Wired868 Wired868 for smart sport news and opinion
“[…] The TTFA’s published Safeguarding Policy and Framework (version 3.0) says the TTFA ‘shall’ impose conditions on a licence whenever a person is being investigated for abuse, a breach of the policy or a criminal offence.
“[…] It says provisional sanctions can be appealed to the committee chair within five days and may last 90 days, extendable once, and that time already served must be counted in the final decision.
“Mr Shawn Cooper has now been restricted for more than six times the initial period and more than three times the maximum sanction with extension…”
The following Letter to the Editor, which suggests that the lengthy safeguarding suspension of former Trinidad and Tobago national youth team coach and Presentation College (San Fernando) coach Shawn Cooper is a stain on the current TTFA, was submitted to Wired868 by Brandon:
A coach described by his peers as having an exemplary record of more than 20 years has been barred from coaching any under 18 players for 19 months. No finding has been reported against him, and the public has never been told why.
(via TTFA Media.)
Shawn Cooper, the former National Under-17 coach, was restricted by the TTFA’s Safeguarding manager in March 2025, effective immediately and with no end date.
The TTFA’s own technical director at the time, Anton Corneal, reportedly called the move “unheard of”. A technical committee member said the committee was never told. The coaches’ association asked for a system in which a coach is heard before he is restricted.
Almost two years later, the restriction stands.
How can this happen? The TTFA’s published Safeguarding Policy and Framework (version 3.0) says the TTFA “shall” impose conditions on a licence whenever a person is being investigated for abuse, a breach of the policy or a criminal offence.
That wording was widened on 1 January 2025, less than three months before it was applied to Mr Cooper. No risk assessment is required, and no evidence has to be shown.
The conditions can include a ban on working with young players, which is also one of the final sanctions the Ethics Committee may impose after a hearing. An investigation can be opened without giving reasons, and that decision cannot be contested.
The restriction can therefore arrive before any finding, and whoever controls the investigation controls it.
The same framework promises safeguards. It provides for an independent Ethics Committee, a burden of proof on the TTFA, and a right to see the evidence. It says a licence cannot be withheld for any reason other than legitimate safeguarding concerns.
Photo: Daniel Prentice/ Wired868.
It says provisional sanctions can be appealed to the committee chair within five days and may last 90 days, extendable once, and that time already served must be counted in the final decision.
Mr Cooper has now been restricted for more than six times the initial period and more than three times the maximum sanction with extension.
The TTFA may say the cap does not apply to this kind of restriction, and the court has left that question for trial. But whatever the answer, the public is entitled to ask what has been established in that time, what the restriction is now protecting against, and when a decision will be made.
Photo: Nicholas Bhajan/ Wired868.
What can 19 months achieve that 90 days could not?
The courts have not rescued him. The judge refused an injunction in May 2026 over delay and a lack of evidence of irreparable harm—but that was a ruling on interim relief, not on fairness.
Interim measures are legitimate, and the TTFA says it cannot comment while the case is live. But a safeguard that cannot be seen to operate is not a safeguard. I see no public indication that these protections have reached Mr Cooper.
Cooper is serving a suspension from the TTFA, due to action taken by Safeguarding manager Gary St Rose.
Photo: Nicholas Bhajan/ Wired868.
A system that protects children well can survive scrutiny. I ask the TTFA to say publicly how its own protections have worked in this case, to confirm that licensing is decided on safeguarding grounds alone, to publish the current framework and the procedures open to complainants and accused alike, and to submit its safeguarding practices to independent review.
Safeguarding earns its authority by being fair. Right now, nobody outside the TTFA can say that it is.
Editor’s Note: Click HERE to read TTFA Safeguarding manager Gary St Rose’s interview with Wired868 on the Shawn Cooper matter, along with other Safeguarding controversies at the time.
|
Wired868 has provided readers with solid, independent journalism since 2012. If you appreciate our work, please contribute to our efforts. Support Independent Journalism |
“[…] A strategic plan should not simply articulate where an organisation hopes to be in four years. It should clearly Read more
“[…] The TTFA could work with clubs, academies, parents and relevant child-protection stakeholders to review its youth-team travel standards and Read more
“[…] A new coach may bring fresh ideas, different tactics, and renewed motivation—but if the underlying problems remain, how much Read more
“[…] Mr St Gary Rose speaks extensively about what complainants are not entitled to demand. Yet he provides considerably less Read more
“[…] Our responsibility is not to respond to the loudest voice, but to protect every child according to their individual Read more
“[…] In April 2025, Wired868 reported that TTFA safeguarding manager Gary St Rose said his department had handled 561 reported Read more
Want to share your thoughts with Wired868? Email us at editor@wired868.com.
Please keep your letter between 300 to 600 words and be sure to read it over first for typos and punctuation.
We don’t publish anonymously unless there is a good reason, such as an obvious threat of harassment or job loss.
