yes or good morning judges clay cook and wife may please the court judge gordon representing the dubby r t should clement it is been fifty six years since the stop discrimination and stop discriminating i think that applies across the board so that adults and students with disabilities should come under the th amendment enough discriminatory evidence to get over to the defendant having the obligation to state some type of nondiscriminatory justification for their action in title nine as it turned out the only other defensive posture was that coach ricky was allowed some type of discretion so let's look a little closer at the title non argument what happens here is st of all there is tryouts for the girls tennis program and under the girls tennis program there were started with fourteen and then they were twelve so ricky is i think is the coach says he actually puts out a handbook where he's going to have even though there was no difference from the number of players the year before there was no complaints about court space and it was intentionally printed to discriminate against  so as soon as the girls have tried out and the hallways not and there's no other legitimate nondiscriminatory justification for the traps to us it is planation is not a reasonable explanation because the girls have the same number why do we need tryouts at all and then they are going to manage when you say when you say the same number you mean the same number of slots on the scene you don't mean the same number of individuals vying for positions to be on those those two teams right right and other words there were twelve  we're not going to spend the money for it's to court or we're going to eliminate girls from participation because we don't have enough court space that is an absolute violation of title nine because it has to be in fact there's a new york soccer case right on point d that says when the boys participated in the regionals and the girls didn't that was a violation of title not the the belief trying out she is treated different sisters who are younger she's totally treated different to any of the other girls that have tried it because they didn't have to drive why is it only t the drying out saying the boys had more practice time they could be presumed from the facts but no i'm saying as soon as they intentionally discriminated against the girls team i think specially because they don't have a north anough course to practice on then the girls team and all the girls have been deprived of a benefit of practice because they have pain i'm sorry most they has about nine yes ok all right in fact i think it's a good idea to transition to the fly before because in my view i think it's you know the stronger claim a team because she failed to try out nobody else was the girls team was asked to try out but if they rely on coaches discretion they really can't because position on the team and anderson and t w walked off the court and didn't finish the match that's a subsequent factual  on the team for seating and if i could just make one more point to the last and we'll talk about that next the point i want to make is that shelby county board of education are some of the administrators there in over rule ricky so if you say it's in the coach's discretion he didn't have any he was overruled and they have the event for they did the right thing and put her back on the team which is an interesting statement by the court so now counsel just to be clear you're distinguishing between the tryouts and the cons and the the matthews perceiving that he is the only statement from the plainest boss your was that she was going to please them all in one night plus there was a thunderstorm on the way anyhow but mr gordon if i could just briefly interject before you complete saying she intended to do them all in one night but was there ever a mandate or directions that you need to do all of this today or and one day or anything like that and  chair she was the remarks about her that she was no fun that she did belong with other girls all these are symptomatic and under under the in drew case that was probably one of the reviews clearly erroneous and we would suggest that they were not for starters but the tryout figures that mr gordon lay out for the last several years there have been and was appalled at the court situation there were six courts shared by four teams sometimes or be fifty or sixty players they would get on board time every now and then they get to court so in practice after school generally at the same time now as it got lighter in the spring so they could adjust that some and they did they also tried some saturday practices  again for coaches you know you can go over and just haul the courts there were some times that the coach ricky got to other times he might have only got more on so they would just if somebody had a big match coming up they might defer to the team and let them have more space so you know it was a challenging situation but what judge sabra saw it was important is it all the times that are relevant to this lawsuit there were significantly more girls on the team than boys so where's the title non violation and making it administrative type discretionary decision we need to pass cuts because we have too many too many players and you can't get any attention in the they don't get playing time they want and it's problematic so as far as we're concerned that takes care of the title non issue for two thousand and fourteen to play in four matches to use a single player she was not a good doubles player so coach rickey said you need to be one or more of these four good players we can only take three singles and he she saw a lot of things behaving badly running or yelling at people and such but she also heard coach explain and withdrew from school she was basically with the team for two days on the two thousand and fifteen season she did play an exhibition match the day before her picture was in the roster back the day of the challenge match was the picture day also so going back to two thousand and thirteen and fourteen again this is her st year with coach ricky she does not like him too doesn't like the  conditioning which she's not used to she starts out as one of the better player but as the other players get better because ricky ricky's a real coach he's not a guy that just throws the balls out there i mean need he knows tennis so some of his players actually improved she she did not she also missed a lot of practices she missed a critical match toward the end of the year to go to a michael jackson concert this other player r s was rapidly climbing up the ladder so ricky decides to have a challenge match between r s and t w there's a lot of noise about they didn't know it was a challenge match or they would done things different but the bottom line is they play and m and t have the last and then sadly she she literally let's they take her out of school so at this point she's out of school she's off the team couple weeks later is the team banquet which brings us to another complaint  and they they don't get official word of the banquet well they're not on the team anymore and judge stivers called this claim the most ludicrous because they ended up talks about discretion for coaching and not wanting to micromanage manage coaches and so forth and they want you to rely on the michigan case the judge town they were they were not similar that michigan case dealt with soccer scheduling which literally deprived girls soccer of competing post season play it affected their scholarships to the stent that there's some contention that the behavior was disruptive to the team or the person political the main throw a temper tantrum your there what the school's duty might be in terms of reasonable accommodation when there might be some disruptive behavior coming from the disabled person no i don't judge or we would have cited them for sure let me tell you a couple of things that coach ricky did do and for starters i think i think fifty fours off the table for two thousand and thirteen and fourteen because the mom didn't even bring it to the school's attention until june and she requested no accommodations until the fall she requested no tennis accommodations until march and she was thousand three hundred and fourteen he did his best to bring her into the team try to make her part of the team she would throw racquets she hit him once he testified that he would just kind of try to ignore that type of behavior but it was very you know is disruptive you know i guess from a coach's standpoint you know the proof is in the pudding i mean you know i think it's a lot to put on coaches to sift through behavioral and mental issues that athletes might have is hard enough just dealing with the technical physical things i mean you can't turn a blind eye to it but i just don't see how you can hold them responsible they've got or fern hour and a half two or three days a week and then maybe decision before any tryout that she is not going to be on the team the following year and the reasons are all related to her disability so would you would you address that decision for me please i will and i know the testimony you're you're talking about you know he he did he did testify and by the way there were tryouts  for i think all the girls but definitely most of the team there might have been some mist and such that were number one but i believe there were trials for every one and he had he had a tryout she  yes ok but you know i guess to put it in in sort of legal parlance for him she wasn't otherwise qualified and i guess to view it in handicap scenario if i go for if a guy rolls his wheelchair onto a football field and says coach i want to be a quarterback he's probably not going to be allowed to be a quarterback but if a one armed pitcher who then there are even major league one arm pitcher to prove themselves capable of playing on a baseball team then they should be on t some evidence on both sides about whether she's otherwise qualified well there might be but judge diver's ruled our way and that i notice the judge stivers does his opinion does not seem to engage with that that particular part of the case that issue that one and two which once again we repeat no one does but then quit as to because of our exhaustion and conditions when she was supposed to  go ahead and play a two hundred and thirty four so the obvious is if she was in two plays seen three in feet four on that day then she had no reason to quit it would have gone to her nd day and may also say even after the april st mascara where she had apparently played the top four seeds which doesn't happen anywhere she was treated so different because of her disability and challenge that after the th challenge matches or the two on april st the facts show that she quit which presumes that she was supposed to play on or she couldn't quit anything but having said that the he was overruled because after she quit and allegedly left school she was put back on the team by the people that were there courtside so on both occasions coach ricky was actions were deemed arbitrary and he didn't he didn't have any a scratch what do you mean by put back on the team he never he didn't i thought the the april st matches were after he was on the team and then see quit he didn't cover in the team after those matches did did not but he did say specifically she had to be one if not all of the four to be on varsity matches so it was a fait accompli even if even if she didn't finish the ranch watching of course that reviewed coach received behavior and discretion and she had been on the team technically for two days she had been in limbo for about six weeks and was not allowed to practice which is still part of the discrimination sufficient discrimination to at least create a genuine issue of fact but after the and on both occasions the quote unquote tryout and the april st massacre of having to and then they put it back on the do you stop please you're saying they overruled get you we were told that the observer misses i'm not sure the name of the woman that is to observe the match he observed  x exceptionally and most competitive conduct and so where did the decision to say that was great that was a mistake by the coach and it seems contradictory differently sorry ok can can you where is the support for the proposition that he cut her from the team b or intended to cut her from the team if she did not win one of those three matches i thought that she simply quit at that point and that the purpose of the matches was not to see if she would stay on the team but rather to see if she would play in the meet you know that is incorrect the act and find it within you thank you thank despond i guess the day should be submitted and you can call the next case when you're ready