The CIS handed down a penalty of forfeiture Thursday on the York women’s volleyball team after the school self-disclosed on a player eligibility violation from last week.

The No. 9-ranked Lions, who cruised to a 16-2 record in OUA conference play and were to host the conference final four after sweeping the RMC Paladins on the weekend, are instead in the position of appealing the CIS ruling and watching a dream season washed out by, what appears to be, a completely unnecessary decision by the team.

Through a bit of digging today, I learned that the player in question was 6-foot middle blocker Michelle Pierce, a transfer from the Windsor Lancers who was required to sit out, per CIS rules, 365 days since playing her last match at Windsor. Pierce did that. However, in dressing in the quarter-final on the weekend against RMC (a team that went 9-9 and finished eighth in a conference that is light on quality teams), Pierce was ineligible because she had not dressed and played in a conference match this season for York.

Pierce, who had 143 kills and 156 digs for the Lancers in 2010-11, would no doubt be a boost to the Lions’ roster, but their decision to dress her — even if we ignore the rules for a moment — makes little to no sense. Here’s a team that won 16 of 18 matches, was ranked for nine weeks in the national top 10, and had two conference all-stars and a coach of the year (Nick Tran) to its credit — all without Pierce in the lineup. At best, Pierce would have given the Lions six matches — OUA quarter-final, semi and final, plus maximum three matches at nationals — and that would have exhausted a full year of eligibility. If this is November, then you add her to the mix without question. But it’s February and this isn’t pro sports where you boost your roster at the trade deadline. In assessing risk-reward, it’s foolish to suggest that six matches from one player is worth a full year of eligibility, especially on a team that had done well enough without the player.

Now, when you consider the actual violation of the rules, it makes the decision even more head-scratching. Everyone who follows the CIS is well aware of the 365 Rule, a basic law that governs over players transferring from an NCAA or CIS school to another CIS school. So while the Lions obviously knew Pierce’s eligibility date, to me it’s unfathomable that they could not have delved further into the CIS bylaws to make utterly sure that they were in the right when deciding to play her. With everything on the line, why would a call to the OUA or CIS (which I am only assuming did not happen) not have been placed to double- and triple-check her eligibility?

It’s clear that there was no attempt by York to circumvent the rules here. After all, the Lions made no secret of Pierce’s appearance, announcing in the post-game press release: “Middle blocker Michelle Pierce (Windsor, Ont.), making her debut for the Lions after sitting out the regular season following a transfer from the University of Windsor, finished with a game-high 12 points on nine kills, two blocks and one service ace.”

So it appears to just have been a terrible error, but a completely unthinkable one nevertheless. The Lions, who would have been a prohibitive favourite to represent the OUA at nationals, instead have to hope an appeal goes their way. While the sympathetic might suggest that York would have earned its way into final four without Pierce (and be absolutely correct), it would be surprising to see the CIS go back on a ruling as serious as this, and set a precedent in the process.

It is a disastrous turn of events for the Lions and seniors Dayna Herold and Claire Leewing — who have now unexpectedly played their final matches — for something that not only could have been avoided easily but likely should never have happened in the first place.