It’s happened again. Second verse same as the first. Sniveling parents wallow, gutless administration follows.

The latest victim: Old Saybrook High School boys’ basketball coach Tim Arsenault, who was told recently he wouldn’t be invited back next season.

Note: Normally, what happens in Old Saybrook stays in Old Saybrook. We don’t cover them. But Arsenault, a Ledyard native and friend to many on this side of the Baldwin Bridge, represents another illustration of misguided parental empowerment pouncing on institutional cowardice.

So why was Arsenault told not to let the doorknob leave a lasting impression? An email to athletic director Jeff Mauri went unreturned. Mauri has told others he can’t address Arsenault’s status because it is a “personnel issue.” Which is what administrators say all the time. It’s like a souvenir piece of the Berlin Wall to hide behind.

Old Saybrook finished 17-8 this season, making the semifinals of the conference tournament and quarterfinals of the state tournament. And not that high school coaches should be specifically bound to win totals, but it’s not like he went 2-18 for five straight years.

Team and school sources say there was never anything inappropriate at practice, during games or team functions. He didn’t belittle his players. He wasn’t issued a spate of technical fouls. He has the respect of colleagues and officials as well.

“That coaching staff is all class,” said Jack Barclay, who assigns officials for the Eastern Board and has been officiating and watching basketball around here for decades. “There’s not a coaching staff I have more respect for than Tim and (assistant) Chris (Gallerani). There’s no reason for this. It’s got to stop.”

Barclay’s opinion is echoed throughout the region.

“Tim is being let go because, let’s just say a group of parents, small but vocal, has the ear of the administration,” one source with knowledge of the team and school said.

Remember this one and write it down: In today’s educational environment, it’s easier — and certainly more convenient — to get rid of the coach rather than stare down the manufactured moral outrage of a few self-entitled parents.

Here’s the good news: Arsenault gets to have his day in front of the Board of Education, per a relatively new due process law for high school coaches. No longer can the athletic director issue the old, “we’ve decided to move in another direction” and get away with it.

Due process for high school coaches in Connecticut became law July 1, 2004. It reads in part:

“Any local or regional board of education acting directly, or through its duly authorized agent, that terminates or declines to renew the coaching contract of an athletic coach who has served in the same coaching position for three or more consecutive school years shall inform such coach of such decision no later than ninety days after the completion of the sport season covered by the contract.

"Such coach shall have an opportunity to appeal such decision to the local or regional board of education in a manner prescribed by such local or regional board of education. Nothing in this subsection shall prohibit a local or regional board of education from terminating the coaching contract of an athletic coach at any time (1) for reasons of moral misconduct, insubordination or a violation of the rules of the board of education, or (2) because a sport has been cancelled by the board of education.”

I know about this law all too well. My mother-in-law, Eileen Crompton, was instrumental in the law's enactment. Crompton, who wasn't an employee of the Region 10 school system, won four state titles as the softball coach at Lewis Mills in Burlington before an underqualified applicant from the system applied for the job. The administration terminated Crompton with no explanation, much to the chagrin of players, parents and alumni.

Why? Because they could.

Not so much anymore. Crompton never got her job back. But her diligence has encouraged others to fight the good fight.

Arsenault’s superiors must fabricate evidence if they are to find “moral misconduct, insubordination or a violation of rules” within the program. If anything, Arsenault was guilty of playing who he wanted to play, thus running afoul of a few parents who believe they can act as puppeteers with the administration.

Perhaps an enterprising member of the Old Saybrook Board of Education would deem this important enough to investigate. He or she would find that Arsenault is a very good coach and a very good guy who teaches all the right things. Or is the Board afraid, too?

This is the opinion of Day sports columnist Mike DiMauro.