Brown v. Oklahoma Secondary School Activities Association, see note 20 at ¶ 11, supra; Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, see note 21, supra; Quaker Oil & Gas Co. v. Jane Oil & Gas Co., 1917 OK 192, ¶ 0, 164 P. 671. Brown v. Oklahoma Secondary School Activities Association, see note 20 at ¶ 11, supra; Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, see note 21, supra; Vickers v. Vining, 1969 OK 66, ¶ 0, 452 P.2d 798. ¶ 9 While we have determined the Executive Director's actions were unreasonable and unlawful, there can be no determination concerning the OSSAA's actions because that process has not been completed.

Brown v. Oklahoma Secondary School Activities Association, see note 20 at ¶ 11, supra; Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, see note 21, supra; Quaker Oil Gas Co. v. Jane Oil Gas Co., 1917 OK 192, ¶ 0, 164 P. 671.Brown v. Oklahoma Secondary School Activities Association, see note 20 at ¶ 11, supra; Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, see note 21, supra; Vickers v. Vining, 1969 OK 66, ¶ 0, 452 P.2d 798. B. The OSSAA violated its own Due Process Rules and Procedure and effectively admitted that the decision regarding Shelby was arbitrary and capricious.

Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma v. National Collegiate Athletic Ass'n, see note 21, supra; Quaker Oil Gas Co. v. Jane Oil Gas Co., 1917 OK 192, ¶ 0, 164 P. 671.Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma v. National Collegiate Athletic Ass'n, see note 21, supra; Vickers v. Vining, 1969 OK 66, ¶ 0, 452 P.2d 798. The player makes inconsistent arguments.

Cases from other jurisdictions demonstrate that conditional cancellation should be ordered when a breach of the implied covenant of reasonable development is found. See Amerada Petroleum Co. v. Doering, 93 F.2d 540 (5th Cir. 1937); Slaughter v. Cities Service Oil Co., 660 S.W.2d 860 (Tex.Civ.App. 1983); Rush v. King Oil Co., 220 Kan. 616, 556 P.2d 431 (1976); Vickers v. Vining, 452 P.2d 798 (Okla. 1969). We have found no case in which a conditional cancellation has been ordered absent the finding of a present breach of the implied covenant of reasonable development where the issue on appeal was the propriety of the conditional cancellation.

Quaker Oil Gas Co. v. Jane Oil Gas Co., 63 Okla. 234, 164 P. 671, 674 (1917).Vickers v. Vining, 452 P.2d 798, 802 (Okla. 1969).Harrison v. Perry, 456 P.2d 512, 516 (Okla. 1969).

Moreover our decisions applicable to the obligation to drill additional wells and the obligation to protect the leased premises against drainage tie the related issues rather closely. In Vickers v. Vining, Okla., 452 P.2d 798 (1969) we said, "Defendants, in effect, argue that there is no implied obligation on the part of a lessee to drill an offset well to a well on adjoining premises or to drill an additional one on the leased premises except where the drilling of such well would probably result in production of sufficient oil to repay the cost of drilling, equipping and operating such well. This is the applicable rule we announced in Spiller v. Massey Moore, Okla., 406 P.2d 467.