(4), Mr. Dayvis’s disavowal of having] d
voted on the question of the migrant rule
raises the question of what ‘‘member in-
stitution’? requested the ruling on the mi-
grant statute, as Mr. King’s telegram
claimed. It wasn’t Kansas and it appar-
ently wasn’t Iowa. State, and Nebraska |!
and Missouri weren’t polled. Did Mr. King,
the chairman of the eligibility committee,
take it upon himself to raise the question?

(5) No school made any objection to} }
Tucker’s eligibility until after the player
had participated in five nonconference
games in December, averaging 15.4 points
per game. This appeared, to Oklahoma, a
deliberate attempt to get Tucker just be-
fore the Big Six Conference season began
early in January. Why wasn’t the player
protested before Oklahoma’s first game
with Southern Methodist at Norman, De-
_eember 132

IN FACE of all this improper procedure
Oklahoma protested the decision vehemently
and demanded a Benne before the entire
conference membership, declaring she would
lay Tucker in the opening game against

ansas unless am a chance to defend
herself, Mr. ing granted the
which was scheduled for Kansas City on
Monday, January 5, the ine
Oklahoma-Kansas basketbali game a
Lawrence. ;

MEANWHILE, Big Six territory news-
papers aired the unusual case) thoroughly.

ahoma w both support and ex-
coriation from the

ress.
THE Kansas bity meeting, Mr. Kraft
presented an important piece of evidence
that quickly killed the migrant athlete
charges against Tucker. That portion of
the migrant rule that Oklahoma was held
to have violated reads: ‘‘It shall be the
duty of the authorities of such institution
(Oklahoma) to ascertain thru correspond-
ence the validity of the reason or reasons
for such transfer.’’ In disbarring Tucker
for life, the conference eligiblit committee
~~ (with the exception of Mr. Davis of Kansas
whose vote was misrepresented) had held
Oklahoma did not comply with this section
of the rule, .

BUT Mr. Kraft showed at Kansas City
the copy of a letter he had written to Mr. |
King on November 19, 1940, a few days
ufter Tucker enrolled at Okleh of-
ficially appraising Mr. King for information
regarding any irregnege? in the transfer,
in accordance wi the conference rule.
Before he wrote the letter, Mr. ft had
talked to Tucker and learned the player
had left Kansas State simply because he
didn’t }ike the school.

MR. Kraft also presented at Kansas City
a reply from Mr. King in which the latter
plea ed for time and aE SOREES. the Okla-

oma athletic director, who was then Tom

d with the Kansas State

stor. » migrant ruling.

Meanwhile Oklaltoma, changed directors and

in the resulting confusion, this was never

one. Here iay. Oklahoma’s only vulner-

in the migrant charge, atid it was

a technical one. Someone in authority at

Norman should have followed the matter
to its full conclusion, t ;

HOWEVER, the fact that Mr. Kraft had
promptly asked for the information on the
transfer showed Okla

ood faith and altho the rule

urden of ascertaining this information
upon Oklahoma, Oklahoma held it sent the
original letter promptly and / x.
_ King co-operated as promptly, instead of

delaying the matter, there would never

pau’ been any controversy over the migrant | .

e. ; :

ONCE Mr.
King

 

 

 

Mi

of Mr.

case,
for sincerity,

to Mr. Kraft’s
the Christmas

into

man had
» before Tucker
=, ames.

KLAHOMA, pointed out that Tucker had
attended school thirteen months in residence
at Oklahoma before playing his first bas-

he had_ transferred,
after seven weeks of the first semester
240 at Kansas State into precisely the
same courses at Oklahoma, finishing the
Jast cleven weeks of the semester at Nor-
man and taking his finals. and obtaining
nORTAHOMA Crater that this porti
rotes' ortion
of the residence fale, written in 1928 when
the Big Six was formed, was_ designed
oo bi i ee Uiay ers

a Big schoo ayin

fica the fontbell season, withdrawing trom
the university at the football season’s close}
and enrolling the following autumn and!
playing another season without penaliy,|
oa deen been a popular custom in the/|
° i |
Altho | Oklahoma accepted this decision, |
it wasn’t generally popular over the state |
nor on the campus, where it was the gen- |
Sorted to evtzeme interprsration of « phrase |
i e nterpretation of a phrase |
of the residence rule written for an en |
Seta Gartesittes” whice. Berl
{i ee whic
obviously erred on the migrant clause. ef }