When the Interscholastic League of Honolulu refined its prohibition on "outside participation," a rule barring athletes from engaging in club competition during their sports season, student welfare was cited as a reason. It's hard to mesh two separate practice and game schedules without running kids ragged.

But you have to wonder whether the young athletes have much to gain from a rule that leaves little to the discretion of coaches or school officials.

The basic rule, which does make exceptions for athletes playing in national or international tournaments, is not a new one. But especially within the competitive soccer community, conflict has flared in recent years over a clarification that said national tournaments such as the vaunted Surf Cup and Nomads competitions are invitational events and don't qualify for the exemption.

This means students have to choose between playing on outside teams that travel to these events and playing for their school.

What makes this such a tough choice is that colleges often recruit from these invitationals, so the temptation to skirt the rule and play for both school and private club is strong. This week, when a Saint Louis School player was disqualified because of the outside-participation rule, both student and school team paid a steep price.

The ILH should consider whether a rule with such strict constraints benefits anyone. And for their part, the private clubs should be part of a dialogue with the league about making team schedules more forgiving. These players aren't in the pros — yet — and they should have options open.