ProudKangaroo wrote on Mar 13
th, 2025 at 12:13pm:
Frank wrote on Mar 13
th, 2025 at 11:22am:
ProudKangaroo wrote on Mar 13
th, 2025 at 11:15am:
Frank wrote on Mar 13
th, 2025 at 11:02am:
ProudKangaroo wrote on Mar 13
th, 2025 at 10:23am:
Frank wrote on Mar 13
th, 2025 at 7:33am:
Don't try to be even stupider than you naturally ( and thanks to your extensive 'education') are, Bbwiyawn.
The court documents state that allowing Australian athletes in their mid-20s — some of whom have played professional Australian rules football — to win scholarships gives them an unfair advantage over student athletes who normally enter college aged 18 or 19.
"ProKick all but guarantees its trainees who pay tuition exceeding $15,000, will receive a full scholarship to punt in the United States upon completion of their pre-collegiate training school," the court documents say.
"This
age and experience disparity grants Australians an unfair competitive advantage in developing their physical skills, leg strength, and technical punting expertise compared to American high school graduates who lack the equivalent timing opportunity to acquire a similar skill competency."
So you want DEI?[/quote]
No. I don't want you and Bbwiyawn get off on or away with your retarded faggotry.
How is it DEI to NOT let blokes compete in women's sports or, as here, object to seasoned footballers competing with school leavers for sport scholarships.
You two bozos stand out for you inability to think. You have made it your trademark.
So after all this time, you still don't know what DEI means then?
As I said, dont be stupider than you already, naturally are.
How is it DEI to NOT endorse blokes as bepenised women or having grown-ups compete with kids for sport scholarships? You have to be hellbent on on retarded faggotry to label opposition to this sort of nnonsense as DEI - And then moronically double down and yap about the definition of DEI.
You've changed the topic to gender when this is about age.
The Australian candidates for these scholarships have been granted them based on merit.
They are simply better than the American candidates.
So you're supporting the lawsuit to change the criteria to restrict the best college students from getting these grants or scholarships to instead go to less qualified people.
This has been the definition you've been using for DEI from pilots to fire chiefs, that they've been given the job not because they're the best candidate for it, but for some other reason, usually the colour of their skin, their gender or who they love.
Now you're supporting proposed changes to the scholarship program to not pick the best college candidates, but ones based on their age.
You're shifting it from merit to DEI (as you would call it).
This has nothing to do with men playing in women's leagues.
So as others have said, you're pro DEI when it suits you now?
What kind of "retarded faggotry" is this you're peddling now?
You haven't actually read the article, have you, KangaMonga? You are just going off, half-cocked but full bluster, as usual.
"If the NCAA said right now, 'Yes, we're going to change this. We're not going to allow ex-professional players, and everybody has to be under the age of 21. We'll let any Australian punter come over under the age of 21 who doesn't have prior (professional experience),' I would walk right down to the courthouse, tear up the lawsuit right now."
The class action is based on six legal claims including age discrimination, anti-trust and unfair trade practices laws, as well as violation of the US Constitution's 14th Amendment, which states that "no state shall deny any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws".
"NCAA policies disproportionately favour international athletes over domestic ones, granting them an extended period of eligibility while maintaining restrictive age limits in other sports," the court documents state.
Loeffler cites the case of ice hockey in the NCAA, where athletes lose one year of tuition for every year they are over 21.
Under those rules, a 23-year-old would only be eligible for two years of tuition instead of the usual four.
"We wanted to show the hypocrisy that in other — sports ice hockey, tennis, skiing — they have these regulations in place so that you can't just go get your proficiency and just keep going and going and then decide at 25 or 26, now I'm going to come dominate the competition," Loeffler said.
"I don't want to exclude anybody. If there is an 18-year-old Australian punter who is phenomenal, come on over."
Forum
Pages: 
