The University of Hawaii said it will vacate 36 victories; reduce scholarships, practice time and tryouts; cut back the role of its operations director; pay a $10,000 fine; and place itself on one-year probation for violations of NCAA rules by its men’s basketball program.

The self-imposed sanctions, contained in a 64-page reply to the NCAA on Friday, were immediately blasted by fired coach Gib Arnold’s attorney, James Bickerton, who categorized them as "a typically shortsighted action, throwing students and their achievements under the bus to save their own okoles."

The NCAA issued its Notice of Allegations on Jan. 30, citing UH for seven violations, all of them Level I or Level II, the most severe of four categories.

The allegations included impermissible benefits for players; improperly using an operations director as coach, scout and recruiter; altering a document to help a recruit gain admittance to school; and lying or misleading investigators.

UH said it "does not contest that violations of NCAA legislation occurred as set out in the Notice of Allegations." In addition, UH said, "Although the university is disappointed to find itself in this position, it offers no excuses for these violations."

In its response crafted by Lightfoot, Franklin & White, an Ala­bama law firm specializing in enforcement cases, UH asked that a Level II violation regarding impermissible benefits for recruits be reclassified as a less severe Level III violation. UH claimed the violation "cannot reasonably be said to provide anything more than a minimal recruiting advantage, if that."

UH dismissed Arnold and assistant Brandyn Akana on Oct. 28, three months before the NCAA’s Notice of Allegations, "without cause."

In a further attempt to mitigate or forestall the imposing of stronger penalties by the NCAA’s Committee on Infractions, UH said it will forfeit one scholarship for each of the next two seasons, 2015-16 and 2016-17, reducing to 12 from 13 the number allowed.

The one-year probation does not involve postseason restrictions, a UH spokes­man said.

UH also said it will strengthen its rules education for athletes, coaches, staff and boosters.

The victories it will vacate will be from the 2012-13 and 2013-14 seasons in which UH had gone 17-15 and 20-11. One victory in 2012, against Houston Baptist, will apparently not be vacated because no UH players in that game were deemed ineligible yet.

By vacating the victories, Arnold’s record would fall to 36-55 over four UH seasons.

Although their names were redacted in the UH reply, former players Isaac Fotu and Davis Rozitis played in the 2012-13 and 2013-14 seasons, and have been cited in the NCAA allegations. Fotu was declared ineligible in October and left school to play professionally in Spain. Rozitis graduated before the NCAA completed its investigation.

Fotu and Rozitis did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Akana could not be reached.

In its response, UH placed the blame squarely on the coaches, saying that "for the most part these violations involve either intentional or careless failure to follow well-known bylaws that members of the men’s basketball coaching staff understood but failed to obey. The coaches compounded the adverse impact of these poor decisions when they (1) failed to report to the university’s compliance department their own or other violations in the program; (2) instructed or encouraged staff members and student-athletes to conceal or not report the violations or; (3) provided false or misleading information during the investigation rather than admit the violation occurred."

Bickerton said, "We categorically reject that interpretation of the evidence. The evidence, when viewed as a whole, clears Gib Arnold of any intention or deliberate or even careless action. The UH compliance department is trying to cover up its own errors. Those will be detailed in our response."

UH spokesman Dan Mei­sen­zahl lauded UH’s compliance office, saying, "They are the ones who initially (uncovered)" the altered document leading to the investigation. "They worked very hard, and even the NCAA has recognized their efforts."

Bickerton maintained the evidence against his client "is ridiculous."

"What they have done, as we will say in our response, it’s like looking out over a crowd and picking out your friend," he said. "They can have 20 witnesses who say Gib didn’t do that, and if the two witnesses with an ax to grind say he did, the NCAA and UH say, ‘Oh, he did.’ And that’s not how a fair proc­ess works."

Bickerton said Arnold’s reply to the NCAA Notice of Allegations was filed late Friday.

The NCAA typically has 60 days to respond to the replies, after which a hearing before the NCAA’s Committee on Infractions is scheduled. The committee may accept or add penalties to the parties involved.

The school declined additional comment "on the substance of the NOA response because it is an ongoing NCAA matter, as required by the NCAA bylaws on confidentiality. UH has fully cooperated with the NCAA and will continue to do so."

Arnold has a $1.4 million grievance pending against UH over the terms of his "without cause" dismissal under a 2011 contract. UH has claimed that violation of NCAA rules mitigates Arnold’s claim. The case could go to arbitration this summer.

In prohibiting its operations director from attending practice during the 2015-16 season, UH said, "given the university’s limited financial resources and resulting fewer noncoaching staff members, this penalty will have a significant negative impact on practices."

New coach Eran Ganot, who took over April 9, had reportedly argued against self-imposing the operations director sanction. Ganot had no comment Friday.

Prohibiting coaches from evaluating prospects alongside current UH players during the first five official visits of the 2015-16 season is significant, UH said. "Given the university’s remote location and attendant difficulty its coaches encounter in viewing prospects outside Hawaii compete in person, this sanction has serious consequences for the program," the response read.

Meisenzahl said, "Winning with integrity is something we want to instill in all of our student-athletes. That is why it is important for us to make sure we do this right. It is about operating with integrity."

In its reply to the NCAA on Friday, UH said, "The university certainly regrets that any of these violations occurred, but it is convinced that it will emerge from this proc­ess stronger and more committed to rules compliance than ever before."

The Star-Advertiser’s Dave Reardon contributed to this report.