PIAA rules Lincoln Park's Minnie eligible at 2nd appeal hearing
Lincoln Park's Elijah Minnie was ruled eligible Thursday following a PIAA appeals hearing in Mechanicsburg, reversing two previous rulings by the WPIAL and one by the PIAA that had kept the basketball standout sidelined.
The five-person panel voted, 3-2, in Minnie's favor, said Lincoln Park athletic director Mike Bariski, clearing Minnie to make his debut Friday night against OLSH.
“Elijah had big tears,” Bariski said. “All kinds of tears. The family that was there supporting him cheered.”
The 6-foot-8 junior from Monessen initially was ruled ineligible Oct. 3 when the WPIAL's board of control decided his transfer was athletically motived. That decision was upheld by the PIAA on Nov. 15 when a five-person appeals board agreed.
Minnie was granted a second WPIAL hearing Dec. 17. New evidence was presented there by Minnie and Lincoln Park officials intended to refute earlier claims that he was recruited to the Beaver County charter school. But the WPIAL again ruled him ineligible, this time in part because Minnie had not considered schools closer to home.
That led to Thursday's three-hour hearing with the PIAA.
“They thought the new evidence was compelling in our favor,” Bariski said. “One of the jurors who had voted ineligible the first time changed his mind.”
Minnie averaged 15.5 points last season for Summit Academy, a school in Butler County for delinquent teenage boys. Once his stay there was complete, Minnie enrolled at Lincoln Park rather than returning to Monessen.
“It was a close vote, and I don't think we can appeal an appealed decision,” Monessen Principal Brian Sutherland said. “As far as I'm concerned, the case is closed.”
Staff writer Jeff Oliver contributed. Chris Harlan is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org or via Twitter @CHarlan_Trib.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.