Harvard Plans To Reappeal Llopis Case

The saga of junior transfer Arturo Llopis's quest for eligibility continues.

On Wednesday, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) upheld its earlier ruling that denied Llopis eligibility to play basketball at Harvard.

Harvard plans to reappeal this decision at the NCAA convention in January, Assistant Director of Athletics Andrea Wickerham said yesterday.

Harvard contends that the NCAA misinterpreted Llopis's actions and imposed an unduly harsh penalty on him, Wickerham said.

"I know of very few student-athletes whose eligibility has been completely denied," Wickerham said.

In denying Llopis eligibility, the NCAA cited "applicable precedent," but has yet to comply with Harvard's request to see relevant cases, Wickerham said.

"Most of these cases have involved soccer and tennis players, so we don't feel they apply," Wickerham said.

Harvard plans to appeal its case directly before a subcommittee of the NCAA Consul during the NCAA convention held in Anaheim, Calif.

This is the final step in the appeal process.

NCAA Director of Eligibility Janet Justus declined to comment on Harvard's chances of having the decision overturned.

'Substantial Benefit'

In rendering its decision, the NCAA ruled that Llopis gained "substantial benefit" from his association with the Spanish professional team F.C. Barcelona, and that the junior actively sought these benefits, Justus said.

It is the "actively sought" clause that has Harvard up in arms.

Since the beginning of the case, Harvard has claimed that Llopis actively sought to retain his amateur status, and not turn professional.

F.C. Barcelona did subsidize Llopis's educational expenses and offered him the opportunity to play with and against professionals over a two-year period, actions that are in clear violation of NCAA regulations.

Llopis, however, did not sign a contract with F.C. Barcelona to play basketball, nor did he take an agent, two actions that would have clearly shown intent to play professionally, Harvard contends.

"That's true, but his professional status for two years is what the committee ruled against," Justus said.

The NCAA believes that because the violations occurred over a prolonged two-year period, Llopis did not intend to remain an amateur.

Llopis insists his intentions were to remain an amateur all along.

"I did everything I could to remain an amateur," Llopis said. "They have rules that are supposed to be standard but I don't think they apply to me."

Llopis especially took offense at insinuations that he was not a serious student in Barcelona.

"I could have gone to LSU but the fact that I'm at Harvard shows I'm hereto study."