NEWYou can now listen to PK Press Club articles!
Eight athletes of soccer, volleyball and athletics of volleyball and fields posted a calling call C. NCAA NCAA Antitrust Settlement.
US District Judge Claudia Wilken approved the rules last week, paving the way for direct payments from universities to athletes.
The eight women argue that female athletes will not receive their just part of $ 2.7 billion back for athletes prohibited to earn money on their name, image and resemblance (null).
CLICK HERE for more sports cover on Foxnews.com
Kacie de Vanderbilt farm; Lexi Drumm, Emma Appleman, Emmie Wannemacher, Riley Haas, Savannah Baron and Elizabeth Arnold from the College of Charleston; And Kate Johnson by Virginie directs the call. They all previously filed objections to the proposed regulations.
Ashlyn Hare, one of the lawyers representing the athletes, said in a press release that the regulation violates title IX, the federal law which prohibits discrimination based on sex in education.
Coastal’s baseball coach Carolina calls Kevin O’Sullivan de la Florida after the explosion of the tournament: “ Bully ”
“We support a rules of the case, but not inaccurate which violates federal law. The calculation of previous damage is based on an error which ignores title IX and deprives women athletes of $ 1.1 billion,” said Hare. “Payment of money as proposed would be a massive error that would cause irreparable damage to female sports.”
House regulations are to benefit financially football and basketball stars in the largest schools, which are likely to receive a large part of the $ 20.5 million per year that colleges are authorized to share with athletes in the next year. Some athletes from other sports who do not earn money for their schools could lose their partial scholarships or see their list squares cut.
“This is a football and basketball regulations without any advantage for female athletes,” said Hare. “The congress expressly rejected efforts to exempt sports generating income such as football and basketball of the title IX anti-discrimination mandate. The NCAA agreed with us. Our argument on appeal is exactly the same argument as the conferences and the NCAA presented before settling the case.”
The call, filed by the law firm Hutchinson Black and Cook by Boulder, Colorado, was reported for the first time by the Front Office Sports. It will be heard by the American Court of Appeal for the ninth circuit.
