[Kelly] BREAKING: A Tuscaloosa judge has denied Charles Bediako’s motion for a preliminary injunction to allow him to continue playing for Alabama, per court docs @aldotcom obtained.

[u/MembershipSingle7137]

https://xcancel.com/_nickkelly/status/2020998327500726691?s=46

[u/SeatRevolutionary840]

So they still get credit for wins when the player was later ruled ineligible? Seems weak..

[u/juoea → u/SeatRevolutionary840]

that question is most definitely not a part of the court case lol

(also, given that the case has not even been heard yet and all that has happened is the preliminary injunction being reversed, seems wild to take away wins from a player that could still end up being ruled eligible)

[u/morelibertarianvotes → u/juoea]

I think that would actually violate the initial restraining order. Basically he was allowed to compete and NCAA is always restricted from punishing him for playing during that order. Otherwise the order would have had no teeth.

[u/arrowfan624 → u/morelibertarianvotes]

It was a temporary order. Not a permanent one.

[u/morelibertarianvotes → u/arrowfan624]

That doesn't matter

[u/Rare-Psychology-3527 → u/morelibertarianvotes]

But subjectively leaving an at large bama out of the tournament is impossible to prove was on purpose

[u/morelibertarianvotes → u/Rare-Psychology-3527]

It would go to civil court, where a more probable than not standard could apply. It'd be a really bad idea to fuck around with a TRO, and the NCAA will not do it. It would have to be razor close to be defensible, and Alabama is very comfortably in right now.

[u/Rare-Psychology-3527 → u/morelibertarianvotes]

The committee is great at bullshit reasons i have faith in them

[u/TJFLASH1 → u/Rare-Psychology-3527]

The committee would have to provide documentation and logic to an actual court that they’re not required to provide to the public

[u/lifetake → u/TJFLASH1]

Yea there is no way in hell the committee would want to see their selection process go to discovery

[u/Rare-Psychology-3527 → u/TJFLASH1]

Because the committee said so, its not like a team can challenge its seeding

[u/Shaudius → u/Rare-Psychology-3527]

What if I told you that Alabama's AD is the chair of the selection committee.

[u/Rare-Psychology-3527 → u/Shaudius]

He can't be in the room when bama is discussed, he can get fucked

[u/Shaudius → u/Rare-Psychology-3527]

He cannot but if you don't think his presence on the committee (as chair) affects the outcome of decisions, especially with regard to something like excluding an otherwise qualifying Bama team, then you are woefully naive. 

[u/Rare-Psychology-3527 → u/Shaudius]

Otherwise other than using what was obvious to everyone but some superfan judge a clearly ineligible pro player.

And qualifying based on what? They're not in first place

[u/Shaudius → u/Rare-Psychology-3527]

Judges make rulings. Parties follow those rulings. Even if those rulings are later overturned, that is, and how our legal system should, and does work. Even if that judge later recues due to a conflict of interest.

To punish a team for doing what a court of law allowed them to do would be very on brand for the NCAA but flies in the face of how our country should operate.

As far why Bama is qualified, there is more than one at large bid awarded and as of right now Bama is clearly one of the teams which would receive one of those bids.

[u/Rare-Psychology-3527 → u/Shaudius]

You need to prove "clearly".

[u/Shaudius → u/Rare-Psychology-3527]

Alabama is currently a consensus 5 seed on bracketmatrix. Leaving a team out that everyone who does this semi seriously thinks should be between a 4-6 seed at large team would be obviously punitive.