Former University of Hawaii men’s basketball coach Gib Arnold is said to have contacted more than two dozen players and others seeking testimony on his behalf in the battle with the school over blame in the contentious NCAA infractions case.

With five weeks remaining before UH and Arnold are scheduled for a hearing before the NCAA Committee on Infractions in Indianapolis, the outlines of their contrasting cases have emerged.

While UH said in last month’s reply to the NCAA Notice of Allegations that it, “does not contest that violations of NCAA legislation occurred as set out in the Notice of Allegations,” Arnold is mounting an aggressive defense that places blame on UH, primarily its compliance office.

Arnold’s Honolulu attorney James Bickerton said, “We have interviewed, I think, 10 or 11 people, maybe two of them were people that had been interviewed (by the NCAA) before. The others are new people that … the NCAA didn’t bother to interview.”

Guard Keith Shamburger, who was at UH for two years but played for Missouri this past season, posted Arnold’s request for assistance on Twitter.

In it, Arnold wrote, “… As u may have heard they ruled Davis (Rozitis) ineligible and thus all the games he played his Jr. And Sr. year. I have been very silent for a long time over this. They took my job, my team and my career. But I’m going to fight this. We all worked way too hard to (get) those w’s only (to have them) say you and your teammates never won a game here. If you can send me your number a bunch of guys are making statements to the NCAA with the hopes of clearing all this up. It’s been blown way out of proportion. I need you to fight one more battle. Let me know the best way to contact you and I will call you more. Thanks. -Gib.”

Shamburger did not say if he complied. The post has since been removed.

Rozitis emailed a seven-paragraph statement to members of the media on Saturday. In it he said, “the allegations I am accused of as well as Coach Arnold are simply not true and are blown way out of proportion.” (Rozitis’ full statement may be read at http://808ne.ws/1KUdsve)

In the NCAA allegations Rozitis was cited with using a booster’s Porsche Cayenne. Arnold is charged with knowing of a possible violation and failing to report it.

It is one of seven alleged violations of the association’s rules, all of Level I or Level II varieties, the most severe of four categories that UH is charged with. Arnold was cited in all seven cases. He is also cited for “failing to promote an atmosphere of compliance” and “knowingly influencing others to provide the (NCAA) with false or misleading information or to conceal information …”

Rozitis did not reply to a message inquiring if he’d consulted with Arnold and his attorneys on the content of Rozitis’ statement.

Arnold has reached out to more than just former players. Former UH director of operations Chris McMillian, who was interviewed by the NCAA, said he’d been recently contacted by his old boss.

McMillian said Arnold wanted him to subject himself to an interview with Arnold’s legal team. McMillian said he told Arnold to contact his attorneys.

The NCAA charges come at a time when the NCAA is holding head coaches to a higher level of responsibility whether or not they were directly responsible for violations.

Under legislation that took effect Aug. 1, 2013, the NCAA says head coaches, “shall promote an atmosphere of compliance” and “shall monitor the activities of all assistant coaches and administrators who report directly or indirectly” to the head coach. In addition, the NCAA says the head coach is “presumed to be responsible for the compliance misconduct of his or her assistant coaches and administrative staff members.”

As a result, if an underling commits a Level I or Level II violation, the head coach is subject to personal sanctions, including multi-year suspensions.

Coaches placed under suspension by the NCAA take their penalties with them in moving to a new job, which requires their new employers to go before the NCAA’s Committee on Infractions and “show cause” why they should not be subject to the penalties.

“Most people don’t want to do that, which, in effect, it makes it very difficult for a coach to get another job once they get that kind of a sanction,” Bickerton said.

In addition, Arnold has a four-month grievance against UH heading to arbitration during which any NCAA-imposed sanctions could come into play.

Arnold claims he is due $1.4 million for dismissal without cause under terms of his 2011 employment agreements. UH is contesting the claim.

Bickerton said the NCAA case centers on a “dysfunctional compliance office.” He said the “the hostility” between his client and the office “is a big reason why the NCAA was steered into turning Gib Arnold into a scapegoat.”

In reviewing the NCAA allegations in January, Manoa Chancellor Robert Bley-Vroman lauded the compliance staff saying, “We have a good compliance system, a very good compliance officer. The NCAA recognized the excellence of our compliance operation …”

Bickerton said UH has not made Amanda Paterson, UH’s Compliance Director, available for an interview and he is asking the NCAA to step in.

“I have a low opinion of the fairness of NCAA procedure so far,” Bickerton said. “I’m hopeful that the NCAA will prove me wrong and arrange for us to interview Amanda Paterson.

“We asked the NCAA to assist and, so far, they haven’t,” Bickerton said.

Paterson has reportedly retained former Hawaii Attorney General Mark Bennett. Paterson did not respond to requests for comment. Bennett and UH athletic director David Matlin said they would have no comment.