MIDVALE — High school coaches know they can't try to persuade students to attend a school simply for sports.
But can they answer questions about the state's transfer rules? Does it matter who initiates the conversations?
A decision Tuesday indicates that it does matter who initiates contact with a coach and that state officials will not look favorably on any coach who discusses transfer rules with students from another school.
Timpview football coach Louis Wong was sanctioned Tuesday by the Utah High School Activities Association's Executive Committee for discussing the possibility of a Provo High football player transferring to Timpview last summer. Wong, who led the T-Birds to a 4A state championship last season, was punished with a one-game suspension, a year probation and a letter of reprimand.
The punishment came after a lengthy hearing in which Provo High administrators and coaches alleged Wong contacted the team's best football player about transferring to Timpview last summer. Wong adamantly denied the allegation and said it was the student, Austin Alder, who signed with Utah State in November, who contacted him after conversations with two Timpview players about being unhappy at Provo.
Alder did not attend the hearing, but two Timpview players did attend and corroborated Wong's version of events, which in the end seemed to be enough to violate the state's rules on the subject.
"We didn't find that he intended to recruit the kid," said UHSAA attorney Mark Van Wagoner. "But in telling his players to have the boy call him, we found that could be, even unintentionally, undue influence in the mind of that player. It's at the lower end of undue influence."
Van Wagoner said they looked at the situation from the teenager's perspective and used the evidence presented in the lengthy and emotional hearing.
"To hear, 'Here is the coach's cell phone, why don't you call him?' that could have had a significant impact on his view of whether he should transfer or not," Van Wagoner said. "In assessing the penalty the panel found no evidence the Timpview football coach tried to recruit him, or really that he understood his actions might have unduly influenced the player."
Van Wagoner continued that intent isn't necessary to be in violation of the rules.
"His behavior, whether knowingly or out of neglect, constituted undue influence and is detrimental to the fair functioning of the association," he said. "The panel wants to be clear that there are likely no circumstances under which a coach of one school should have conversations about transferring with students from another school."
"It didn't matter to us that (Wong) didn't make the call because, in essence, he initiated the contact by telling him to call through his players," Van Wagoner said.
Timpview principal Dr. George Bayles, who sits on the executive committee as the Region 7 chair, said he was disappointed and torn about whether the school should appeal the decision. He said the constant allegations of recruiting are soiling the reputation of a man who has done nothing but run a successful program for the T-Birds.
"We're struggling with this," Bayles said. "I have a lot of respect for those guys who make these decisions, and I've been on both sides of it ... But the thing we feel bad about is that they've taken (disciplinary action) against a man who is the epitome of honesty and integrity."
Bayles said what frustrated him most was that the boy who alleged Wong called him, Alder, didn't even show up at the hearing to be questioned by the panel or Timpview officials.
Van Wagoner did say it was Wong's statements that were used to determine two things: that Wong didn't intend to recruit or influence Alder and that Wong's instruction to his own players to have Alder call him violated the undue influence rule.
Bayles wondered why the panel didn't warn the coach — and other coaches — that even responding to questions could be a violation of the rules.
"Are we getting to the point where all you have to do is accuse somebody and then don't even stand behind it?" Bayles asked. "That becomes a scary situation ... If anything, Coach Wong was penalized because he was honest."
While Provo officials provided a list of 22 students now playing football for Timpview who reside now, or at the time of their transfers, outside of the T-Birds' boundaries, Bayles provided signed statements from those parents and players swearing they were not recruited to go to the school for sports.
"(Utah County coaches) are tired of losing their best players only to face them across the line of scrimmage, along with teammates who were recruited from other valley schools," said Provo principal Samuel Ray in a letter to the UHSAA. "Utah County football coaches are considering forfeiting all games to Timpview next year as a protest."
Bayles said there is no proof of recruiting because there is no recruiting, and while he acknowledged that some players transferred to Timpview from other boundaries, he insisted they were not enticed by the school's staff. Timpview officials said all of the players transferred legally and some even opted to sit out a year in order to attend school at Timpview and play football for coach Wong.
"Is it undue influence that a program is successful?" said Timpview assistant principal Brad Monks. "You can't tell a coach, 'Don't win football games."'
The panel also wanted to make it clear that they found no evidence that Timpview coaching staff was involved in recruiting and that there was no pattern or culture of recruiting at the school.
E-mail: adonaldson@desnews.com