and state laws that prohibit wagering on sporting events in every state except Nevada, sports wagering remains a growing problem on college campuses.  I have seen firsthand, the negative impact that sports wagering has on the lives of college student-athletes.  Recent sports wagering and point-shaving scandals that have occurred at Boston College and Arizona State University.  include student-athletes: some who were suspended from their teams; others who lost their athletic scholarships and two student-athletes who have been indicted and now face federal prison terms.

The preliminary evidence regarding sports wagering on college campuses reveals an alarming trend.  A recent NCAA-sponsored study disclosed that 25 percent of the student-athletes wagered on college athletics; four percent wagered on the game they played in; and three athletes changed the outcome of the game they played in. In another study conducted by several university researchers, the data revealed that six to eight percent of college students are possible pathological gamblers. 

The growth of Internet gambling is cause for significant concern on our colleges campuses. Internet gambling provides college students with virtual anonymity with the opportunity to place wagers on sporting events from the privacy of their campus residence.  Accessibility to the Internet is perhaps the greatest concern.  Most college students have unlimited use of the Internet and most college residence halls are presently wired for Internet access.  In fact, there may be no group in this country who has more access to computers and the Internet than college students.

The rapid growth of Internet gambling was outlined in a recent Sports Illustrated cover story.  The story reports “explosive growth” in the Internet gambling industry from $60 million in business in 1996 to $600 million in business in 1998.  Furthermore, the number of on-line sites that handle sports bets has increased from two in 1996 to at least 60-70 today.

H.R. 2380 is a vital piece of legislation.  Congress has long recognized that sports wagering has no place in professional and amateur sports.  It is a federal crime, under Section 1084 of Title 18, to use wire communication facilities for purposes of sports wagering.  Furthermore, by enacting the 1992 Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act, Congress took the important step of prohibiting any further legalization of sports wagering by states or other governmental entities. 
 
Although Internet sports wagering is clearly prohibited under Title 18, H.R. 2380 would strengthen the tools available to enforce the prohibition.  H.R. 2380 would provide civil remedies that allow law enforcement officials to require Internet service providers to block access or discontinue service to gambling sites.
 
There are many positive uses of the Internet.  However, Internet gambling is not one of them.  Congress has ensured through legislation that, with only a few exceptions, it is illegal to wager on sporting events in this country.  Surely, Congress did not intend to make exceptions for those trying to skirt existing federal and state laws through the use of a new communications medium.

The NCAA has also strongly supported Senate Bill 474, which prohibits Internet gambling.  The NCAA has worked closely with Senator Kyl and his staff on making refinements to his original bill and would be pleased to work with the House committee in a similar capacity.  We strongly endorse H.R. 2380 and urge members of this Subcommittee to move quickly in passing this important legislation.

Thank you.

_____

 

WRITTEN TESTIMONY OF BILL SAUM

DIRECTOR OF AGENT AND GAMBLING ACTIVITIES

NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION

before the

NATIONAL GAMBLING IMPACT STUDY COMMISSION

November 10, 1998

Las Vegas, Nevada

INTRODUCTION:

            As the National Collegiate Athletic Association's (NCAA) gambling and agent representative, I am pleased to have the opportunity to provide the Commission with the NCAA's perspective on sports gambling and its impact on college students.

            The NCAA is a tax-exempt, unincorporated association of approximately 1,150 colleges, universities, conferences and related organizations devoted to the regulation and promotion of intercollegiate athletics for male and female student-athletes.  I serve as the primary staff member responsible for coordinating the NCAA's efforts in addressing sports gambling issues.  My duties include: developing educational materials and programs for NCAA member institutions and student-athletes on issues associated with sports wagering; conducting investigations related to violations of NCAA rules in this area; and creating working partnerships with representatives of sports organizations, local, state and federal governments, and gaming regulatory bodies.

            This testimony is intended to provide you with a greater understanding of the high incidence of gambling, particularly sports gambling, on college campuses.  My comments will address the impact of sports gambling on the integrity of sports contests and, more importantly, on the college students who participate in or are affected by such activity.  I will also discuss current studies that provide insight into the gambling behavior of college students.  Finally, I will examine the forces fueling the growth of sports gambling and make suggestions for addressing the issues raised in my testimony.
   
THE EFFECTS OF COLLEGE SPORTS GAMBLING.

            Like many other sports organizations, the NCAA has a clear, direct policy regarding sports gambling.  The NCAA prohibits the participation in any form of legal or illegal sports gambling because of its potential to undermine the integrity of sports contests and jeopardize the welfare of the student-athlete and the intercollegiate athletics community.  The NCAA membership has adopted specific legislation prohibiting athletics department staff members, conference office staff and student-athletes from engaging in sports gambling activities as they relate to intercollegiate or professional sporting events.[1] These same rules apply to NCAA national staff.

Impact on the Integrity of the Sports Contest.
                        
As a sports organization, the NCAA is well aware of the direct threat sports gambling poses to the integrity of each intercollegiate contest.  In the late 1940s, the academic community and the public were shocked to learn that the City College of New York basketball team was involved in a point shaving scandal.  Sadly, today the scandals appear to be occurring with greater frequency.  Within the last ten months, the public learned of point shaving scandals on the campuses of Arizona State University and Northwestern University.[2]  The magnitude of these and similar incidents should not be underestimated.  According to federal law enforcement officials more money was wagered in the Arizona State case than on any point shaving scam in the history of intercollegiate athletics.  However, when it comes to sports gambling on college campuses, this is just the tip of the iceberg.

In 1995, four Maryland football players and one men's basketball player were found to have bet on collegiate sporting events.[3]  Two years ago, 13 football players at Boston College were involved in sports gambling activities, four admitted to betting against their own team.[4]  Just last year, a basketball player at Cal-State Fullerton was approached by a student after practice and offered $1,000 per game to shave points.[5]  Earlier this year, law enforcement dismantled a large sports gambling ring that was operating, in part, out of a Columbia University fraternity house.[6]

As you can plainly see, the influence of sports gambling is far reaching and sports organizations continually live in fear that sports gambling will infiltrate and undermine the contest itself.

Impact on Student-Athletes.

Through my experiences conducting sports gambling investigations at NCAA member institutions, I am acutely aware of the impact that sports gambling can have on the lives of college student-athletes.  I have witnessed students, their families and institutions publicly humiliated.  I have seen students be expelled from college, lose athletic scholarships worth thousands of dollars and jeopardize any hope of a career professional athletics.  In most cases, the scenario is strikingly familiar.  Student-athletes who have begun gambling on sports incur losses beyond their means to repay and, as a result, become vulnerable to point shaving schemes.  Sometimes they participate in such schemes voluntarily in a desperate attempt to erase their outstanding debt, other times they are compelled by the threat of personal injury.  In the latter cases, often organized crime is involved.  In many cases, student bookmaking operations can be traced back to organized crime.

The profile of the typical college student who gambles is someone who believes he can control his own destiny, someone who is willing to take risks, and someone who believes he possesses the skill to be successful in this endeavor.  If you otherwise look at these qualities in a positive light, they are reflected in many college athletes.  This may, in part, explain why some student-athletes are drawn to sports gambling.

However, environmental factors may also be playing an influential role.  One of the Boston College football players involved in the school's betting scandal stated, "The attitude was: 'It's just part of the college experience.'  To tell the truth, it never crossed my mind it was illegal; it was so commonplace."[7]  Other evidence indicates that sports gambling habits were developed well before college.  One of the athletes involved in the Northwestern University point shaving case admitted that gambling had been a part of his life ever since he was a youngster.  He stated that he remembered "guys younger and older saying, 'Let's bet $5 to see who is better in one-on-one,’ I saw gambling every day in the inner city.  People were playing cards and shooting dice.  It was normal."[8]

Our NCAA investigations have revealed that there is a very high incidence of gambling among college students. Student bookies are present at every institution.  There is certainly no dispute that the impact of sports gambling is being felt on college campuses across the country.

EVIDENCE OF THE GROWTH OF GAMBLING ON COLLEGE CAMPUSES.

Valerie Lorenz, executive director of the Compulsive Gambling Center in Baltimore, was quoted last April as saying "gambling is rampant on college campuses."[9]   While there are no comprehensive studies available that analyze the prevalence of sports gambling or gambling in general on college campuses, the preliminary evidence reveals an alarming trend.  A recent University of Cincinnati/NCAA-sponsored study randomly surveyed 2000 male student-athletes in Division I basketball and football programs to assess the extent of NCAA rules violations.  The survey disclosed that over 25 percent of the athletes reported gambling on college sporting events other than their own while in college.  Four percent of the athletes admitted to wagering on games in which they had played.  Alarmingly, three of the athletes admitted to changing the outcome of the game in which they played.[10]  

            In a 1998 study,[11] 954 students at nine universities belonging to the Southeastern Conference were surveyed.  The students surveyed were enrolled in First Aid or Health and Safety Classes offered at each of the institutions and 13 percent of the participants were athletes.  The results revealed that athletes were nearly twice as likely to be problem gamblers than non-athletes (12.4 percent vs. 6.6 percent).[12]  In addition, athletes with Greek fraternity or sorority affiliations had a higher prevalence rate of problem gambling than nonaffiliated athletes.[13]

The high incidence of gambling not only exists among student-athletes but also among the general student body.  In a study conducted by several university researchers, 1,700 students from 6 colleges and universities in the U.S. were surveyed about their gambling behavior.[14]  Thirty-three percent of male students and 15 percent of female students gambled once a week or more.[15]  The data also revealed that the rates of pathological and problematic gambling among college students are four to eight times higher than reported for the adult population.[16]

Further evidence of the high incidence of problem gambling among college students is found in a recent study by the Harvard University Medical School's Division on Addiction.[17]  The study revealed that college students show the highest percentages of pathological and problem gambling.[18]

Perhaps the most revealing evidence of the impact of sports gambling on college students is confirmed by Dr. Howard Shaffer, one of the authors of the Harvard University study.  According to Dr. Shaffer, research shows that more youth are introduced to gambling through sports betting than through any other type of gambling activity.[19]  While these studies provide us with just a snapshot of the gambling activity on college campuses, it is clear that gambling, particularly sports gambling, is touching the lives of an alarming number of college students.


FORCES FUELING THE EXPANSION OF SPORTS GAMBLING AMONG COLLEGE STUDENTS.
Illegal Sports Wagering.

Despite federal and state laws that prohibit the placing of bets on professional and college sporting events in every state except Nevada, illegal sports gambling continues to prosper.  The FBI has estimated that close to $2.5 billion is wagered illegally on the NCAA  Division I Men’s Basketball Tournament each year.[20]
 
As previously mentioned, I have witnessed the explosion of illegal sports gambling on college campuses.  NCAA investigations continue to uncover widespread student bookie operations that involve student-athletes as well as members of the general student population.  In 1995, Sports Illustrated produced a three-part series on sports gambling on college campuses.[21]  The author noted that "[o]n most campuses illegal sports gambling is seldom further than a conversation away.  Somebody in the dorm knows a bookie.  Somebody in the fraternity house knows a bookie.  Somebody in the frat is a bookie."[22]

More recently, a December 10, 1997 episode of CBS news magazine Public Eye highlighted the widespread problem of sports gambling on college campuses.  The segment aired footage from a college tavern on game day - just a few blocks from the Division I-A school's football stadium.  A hidden camera revealed several student bookies utilizing cellular phones to accept bets on college games.  According to a former bookie who appeared on the show, illegal sports gambling exists on nearly every college campus.  This fact has not only been confirmed by the NCAA's own investigations but by numerous federal and state law enforcement officials.

Legal Sports Wagering.

Pursuant to the passage of the 1992 Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA),[23] Nevada is the only place in the country where sports betting is legal (PASPA did allow for the continuation of a sports lottery in Oregon and a hybrid form of sports betting in Wyoming and South Dakota).  The 1998 NCAA Men's Division I Basketball Tournament saw approximately $80 million wagered with Nevada bookmakers.[24]  For the first time, more money was wagered in Nevada on the basketball tournament than on the 1998 Super Bowl ($78 million).[25]  Of course, $80 million was only a fraction of the $2.5 billion that the FBI estimates was wagered illegally during the basketball tournament.[26]  Nevertheless, Nevada sports books handled $2.573 billion in legal sports bets in 1997.[27]  Each year in March, thousands of fans, including many college students, journey to Las Vegas to wager on the NCAA Men's Division I basketball tournament.  During this two-week period, the sports book areas of the casinos are packed to capacity and nearly everyone has money riding on the outcome of the games.

Internet Gambling. 
     
The advent of Internet gambling may soon be the driving force behind the growth of sports gambling on college campuses across the United States.  The most significant aspect of Internet gambling is that it provides a college student with the opportunity to place wagers on professional and college sporting events from the privacy of his or her campus residence.  Internet gambling offers the student virtual anonymity. All he or she needs is a credit card to place a sports wager over the Internet.  Futhermore, the widespread availability and use of credit cards among college students is apparent.  A recent analysis on credit card debt from students who have applied for loans from Nellie Mae revealed that 65 percent of undergraduate students have credit cards, 20 percent have four or more cards, and the average credit card balance is $2,226.[28]  It is clear that most students do not need to obtain their parents' credit cards in order to bet online. 

Accessibility to the Internet is perhaps the greatest reason for concern regarding Internet gambling on college campuses.  Many college students have unlimited use of the Internet and most residence halls are wired for Internet access.  In fact, there may be no group in this country who has more readily available access to computers and the Internet than college students.  For the NCAA, the potential exists for a student-athlete to place a wager via the Internet and then attempt to influence the outcome of the contest while participating on the court or playing field.

Although Internet gambling is a relatively new phenomenon, every indication is that is reaching a large market.  The rapid growth of Internet gambling was outlined in a recent Sports Illustrated cover story.[29]  The article reports that analysts predict “explosive growth” in the Internet gambling industry.  According to Sports Illustrated, “What was a $60 million business in 1996 will handle $600 million in bets in 1998, with another tenfold increase likely by 2001.”[30]  Furthermore, the number of on-line sites that handle sports bets has grown from two in 1996 to 90 today.[31]

Most troubling to the NCAA and college administrators is that Internet gambling operations are illegal in this country.  Under section 1084 of Title 18 of the U.S. code, anyone engaged in the business of betting or wagering who knowingly uses wire communication facilities for the transmission in interstate or foreign commerce of a sports bet or wager is committing a federal crime.  Nevertheless, I continue to receive calls from student-athletes and athletics administrators who are concerned about e-mail solicitations inviting them to visit online sports book Web sites. To date, there is no data available on the prevalence of Internet gambling on college campuses but there is no doubt that operators are cognizant that college students represent a very lucrative market for their illegal product.

Sports Touts.

Browse through the USA Today sports section and you will find advertisements for sports handicappers, commonly referred to as sports touts.  In most cases, the ads ask consumers to call a 1-800 or 1-900 telephone number and pay to listen to a recording of the tout's picks of sports teams that will beat the published point spread.  While there is nothing illegal about this operation, the information provided is, in most cases, used by consumers to place illegal sports bets. 
 
Furthermore, there does not appear to be any regulation of these businesses. Recently, HBO Real Sports produced a segment which investigated the legitimacy of several sports tout operations.[32]  The show revealed an industry plagued by false and fraudulent claims.  Ironically, law enforcement is not likely to hear complaints from consumers who are duped by sports tout services.  It is doubtful that a person who relied on the false claims of a tout to place illegal sports bets would contact law enforcement officials to register a complaint. 

Despite the lack of regulation in this industry, there are some that are fighting back.  Just last month, the NFL received a favorable judgment in a lawsuit against tout service Sports Advisors, Inc. for making false advertising statements.[33]  The NFL complaint was triggered by advertisements that depicted NFL coach Bum Phillips as claiming to have inside information for the betting service.  In its ads, the service also mentioned that Phillips' son, Wade, coaches for the Buffalo Bills.  Sports Advisors Inc. was required to place correction advertisements in numerous publications indicating that the company never possessed inside information from any NFL coach or player or from any other NFL personnel.

Sports touts are not just marketing their services in newspapers and sports publications.  In cities across the United States, there are weekly syndicated television and radio shows that feature sports touts promoting their services and providing picks for upcoming college and professional sports contests.  

Little is known about sports tout services except that it is a growing industry. Given the pervasiveness of the advertising, it is likely that college students are utilizing sport tout services to engage in illegal sports gambling.


CONCLUSION.

 In an effort to address the high incidence of sports gambling on college campuses, the NCAA supports the following efforts:

1.     Campus Initiated Sports Gambling Education Efforts.  

As previously mentioned, I spend a great deal of my time traveling the country discussing the issues associated with sports gambling among college students.  While campus crime is a hot topic in the higher education community, the issue of sports gambling on college campuses is still largely overlooked by college administrators.  There needs to be comprehensive gambling education programs conducted on each campus that target all students (athletes and non-athletes).  These programs need to discuss, in particular, the dangers of sports gambling and provide assistance for those in need.

2.     Internet Gambling Prohibition Legislation.

No one would deny that there are an unlimited number of positive uses of the Internet.  However, Internet gambling is not one of them.  Congress has ensured through legislation that, with only a few exceptions, it is illegal to wager on sporting events in this country.  Surely, Congress did not intend to make exceptions for those trying to skirt existing federal and state laws through the use of a new communications medium.  There is a real need for the passage of federal Internet gambling prohibition legislation.  First, in an unusual move, the state attorneys general have called for federal legislation to prohibit Internet gambling.[34]  The attorneys general have recognized that Internet gambling, by its very nature, cannot be kept within any state's borders.  Only a uniform federal prohibition will be an effective response.  Second, existing law needs to be updated to address the development of a wireless Internet.  Third, additional civil enforcement mechanisms must be available to ensure that law enforcement officials, under certain circumstances, can require Internet service providers to block access or discontinue service to gambling Web sites.  Fourth, a new federal law with stiff criminal penalties will serve as a strong deterrent for both individual gamblers and those who operate Internet gambling operations abroad.  A strong federal law, prohibiting Internet gambling in this country, will hopefully curtail the growth of an Internet gambling industry that receives a significant amount of revenue from U.S. customers.

3.     Crackdown on Sports Tout Advertising Practices.

Sports tout services advertising needs to be examined.  As evidenced by the NFL lawsuit against Sports Advisor Inc.[35] and the HBO Real Sports segment,[36] companies are making misleading and false statements in advertisements for their sports tout services.  Many sports handicappers are advertising their success in picking "winners" with no evidence to support their assertions.  Without some type of regulation, consumer fraud practices will continue.

In addition, the NCAA remains concerned about the impact of sports tout advertising on teenagers and college students. Recently, Congress has focused its attention on the impact of alcohol and tobacco advertisements on our nation's youth, however, little has been said about the effects of sports gambling advertisements.  Sports tout services provide information for an activity, sports betting, that is illegal in 49 out of 50 states.  With sports touts now appearing on television and radio, young people are subject to more sports gambling information than ever before.
 
4.     More Studies Devoted to Teenage and College Student Gambling Behavior.

More research needs to be conducted in order to gain a better understanding of the extent of gambling on college campuses.  All existing studies point toward an extremely high incidence of gambling among college students.  However, in order to ensure that the most effective response is taken, we all must better understand the nature of the problem.  Studies need to explore such issues as student attitudes toward gambling, the extent of sports gambling on campus, the prevalence of Internet gambling among students, and the influence of gambling advertising and other factors on student gambling behavior. 

5.     Continued Assistance from Law Enforcement.

In order to combat illegal sports gambling in this country, law enforcement must ensure that compliance with federal and state laws is a high priority.  Over the past several years, the NCAA has received valuable assistance from local, state and federal law enforcement officials in identifying and prosecuting defendants in sports gambling scandals at several NCAA institutions.  In addition, the NCAA and federal law enforcement officials have begun to share information on sports gambling activity.  These types of efforts need to continue.

Also, the state attorneys general have recognized the difficulties in enforcing state law prohibitions as they pertain to gambling on the Internet.  The state attorneys general are actively encouraging Congress to pass a federal Internet gambling legislation that would result in a single, uniform law prohibiting Internet gambling in this country.  The legislation would also provide stiff criminal penalties and flexible civil enforcement mechanisms that will act as a strong deterrent.

Illegal sports gambling, whether it is through a bookie or over the Internet, will continue to flourish on college campuses and in cities across the United States unless a strong effort is made to enforce state and federal laws prohibiting such activity.



            The NCAA appreciates the opportunity to appear before you and hopes that the Commission will include in its final report a discussion and a list of recommendations on how to address issues related to sports gambling among our nation's youth.  The integrity of our game is at stake.

Thank you.  

Student-Athlete Reinstatement Case Precedent

Eligibility and Secondary Infraction Case Report

Sec Case ID:  14161
Elig Case ID:  0
Verbal Eligibility Decision Date:  
Verbal Secondary Decision Date:18-OCT-00
Division:  I
Sports:  Men's Tennis
Bylaws:  10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES
Secondary Appeal:  No
Eligibility Appeal:  No

Facts
For a period of approximately five months, the assistant men's tennis coach wagered a total of approximately $300 on sporting events, including intercollegiate sporting events. Further, on at least two occasions, the assistant coach wagered on the institution at which he was employed.

Additional Facts
-----

Institutional Action
The assistant coach was suspended pending the outcome of the investigation.

Enforcement Action
The assistant men's tennis coach was suspended from all coaching related activities for a period of two years, or, in the alternative, the university should be required to appear before the Committee on Infractions to show cause in accordance with Bylaw 19.6.1-(i) why a penalty should not be imposed against the university if it does not take the appropriate disciplinary action. Further, if the assistant coach seeks employment or affiliation in an athletically related position at any NCAA member institution during that two-year period, the coach and the involved institution shall be requested to appear before the Committee on Infractions to show cause why that institution should not be subject to additional penalties.

Eligibility Action
-----

Rationale
-----

Legislation

10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES

Staff members of a member conference, staff members of the athletics department of a member institution and student-athletes shall not knowingly: (Revised:4/22, deleted/98 effective 8/1/98)
Provide information to individuals involved in organized gambling activities concerning intercollegiate athletics competition;
Solicit a bet on any intercollegiate team;
Accept a bet on any team representing the institution;
Solicit or accept a bet on any intercollegiate competition for any item (e.g., cash, shirt, dinner) that has tangible value; or (Revised: 9/15/97)
Participate in any gambling activity that involves intercollegiate athletics or professional athletics, through a bookmaker, a parlay card or any other method employed by organized gambling. (Revised: 1/9/96, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)

Eligibility and Secondary Infraction Case Report

Sec Case ID:  14521
Elig Case ID:  19095
Verbal Eligibility Decision Date:  16-OCT-00
Verbal Secondary Decision Date:16-OCT-00
Division:  I
Sports:  Baseball
Bylaws:  10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES
Secondary Appeal:  No
Eligibility Appeal:  No

Facts
Freshman SA placed five bets on college and professional football games through an Internet gambling service.  The wagers were placed from August 16, 2000, to September 14, 2000. Institution discovered violation on September 15, 2000, when the head baseball coach inadvertently opened a letter containing a $100 check written to SA from an Internet sports gambling company addressed to SA. SA has three seasons remaining.

Additional Facts
-----

Institutional Action
The institution referred SA to the university counseling center and will review the gambling legislation with all student-athletes, coaches and administrative staffs.

Enforcement Action
No further action.

Eligibility Action
Eligibility reinstated for SA on September 15, 2001, and after he is charged with a season of eligibility.

Rationale
Based on the application of NCAA legislated sanctions per Bylaw 10.3.1-(b)

Legislation

10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES

Staff members of a member conference, staff members of the athletics department of a member institution and student-athletes shall not knowingly: (Revised:4/22, deleted/98 effective 8/1/98)
Provide information to individuals involved in organized gambling activities concerning intercollegiate athletics competition;
Solicit a bet on any intercollegiate team;
Accept a bet on any team representing the institution;
Solicit or accept a bet on any intercollegiate competition for any item (e.g., cash, shirt, dinner) that has tangible value; or (Revised: 9/15/97)
Participate in any gambling activity that involves intercollegiate athletics or professional athletics, through a bookmaker, a parlay card or any other method employed by organized gambling. (Revised: 1/9/96, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)

Eligibility and Secondary Infraction Case Report

Sec Case ID:  12281
Elig Case ID:  0
Verbal Eligibility Decision Date:  
Verbal Secondary Decision Date:  17-DEC-99
Division:  I
Sports:  Football
Bylaws:  10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES
Secondary Appeal:  No
Eligibility Appeal:  No

Facts
The Director of Athletics wagered a sweat suit on the institution's playoff football game in November 1997.

Additional Facts
-----

Institutional Action
The gambling legislation was reviewed at the October 1998 compliance meeting with the coaching staff and the director of athletics. The director of athletics involved in the violation is no longer at the university.

Enforcement Action
No further action.

Eligibility Action
-----

Rationale
-----

Legislation

10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES

Staff members of a member conference, staff members of the athletics department of a member institution and student-athletes shall not knowingly: (Revised:4/22, deleted/98 effective 8/1/98)
Provide information to individuals involved in organized gambling activities concerning intercollegiate athletics competition;
Solicit a bet on any intercollegiate team;
Accept a bet on any team representing the institution;
Solicit or accept a bet on any intercollegiate competition for any item (e.g., cash, shirt, dinner) that has tangible value; or (Revised: 9/15/97)
Participate in any gambling activity that involves intercollegiate athletics or professional athletics, through a bookmaker, a parlay card or any other method employed by organized gambling. (Revised: 1/9/96, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)

Eligibility and Secondary Infraction Case Report

Sec Case ID:  0
Elig Case ID:  17058
Verbal Eligibility Decision Date:  11-JUN-99
Verbal Secondary Decision Date:
Division:  I
Sports:  Baseball
Bylaws:  10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES
Secondary Appeal:  No
Eligibility Appeal:  No

Facts
The SA organized a betting pool on the 1999 NCAA men's basketball tournament and entered himself for $5.  He subsequently won the pool of $50.

Additional Facts
-----

Institutional Action
The SA donated his winnings to charity prior to discovery of the violation. The institution will withhold the SA from the next two contests.

Enforcement Action
Not applicable.

Eligibility Action
Eligibility reinstated on basis of institutional action.

Rationale
The staff determined that the SA should be withheld from competition due to his involvement in the organization of the pool and the fact that he had received education regarding gambling from the institution.


Legislation

10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES

Staff members of a member conference, staff members of the athletics department of a member institution and student-athletes shall not knowingly: (Revised:4/22, deleted/98 effective 8/1/98)
Provide information to individuals involved in organized gambling activities concerning intercollegiate athletics competition;
Solicit a bet on any intercollegiate team;
Accept a bet on any team representing the institution;
Solicit or accept a bet on any intercollegiate competition for any item (e.g., cash, shirt, dinner) that has tangible value; or (Revised: 9/15/97)
Participate in any gambling activity that involves intercollegiate athletics or professional athletics, through a bookmaker, a parlay card or any other method employed by organized gambling. (Revised: 1/9/96, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)


Eligibility and Secondary Infraction Case Report

Sec Case ID:  0
Elig Case ID:  16735
Verbal Eligibility Decision Date:  22-FEB-99
Verbal Secondary Decision Date:
Division:  I
Sports:  Baseball
Bylaws:  10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES
Secondary Appeal:  No
Eligibility Appeal:  Yes

Facts
Over a five-week period, SA placed 25-30 bets valued at $625-$750 on collegiate and professional football contests through a high school friend, who the institution determined is not a bookie. SA placed all bets during 1998 fall semester when SA was not enrolled at the institution but did intend to enroll for the 1999 spring semester in order to seek a second undergraduate degree while utilizing his fourth season of intercollegiate baseball (SA graduated in May of 1998). SA was forthcoming when the entire team was interviewed about possible sports wagering.

Additional Facts
-----

Institutional Action
The institution plans to withhold SA from 10 contests of a 56 game season (approximately 18%). Further, the institution required the young man to attend an educational session on gambling.

Enforcement Action
Not applicable.

Eligibility Action
Eligibility reinstated after the institution withholds the young man from an additional 18 contests (for a total of 50% of the season).

On appeal to the Division I Subcommittee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement, the subcommittee affirmed the staff's initial decision.

Rationale
The staff granted the young man relief from precedent for being forthcoming when questioned. Precedent would require a harsher reinstatement condition due to the high number of bets placed and high dollar amount wagered.

Legislation

10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES

Staff members of a member conference, staff members of the athletics department of a member institution and student-athletes shall not knowingly: (Revised:4/22, deleted/98 effective 8/1/98)
Provide information to individuals involved in organized gambling activities concerning intercollegiate athletics competition;
Solicit a bet on any intercollegiate team;
Accept a bet on any team representing the institution;
Solicit or accept a bet on any intercollegiate competition for any item (e.g., cash, shirt, dinner) that has tangible value; or (Revised: 9/15/97)
Participate in any gambling activity that involves intercollegiate athletics or professional athletics, through a bookmaker, a parlay card or any other method employed by organized gambling. (Revised: 1/9/96, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)

Eligibility and Secondary Infraction Case Report

Sec Case ID:  11038
Elig Case ID:  0
Verbal Eligibility Decision Date:  11-DEC-98
Verbal Secondary Decision Date:
Division:  I
Sports:  
Bylaws:  10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES
Secondary Appeal:  No
Eligibility Appeal:  No

Facts
Sports information director served as a "guest picker" for a weekly sports column in a local newspaper.

Additional Facts
-----

Institutional Action
Reviewed appropriate legislation with entire staff and will continue to send reminders throughout remainder of year.

Enforcement Action
No further action.

Eligibility Action
-----

Rationale
-----

Legislation

10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES

Staff members of a member conference, staff members of the athletics department of a member institution and student-athletes shall not knowingly: (Revised:4/22, deleted/98 effective 8/1/98)
Provide information to individuals involved in organized gambling activities concerning intercollegiate athletics competition;
Solicit a bet on any intercollegiate team;
Accept a bet on any team representing the institution;
Solicit or accept a bet on any intercollegiate competition for any item (e.g., cash, shirt, dinner) that has tangible value; or (Revised: 9/15/97)
Participate in any gambling activity that involves intercollegiate athletics or professional athletics, through a bookmaker, a parlay card or any other method employed by organized gambling. (Revised: 1/9/96, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)

Eligibility and Secondary Infraction Case Report

Sec Case ID:  0
Elig Case ID:  16379
Verbal Eligibility Decision Date:  26-OCT-98
Verbal Secondary Decision Date:
Division:  I
Sports:  Men's Basketball
Bylaws:  10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES
Secondary Appeal:  No
Eligibility Appeal:  No

Facts
While a student-athlete at his previous institution, SA was a bookmaker in an organized gambling operation on the institution's campus, soliciting and receiving sports wagers for NHL, NBA and NCAA contests for a two-week period during the 1997 spring semester. The operation enabled students to place between 300-400 bets on sporting events totaling over $5,000. The young man ceased his involvement in the gambling operation as a result of an intervention by local law enforcement authorities. Further, for a two-week period during the 1996 fall semester, the young man was involved in a similar gambling operation as a bookmaker and profited approximately $800 during that time period.

Additional Facts
-----

Institutional Action
Not applicable.

Enforcement Action
Not applicable.

Eligibility Action
Eligibility not reinstated.

Rationale
Based on case precedent.

Legislation

10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES

Staff members of a member conference, staff members of the athletics department of a member institution and student-athletes shall not knowingly: (Revised:4/22, deleted/98 effective 8/1/98)
Provide information to individuals involved in organized gambling activities concerning intercollegiate athletics competition;
Solicit a bet on any intercollegiate team;
Accept a bet on any team representing the institution;
Solicit or accept a bet on any intercollegiate competition for any item (e.g., cash, shirt, dinner) that has tangible value; or (Revised: 9/15/97)
Participate in any gambling activity that involves intercollegiate athletics or professional athletics, through a bookmaker, a parlay card or any other method employed by organized gambling. (Revised: 1/9/96, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)

Eligibility and Secondary Infraction Case Report

Sec Case ID:  10341
Elig Case ID:  0
Verbal Eligibility Decision Date:  
Verbal Secondary Decision Date:  10-JUL-98
Division:  I
Sports:  
Bylaws:  10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES
Secondary Appeal:  No
Eligibility Appeal:  No

Facts
Various coaching staff members and support staff members were involved in a men's basketball office pool that included a $5.00 entry fee.

Additional Facts
-----

Institutional Action
Required involved staff members to withdraw from pool and collect their $5.00 entry fee, issued letters of reprimand to all involved staff members, and reviewed appropriate legislation with all involved staff members.

Enforcement Action
No further action.

Eligibility Action
-----

Rationale
-----

Legislation

10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES

Staff members of a member conference, staff members of the athletics department of a member institution and student-athletes shall not knowingly: (Revised:4/22, deleted/98 effective 8/1/98)
Provide information to individuals involved in organized gambling activities concerning intercollegiate athletics competition;
Solicit a bet on any intercollegiate team;
Accept a bet on any team representing the institution;
Solicit or accept a bet on any intercollegiate competition for any item (e.g., cash, shirt, dinner) that has tangible value; or (Revised: 9/15/97)
Participate in any gambling activity that involves intercollegiate athletics or professional athletics, through a bookmaker, a parlay card or any other method employed by organized gambling. (Revised: 1/9/96, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)

Eligibility and Secondary Infraction Case Report

Sec Case ID:  10014
Elig Case ID:  0
Verbal Eligibility Decision Date:  
Verbal Secondary Decision Date:  01-MAY-98
Division:  I
Sports:  Men's Swimming
Bylaws:  10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES
Secondary Appeal:  No
Eligibility Appeal:  No

Facts
Head coach participated in a fantasy football league involving professional players for a two-week period. Coach had not paid an entry fee or received any money.

Additional Facts
-----

Institutional Action
Issued a written reprimand to head coach, suspended him from job duties for two days and precluded him from attending one weekend of scheduled meets.

Enforcement Action
No further action.

Eligibility Action
-----

Rationale
-----

Legislation

10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES

Staff members of a member conference, staff members of the athletics department of a member institution and student-athletes shall not knowingly: (Revised:4/22, deleted/98 effective 8/1/98)
Provide information to individuals involved in organized gambling activities concerning intercollegiate athletics competition;
Solicit a bet on any intercollegiate team;
Accept a bet on any team representing the institution;
Solicit or accept a bet on any intercollegiate competition for any item (e.g., cash, shirt, dinner) that has tangible value; or (Revised: 9/15/97)
Participate in any gambling activity that involves intercollegiate athletics or professional athletics, through a bookmaker, a parlay card or any other method employed by organized gambling. (Revised: 1/9/96, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)

Eligibility and Secondary Infraction Case Report

Sec Case ID:  9993
Elig Case ID:  0
Verbal Eligibility Decision Date:  
Verbal Secondary Decision Date:  30-APR-98
Division:  I
Sports:  Football
Bylaws:  10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES
Secondary Appeal:  No
Eligibility Appeal:  No

Facts
Student manager placed bets on collegiate football games including those involving the institution. Young man resigned as manager after two contests.

Additional Facts
-----

Institutional Action
Recommended separation of student manager from the institution and conducted education on gambling activities with all student-athletes, managers, trainers and coaches.

Enforcement Action
No further action.

Eligibility Action
-----

Rationale
-----

Legislation

10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES

Staff members of a member conference, staff members of the athletics department of a member institution and student-athletes shall not knowingly: (Revised:4/22, deleted/98 effective 8/1/98)
Provide information to individuals involved in organized gambling activities concerning intercollegiate athletics competition;
Solicit a bet on any intercollegiate team;
Accept a bet on any team representing the institution;
Solicit or accept a bet on any intercollegiate competition for any item (e.g., cash, shirt, dinner) that has tangible value; or (Revised: 9/15/97)
Participate in any gambling activity that involves intercollegiate athletics or professional athletics, through a bookmaker, a parlay card or any other method employed by organized gambling. (Revised: 1/9/96, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)

Eligibility and Secondary Infraction Case Report

Sec Case ID:  0
Elig Case ID:  15315
Verbal Eligibility Decision Date:  20-MAR-98
Verbal Secondary Decision Date:
Division:  I
Sports:  Baseball, Football
Bylaws:  10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES
Secondary Appeal:  No
Eligibility Appeal:  No

Facts
SA #1 placed five to six bets for a total of $350 on professional football and basketball contests over two week period. SA #2 placed three to four bets for total of $125 on professional football contests over a two to three month period. SA #3 placed one $25 bet on professional football contest. SAs reported their gambling activity to institution after institution became aware of possible gambling activity among its SAs and encouraged SAs to self-report.

Additional Facts
-----

Institutional Action
Institution will withhold SAs from the first four, three and one contests, respectively. In addition, institution implemented additional educational and preventative measures to avoid future similar violations.

Enforcement Action
Not applicable.

Eligibility Action
Eligibility reinstated after SA # 1 and #2 are withheld from first 30 percent and SA #3 is withheld from first 20 percent of regularly scheduled intercollegiate contests of baseball and football seasons, respectively.

Rationale
The young men were provided relief from prior case precedent (which would have required a 50 percent condition for reinstatement for SA #1 and #2 and a 30 percent condition for reinstatement for SA #3) due to the fact that although the institution had reason to believe and was investigating whether SAs were involved in gambling activities, the institution did not have specific information about the young men who self-reported their involvement.

Legislation

10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES

Staff members of a member conference, staff members of the athletics department of a member institution and student-athletes shall not knowingly: (Revised:4/22, deleted/98 effective 8/1/98)
Provide information to individuals involved in organized gambling activities concerning intercollegiate athletics competition;
Solicit a bet on any intercollegiate team;
Accept a bet on any team representing the institution;
Solicit or accept a bet on any intercollegiate competition for any item (e.g., cash, shirt, dinner) that has tangible value; or (Revised: 9/15/97)
Participate in any gambling activity that involves intercollegiate athletics or professional athletics, through a bookmaker, a parlay card or any other method employed by organized gambling. (Revised: 1/9/96, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)

Eligibility and Secondary Infraction Case Report

Sec Case ID:  8827
Elig Case ID:  0
Verbal Eligibility Decision Date:  
Verbal Secondary Decision Date:  22-OCT-97
Division:  I
Sports:  Football
Bylaws:  10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES
Secondary Appeal:  No
Eligibility Appeal:  Yes

Facts
Staff members participated in an NCAA tournament pool, and a part-time coach placed wagers on several professional football games through an operation maintained by an employee of the university's recreational and intramural division. No student-athletes were involved.

Additional Facts
-----

Institutional Action
Issued a reprimand to involved individual and placed him on disciplinary review for 90 days without pay; discussed gambling legislation with all coaches, staff and student-athletes; required all staff members to attend a compliance session; and suspended part-time coach for a one-week period.

Enforcement Action
No further action.

Eligibility Action
-----

Rationale
-----

Legislation

10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES

Staff members of a member conference, staff members of the athletics department of a member institution and student-athletes shall not knowingly: (Revised:4/22/98 effective 8/1/98)
Provide information to individuals involved in organized gambling activities concerning intercollegiate athletics competition;
Solicit a bet on any intercollegiate team;
Accept a bet on any team representing the institution;
Solicit or accept a bet on any intercollegiate competition for any item (e.g., cash, shirt, dinner) that has tangible value; or (Revised: 9/15/97)
Participate in any gambling activity that involves intercollegiate athletics or professional athletics, through a bookmaker, a parlay card or any other method employed by organized gambling. (Revised: 1/9/96, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)

Eligibility and Secondary Infraction Case Report

Sec Case ID:  0
Elig Case ID:  15532
Verbal Eligibility Decision Date:  10-SEP-97
Verbal Secondary Decision Date:
Division:  I
Sports:  Football
Bylaws:  10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES
Secondary Appeal:  No
Eligibility Appeal:  Yes

Facts
During a two and one-half week period in fall of 1996, SA wagered (while a football SA at another college) a total of $3,800 with a student bookmaker on two professional football contests, two college football contests, an intercollegiate football three-game "teaser" and the World Series. SA quit the college football team prior to final three contests of 1996-97 season and transferred to another institution as a graduate student in fall of 1997.

Additional Facts
-----

Institutional Action
Not applicable.

Enforcement Action
Not applicable.

Eligibility Action
Eligibility not restored. Staff believes that the large amount of money wagered and high number of bets placed is the type of serious circumstance that fundamentally threatens integrity of intercollegiate athletics.

On appeal to Division I Subcommittee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement, the committee affirmed the staff's initial decision.

Rationale
Based on case precedent.

Legislation

10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES

Staff members of a member conference, staff members of the athletics department of a member institution and student-athletes shall not knowingly: (Revised:4/22/98 effective 8/1/98)
Provide information to individuals involved in organized gambling activities concerning intercollegiate athletics competition;
Solicit a bet on any intercollegiate team;
Accept a bet on any team representing the institution;
Solicit or accept a bet on any intercollegiate competition for any item (e.g., cash, shirt, dinner) that has tangible value; or (Revised: 9/15/97)
Participate in any gambling activity that involves intercollegiate athletics or professional athletics, through a bookmaker, a parlay card or any other method employed by organized gambling. (Revised: 1/9/96, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)

Eligibility and Secondary Infraction Case Report

Sec Case ID:  8555
Elig Case ID:  0
Verbal Eligibility Decision Date:  
Verbal Secondary Decision Date:  26-AUG-97
Division:  I
Sports:  
Bylaws:  10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES
Secondary Appeal:  No
Eligibility Appeal:  No

Facts
Several athletics department staff members took part in office pools in which amounts between $2 and $5 were contributed on intercollegiate athletics events and amounts up to $30 were contributed to fantasy leagues on professional baseball, basketball and football.

Additional Facts
-----

Institutional Action
Issued reprimands to involved staff members, and required the individuals to attend all educational programs given by the athletics department; issued memorandum to all institution employees regarding prohibition of gambling in the state adherence to the law and NCAA rules and policies; began search to fill position of compliance coordinator; and reviewed appropriate legislation with coaching staff members.

Enforcement Action
No further action.

Eligibility Action
-----

Rationale
-----

Legislation

10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES

Staff members of a member conference, staff members of the athletics department of a member institution and student-athletes shall not knowingly: (Revised:4/22/98 effective 8/1/98)
Provide information to individuals involved in organized gambling activities concerning intercollegiate athletics competition;
Solicit a bet on any intercollegiate team;
Accept a bet on any team representing the institution;
Solicit or accept a bet on any intercollegiate competition for any item (e.g., cash, shirt, dinner) that has tangible value; or (Revised: 9/15/97)
Participate in any gambling activity that involves intercollegiate athletics or professional athletics, through a bookmaker, a parlay card or any other method employed by organized gambling. (Revised: 1/9/96, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)

Eligibility and Secondary Infraction Case Report

Sec Case ID:  8268
Elig Case ID:  0
Verbal Eligibility Decision Date:  
Verbal Secondary Decision Date:  18-JUL-97
Division:  I
Sports:  Football
Bylaws:  10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES
Secondary Appeal:  No
Eligibility Appeal:  No

Facts
Student manager wagered approximate $50 bets on college and professional football games, and a student trainer placed bets on professional football games. Student manager indicated that he never bet on the institution or on behalf of any players at the institution.

Additional Facts
-----

Institutional Action
Suspended student manager from all football support activity for remainder of year; suspended student trainer for three weeks; formed a campus-community task force to study gambling issues on campus; reviewed appropriate NCAA legislation; and hired two outside consultants to visit with teams regarding gambling issues.

Enforcement Action
No further action.

Eligibility Action
-----

Rationale
-----

Legislation

10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES

Staff members of a member conference, staff members of the athletics department of a member institution and student-athletes shall not knowingly: (Revised:4/22/98 effective 8/1/98)
Provide information to individuals involved in organized gambling activities concerning intercollegiate athletics competition;
Solicit a bet on any intercollegiate team;
Accept a bet on any team representing the institution;
Solicit or accept a bet on any intercollegiate competition for any item (e.g., cash, shirt, dinner) that has tangible value; or (Revised: 9/15/97)
Participate in any gambling activity that involves intercollegiate athletics or professional athletics, through a bookmaker, a parlay card or any other method employed by organized gambling. (Revised: 1/9/96, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)

Eligibility and Secondary Infraction Case Report

Sec Case ID:  0
Elig Case ID:  13566
Verbal Eligibility Decision Date:  29-APR-97
Verbal Secondary Decision Date:
Division:  I
Sports:  Football
Bylaws:  10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES
Secondary Appeal:  No
Eligibility Appeal:  Yes

Facts
SA #1 placed a total of three $150 wagers on both professional and collegiate football contests (a total of $450), SA #2 placed a total of two $100 wagers on collegiate football contests (a total of $200) and SA #3 placed a total of three $100 wagers on both professional and collegiate contests (a total of $300) during the 1996-97 academic year.

Additional Facts
-----

Institutional Action
Institution withheld the SAs from three contests during 1996-97 season. SAs are required to attend a gambling counseling program. Also, SA #1 and #2 were placed on deferred university housing suspension through December 1997. In addition, SA #2 was placed on probation and required to complete 15 hours of community service.

Enforcement Action
Not applicable.

Eligibility Action
Eligibility restored after the SAs are withheld from an additional two contests (a total of 50% of a football season).

Rationale
Based on case precedent.

Legislation

10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES

Staff members of a member conference, staff members of the athletics department of a member institution and student-athletes shall not knowingly: (Revised:4/22/98 effective 8/1/98)
Provide information to individuals involved in organized gambling activities concerning intercollegiate athletics competition;
Solicit a bet on any intercollegiate team;
Accept a bet on any team representing the institution;
Solicit or accept a bet on any intercollegiate competition for any item (e.g., cash, shirt, dinner) that has tangible value; or (Revised: 9/15/97)
Participate in any gambling activity that involves intercollegiate athletics or professional athletics, through a bookmaker, a parlay card or any other method employed by organized gambling. (Revised: 1/9/96, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)

Eligibility and Secondary Infraction Case Report

Sec Case ID:  0
Elig Case ID:  13567
Verbal Eligibility Decision Date:  29-APR-97
Verbal Secondary Decision Date:
Division:  I
Sports:  Football
Bylaws:  10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES
Secondary Appeal:  No
Eligibility Appeal:  No

Facts
SA placed one $75 wager on a professional football contest during the 1996-97 academic year. In addition, SA served as an intermediary for others to place wagers during the 1995-96 and 1996-97 academic years, and on two or three occasions, added money to wagers he was placing for others.  

New information submitted by the institution indicated that SA placed one $50 wager during the 1995-96 academic year, placed three to four wagers totaling $175-$225 during the 1996-97 academic year and on a couple of occasions, while SA was on the phone placing a bet, others in his presence asked SA to relay their bets to the bookmaker which SA did.

Additional Facts
-----

Institutional Action
Institution withheld SA from three contests during the 1996-97 season. Also, SA must attend gambling counseling sessions during the spring and fall 1997 semesters and was placed on university probation.

Enforcement Action
Not applicable.

Eligibility Action
Eligibility restored after SA is withheld from the 1996-97 season and charged with the loss of one season of competition.

Upon reconsideration of new information, the staff restored the young man after he is withheld from an additional four contests of the 1997-98 football season (a total of 70% of a football season). In particular, the staff considered the circumstances surrounding the SA's placement of bets for others.

Rationale
Based on case precedent.

Legislation

10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES

Staff members of a member conference, staff members of the athletics department of a member institution and student-athletes shall not knowingly: (Revised:4/22/98 effective 8/1/98)
Provide information to individuals involved in organized gambling activities concerning intercollegiate athletics competition;
Solicit a bet on any intercollegiate team;
Accept a bet on any team representing the institution;
Solicit or accept a bet on any intercollegiate competition for any item (e.g., cash, shirt, dinner) that has tangible value; or (Revised: 9/15/97)
Participate in any gambling activity that involves intercollegiate athletics or professional athletics, through a bookmaker, a parlay card or any other method employed by organized gambling. (Revised: 1/9/96, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)


Eligibility and Secondary Infraction Case Report

Sec Case ID:  0
Elig Case ID:  13568
Verbal Eligibility Decision Date:  29-APR-97
Verbal Secondary Decision Date:
Division:  I
Sports:  Football
Bylaws:  10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES
Secondary Appeal:  No
Eligibility Appeal:  No

Facts
SA placed one $600 wager on a professional football contest and 8-9 $100-$200 wagers on intercollegiate football contests during the 1996-97 academic year.

Additional Facts
-----

Institutional Action
Institution withheld SA from three contests during the 1996-97 season. SA attended gambling counseling sessions in the spring 1997 semester. He was placed on university probation and is on deferred university housing suspension through December 1997. SA also required to perform 15 hours of community service.

Enforcement Action
Not applicable.

Eligibility Action
Eligibility restored after SA is withheld from the 1997-98 season and charged with the loss of one season of competition.

Rationale
After reviewing prior case precedent, staff determined that SA should not be restored based on the large individual wagers as well as the total amount of money wagered. However, staff considered the critical injury SA sustained recently and determined that if SA was provided with at least some remaining eligibility, this may assist in SA's rehabilitative efforts.

Legislation

10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES

Staff members of a member conference, staff members of the athletics department of a member institution and student-athletes shall not knowingly: (Revised:4/22/98 effective 8/1/98)
Provide information to individuals involved in organized gambling activities concerning intercollegiate athletics competition;
Solicit a bet on any intercollegiate team;
Accept a bet on any team representing the institution;
Solicit or accept a bet on any intercollegiate competition for any item (e.g., cash, shirt, dinner) that has tangible value; or (Revised: 9/15/97)
Participate in any gambling activity that involves intercollegiate athletics or professional athletics, through a bookmaker, a parlay card or any other method employed by organized gambling. (Revised: 1/9/96, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)

Eligibility and Secondary Infraction Case Report

Sec Case ID:  0
Elig Case ID:  13569
Verbal Eligibility Decision Date:  29-APR-97
Verbal Secondary Decision Date:
Division:  I
Sports:  Football
Bylaws:  10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES
Secondary Appeal:  No
Eligibility Appeal:  No

Facts
SA #1 placed three $100 wagers on professional football contests and SA #2 wagered a total of $50 on collegiate football contests during the 1996-97 academic year.


Additional Facts
-----

Institutional Action
Institution withheld SA #1 from 50 percent (three contests) of the 1997 traditional golf season. Institution withheld SA #2 from three football contests during the 1996-97 season. SA #2 was also required to attend a gambling counseling program, placed on probation, placed on deferred university housing through June 1998 and required to complete 15 hours of community service.


Enforcement Action
Not applicable.

Eligibility Action
Eligibility restored based on institutional action.

Rationale
Based on case precedent.

Legislation

10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES

Staff members of a member conference, staff members of the athletics department of a member institution and student-athletes shall not knowingly: (Revised:4/22/98 effective 8/1/98)
Provide information to individuals involved in organized gambling activities concerning intercollegiate athletics competition;
Solicit a bet on any intercollegiate team;
Accept a bet on any team representing the institution;
Solicit or accept a bet on any intercollegiate competition for any item (e.g., cash, shirt, dinner) that has tangible value; or (Revised: 9/15/97)
Participate in any gambling activity that involves intercollegiate athletics or professional athletics, through a bookmaker, a parlay card or any other method employed by organized gambling. (Revised: 1/9/96, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)


Eligibility and Secondary Infraction Case Report

Sec Case ID:  0
Elig Case ID:  13455
Verbal Eligibility Decision Date:  14-APR-97
Verbal Secondary Decision Date:
Division:  I
Sports:  Men's Golf
Bylaws:  10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES
Secondary Appeal:  No
Eligibility Appeal:  No

Facts
From November 1995 to March 1996, SA placed approximately 20 bets valued at approximately $500 on intercollegiate sporting events. The SA placed these bets on behalf of other students at the institution with a bookmaker (an individual enrolled at the institution) operating on or near the institution's campus. The bookmaker had developed a relationship with several students at the institution, including SA, in which the students would place bets on behalf of other students not familiar with the bookie.

Additional Facts
-----

Institutional Action
The institution placed the young man on disciplinary probation, required him to write an educational paper on gambling and prepare a proposal for an educational program on the subject of gambling by SAs. Further, the institution withheld the SA from the 1996-97 nontraditional golf season and 45% (8 contests) of the 1996-97 traditional golf season.

Enforcement Action
Not applicable.

Eligibility Action
Eligibility restored after SA is withheld from the remainder of the 1996-97 traditional golf season and the SA is charged with a season of competition.

Rationale
Based on case precedent.

Legislation

10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES

Staff members of a member conference, staff members of the athletics department of a member institution and student-athletes shall not knowingly: (Revised:4/22/98 effective 8/1/98)
Provide information to individuals involved in organized gambling activities concerning intercollegiate athletics competition;
Solicit a bet on any intercollegiate team;
Accept a bet on any team representing the institution;
Solicit or accept a bet on any intercollegiate competition for any item (e.g., cash, shirt, dinner) that has tangible value; or (Revised: 9/15/97)
Participate in any gambling activity that involves intercollegiate athletics or professional athletics, through a bookmaker, a parlay card or any other method employed by organized gambling. (Revised: 1/9/96, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)


Eligibility and Secondary Infraction Case Report

Sec Case ID:  0
Elig Case ID:  13477
Verbal Eligibility Decision Date:  21-FEB-97
Verbal Secondary Decision Date:
Division:  I
Sports:  Women's Soccer
Bylaws:  10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES
Secondary Appeal:  No
Eligibility Appeal:  No

Facts
SAs participated in an organized sports pool in which they picked winners of numerous intercollegiate athletics contests. SAs won pool on one occasion. SAs were not required to pay fee to enter pool.

Additional Facts
-----

Institutional Action
Institution prohibited SAs from collecting winnings from pool ($50 gift certificate). Also, institution will require SAs to perform 10 hours of community service and will withhold SAs from two contests.


Enforcement Action
Not applicable.

Eligibility Action
Eligibility restored.

Rationale
Based on case precedent.

Legislation

10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES

Staff members of a member conference, staff members of the athletics department of a member institution and student-athletes shall not knowingly: (Revised:4/22/98 effective 8/1/98)
Provide information to individuals involved in organized gambling activities concerning intercollegiate athletics competition;
Solicit a bet on any intercollegiate team;
Accept a bet on any team representing the institution;
Solicit or accept a bet on any intercollegiate competition for any item (e.g., cash, shirt, dinner) that has tangible value; or (Revised: 9/15/97)
Participate in any gambling activity that involves intercollegiate athletics or professional athletics, through a bookmaker, a parlay card or any other method employed by organized gambling. (Revised: 1/9/96, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)

Eligibility and Secondary Infraction Case Report

Sec Case ID:  0
Elig Case ID:  13125
Verbal Eligibility Decision Date:  21-FEB-97
Verbal Secondary Decision Date:
Division:  I
Sports:  Women's Soccer
Bylaws:  10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES
Secondary Appeal:  No
Eligibility Appeal:  No

Facts
SAs participated in an organized sports pool in which they picked winners of numerous intercollegiate athletics contests. SAs won pool on one occasion. SAs were not required to pay fee to enter pool.

Additional Facts
-----

Institutional Action
Institution prohibited SAs from collecting winnings from pool ($50 gift certificate). Also, institution will require SAs to perform 10 hours of community service and will withhold SAs from two contests.


Enforcement Action
Not applicable.

Eligibility Action
Eligibility restored.

Rationale
Based on case precedent.

Legislation

10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES

Staff members of a member conference, staff members of the athletics department of a member institution and student-athletes shall not knowingly: (Revised:4/22/98 effective 8/1/98)
Provide information to individuals involved in organized gambling activities concerning intercollegiate athletics competition;
Solicit a bet on any intercollegiate team;
Accept a bet on any team representing the institution;
Solicit or accept a bet on any intercollegiate competition for any item (e.g., cash, shirt, dinner) that has tangible value; or (Revised: 9/15/97)
Participate in any gambling activity that involves intercollegiate athletics or professional athletics, through a bookmaker, a parlay card or any other method employed by organized gambling. (Revised: 1/9/96, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)

Eligibility and Secondary Infraction Case Report

Sec Case ID:  0
Elig Case ID:  12917
Verbal Eligibility Decision Date:  15-JAN-97
Verbal Secondary Decision Date:
Division:  I
Sports:  Men's Basketball
Bylaws:  10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES
Secondary Appeal:  No
Eligibility Appeal:  No

Facts
SA placed two $25 and two $100 bets over a two-month period through another student. SA voluntarily came forward to report violation. Institution had no prior information that SA was involved in gambling activity.

Additional Facts
-----

Institutional Action
Institution will withhold SA from two exhibition contests and first two regularly scheduled contests of 1996-97 season.

Enforcement Action
Not applicable.

Eligibility Action
Eligibility restored on basis of institutional action.

Rationale
Staff considered as significant mitigation that SA voluntarily reported his involvement in violation in this particular situation, where institution was not conducting an investigation and had no information to implicate SA.

Legislation

10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES

Staff members of a member conference, staff members of the athletics department of a member institution and student-athletes shall not knowingly: (Revised:4/22/98 effective 8/1/98)
Provide information to individuals involved in organized gambling activities concerning intercollegiate athletics competition;
Solicit a bet on any intercollegiate team;
Accept a bet on any team representing the institution;
Solicit or accept a bet on any intercollegiate competition for any item (e.g., cash, shirt, dinner) that has tangible value; or (Revised: 9/15/97)
Participate in any gambling activity that involves intercollegiate athletics or professional athletics, through a bookmaker, a parlay card or any other method employed by organized gambling. (Revised: 1/9/96, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)

Eligibility and Secondary Infraction Case Report

Sec Case ID:  0
Elig Case ID:  12914
Verbal Eligibility Decision Date:  15-JAN-97
Verbal Secondary Decision Date:
Division:  I
Sports:  Football
Bylaws:  10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES
Secondary Appeal:  No
Eligibility Appeal:  No

Facts
SA placed three $50 bets over phone through a friend in California. SA was interviewed by athletics director as a result of a campus investigation into possible gambling activity by its SAs.

Additional Facts
-----

Institutional Action
Institution withheld SA from next regularly scheduled contest.

Enforcement Action
Not applicable.

Eligibility Action
Eligibility restored on basis of institutional action and after SA is withheld from an additional contest (for a total of two contests).

Rationale
Based on case precedent.

Legislation

10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES

Staff members of a member conference, staff members of the athletics department of a member institution and student-athletes shall not knowingly: (Revised:4/22/98 effective 8/1/98)
Provide information to individuals involved in organized gambling activities concerning intercollegiate athletics competition;
Solicit a bet on any intercollegiate team;
Accept a bet on any team representing the institution;
Solicit or accept a bet on any intercollegiate competition for any item (e.g., cash, shirt, dinner) that has tangible value; or (Revised: 9/15/97)
Participate in any gambling activity that involves intercollegiate athletics or professional athletics, through a bookmaker, a parlay card or any other method employed by organized gambling. (Revised: 1/9/96, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)

Eligibility and Secondary Infraction Case Report

Sec Case ID:  7630
Elig Case ID:  12456
Verbal Eligibility Decision Date:  25-OCT-96
Verbal Secondary Decision Date: 25-OCT-96
Division:  I
Sports:  Football
Bylaws:  10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES
Secondary Appeal:  No
Eligibility Appeal:  No

Facts
SA solicited a wager from SA from a different institution wagering institutional equipment (jerseys) based upon final competitive record between institutions in sport over a five-year period. SA won wager and was provided a jersey from other young man.

Additional Facts
-----

Institutional Action
Institution will return jersey to SA and continue efforts in educating SAs regarding gambling issues.

Enforcement Action
Secondary violation; no further action.

Eligibility Action
Eligibility restored and SA must attend one meeting of and donate $50 to a noninstitutional association, which provides educational information regarding gambling activity.

Rationale
Based on case precedent.

Legislation

10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES

Staff members of a member conference, staff members of the athletics department of a member institution and student-athletes shall not knowingly: (Revised:4/22/98 effective 8/1/98)
Provide information to individuals involved in organized gambling activities concerning intercollegiate athletics competition;
Solicit a bet on any intercollegiate team;
Accept a bet on any team representing the institution;
Solicit or accept a bet on any intercollegiate competition for any item (e.g., cash, shirt, dinner) that has tangible value; or (Revised: 9/15/97)
Participate in any gambling activity that involves intercollegiate athletics or professional athletics, through a bookmaker, a parlay card or any other method employed by organized gambling. (Revised: 1/9/96, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)

Eligibility and Secondary Infraction Case Report

Sec Case ID:  7629
Elig Case ID:  12479
Verbal Eligibility Decision Date:  24-OCT-96
Verbal Secondary Decision Date: 24-OCT-96
Division:  I
Sports:  Football
Bylaws:  10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES
Secondary Appeal:  No
Eligibility Appeal:  No

Facts
Two SAs from different institutions wagered institutional equipment (jerseys) based upon final competitive record between two institutions in sport over a five-year period. SA lost wager and provided team jersey to other SA.

Additional Facts
-----

Institutional Action
Institution will retrieve SA's team jersey and require SA to participate in an additional rules educational seminar.

Enforcement Action
Secondary violation; no further action.

Eligibility Action
Eligibility restored and SA must attend one meeting of and donate $50 to a noninstitutional association, which provides educational information regarding dangers of engaging in gambling activity.

Rationale
Based on case precedent.

Legislation

10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES

Staff members of a member conference, staff members of the athletics department of a member institution and student-athletes shall not knowingly: (Revised:4/22/98 effective 8/1/98)
Provide information to individuals involved in organized gambling activities concerning intercollegiate athletics competition;
Solicit a bet on any intercollegiate team;
Accept a bet on any team representing the institution;
Solicit or accept a bet on any intercollegiate competition for any item (e.g., cash, shirt, dinner) that has tangible value; or (Revised: 9/15/97)
Participate in any gambling activity that involves intercollegiate athletics or professional athletics, through a bookmaker, a parlay card or any other method employed by organized gambling. (Revised: 1/9/96, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)

Eligibility and Secondary Infraction Case Report

Sec Case ID:  0
Elig Case ID:  9933
Verbal Eligibility Decision Date:  11-JUL-95
Verbal Secondary Decision Date: 
Division:  I
Sports:  Football
Bylaws:  10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES
Secondary Appeal:  No
Eligibility Appeal:  No

Facts
During a seven-week period in the fall of 1994, SA placed two bets on intercollegiate football games through the use of parlay cards for a total cumulative amount bet of $20.

Additional Facts
-----

Institutional Action
Not applicable.

Enforcement Action
Not applicable.

Eligibility Action
Eligibility restored after SA is withheld from the first regularly scheduled intercollegiate contest of the 1995-96 football season (nine percent of the season).

Rationale
-----

Legislation

10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES

Staff members of a member conference, staff members of the athletics department of a member institution and student-athletes shall not knowingly: (Revised:4/22/98 effective 8/1/98)
Provide information to individuals involved in organized gambling activities concerning intercollegiate athletics competition;
Solicit a bet on any intercollegiate team;
Accept a bet on any team representing the institution;
Solicit or accept a bet on any intercollegiate competition for any item (e.g., cash, shirt, dinner) that has tangible value; or (Revised: 9/15/97)
Participate in any gambling activity that involves intercollegiate athletics or professional athletics, through a bookmaker, a parlay card or any other method employed by organized gambling. (Revised: 1/9/96, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)

Eligibility and Secondary Infraction Case Report

Sec Case ID:  0
Elig Case ID:  9932
Verbal Eligibility Decision Date:  11-JUL-95
Verbal Secondary Decision Date: 
Division:  I
Sports:  Football
Bylaws:  10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES
Secondary Appeal:  No
Eligibility Appeal:  No

Facts
During the fall of 1994, SA placed two bets on intercollegiate football and basketball games (one each) through the use of parlay cards for a total cumulative amount bet of $20 to $25.

Additional Facts
-----

Institutional Action
Not applicable.

Enforcement Action
Not applicable.

Eligibility Action
Eligibility restored after SA is withheld from the first regularly scheduled intercollegiate contest of the 1995-96 football season (nine percent of the season).

Rationale
-----

Legislation

10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES

Staff members of a member conference, staff members of the athletics department of a member institution and student-athletes shall not knowingly: (Revised:4/22/98 effective 8/1/98)
Provide information to individuals involved in organized gambling activities concerning intercollegiate athletics competition;
Solicit a bet on any intercollegiate team;
Accept a bet on any team representing the institution;
Solicit or accept a bet on any intercollegiate competition for any item (e.g., cash, shirt, dinner) that has tangible value; or (Revised: 9/15/97)
Participate in any gambling activity that involves intercollegiate athletics or professional athletics, through a bookmaker, a parlay card or any other method employed by organized gambling. (Revised: 1/9/96, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)

Eligibility and Secondary Infraction Case Report

Sec Case ID:  0
Elig Case ID:  9931
Verbal Eligibility Decision Date:  11-JUL-95
Verbal Secondary Decision Date: 
Division:  I
Sports:  Football
Bylaws:  10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES
Secondary Appeal:  No
Eligibility Appeal:  No

Facts
During a two-week period in the fall of 1993, SA placed two bets on intercollegiate football games through the use of parlay cards for a total cumulative amount bet of $10.

Additional Facts
-----

Institutional Action
Not applicable.

Enforcement Action
Not applicable.

Eligibility Action
Eligibility restored after SA is withheld from the first regularly scheduled intercollegiate contest of the 1995-96 football season (nine percent of the season).

Rationale
-----

Legislation

10.3 GAMBLING ACTIVITIES

Staff members of a member conference, staff members of the athletics department of a member institution and student-athletes shall not knowingly: (Revised:4/22/98 effective 8/1/98)
Provide information to individuals involved in organized gambling activities concerning intercollegiate athletics competition;
Solicit a bet on any intercollegiate team;
Accept a bet on any team representing the institution;
Solicit or accept a bet on any intercollegiate competition for any item (e.g., cash, shirt, dinner) that has tangible value; or (Revised: 9/15/97)
Participate in any gambling activity that involves intercollegiate athletics or professional athletics, through a bookmaker, a parlay card or any other method employed by organized gambling. (Revised: 1/9/96, 1/14/97 effective 8/1/97)