From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Wed Nov 26 20:26:22 1997 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.8.7/8.8.8) id KAA11758 for britdisc-outgoing; Wed, 26 Nov 1997 10:49:28 GMT Received: from monet.stdavids.ncr.com (h153-73-102-11.NCR.COM [153.73.102.11]) by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.8.7/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA11595 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Wed, 26 Nov 1997 10:48:48 GMT Received: from dunfgate.stdavids.ncr.com (dunfgate.StDavids.NCR.COM [153.73.102.29]) by monet.stdavids.ncr.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA01532 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Wed, 26 Nov 1997 10:46:38 GMT Received: by dunfgate.stdavids.ncr.com with Microsoft Mail id <347C7587@dunfgate.stdavids.ncr.com>; Wed, 26 Nov 97 11:16:23 PST From: "Grayson, David" <graysd@monetpost.stdavids.ncr.com> To: britdisc <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk> Subject: Student Eligibility Rules Date: Wed, 26 Nov 97 09:48:00 PST Message-ID: <347C7587@dunfgate.stdavids.ncr.com> X-Mailer: Microsoft Mail V3.0 Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk Precedence: bulk With student indoors coming up and the inaugural Scottish Student League having started (are any other regions doing this? - I remember the initial idea came from Loughborough) I think the time is right for a mention of the new rules which have been brought in. I believe these new regulations were the result of attempting to clear up the ambiguity of old. This was undoubtedly good as they are far clearer than before. I am however less convinced that they provide the ideal long term solution. The rules for this year (as I understand them). 1. Only full time students (on a graduating course) can play 2. Students may only play for their institution. If their institution does not have a team then they may only play for their geographically closest team and they may only play for this team if they practice with them at least once a week. 3. You can't play for more than 4 years as a student These rules presently exclude the following groups of players: Staff of an institution Students at institutions without a team who don't happen to play regularly with their "local" student team Juniors not at a HE institution Very experienced students To my mind the way to look at this issue is from the point of view of "What is the point of student competition?" When this question is asked then there are 2 viable models to choose from. Model 1: Student competitions are to provide competition between institutions. Therefore at stake is basically the reputation of the Institution. This is the model almost all other Uni sports competitions run on. The line taken by our institution (Glasgow) is that they support us and consequently want recognition when we compete - i.e. we are competing for them. They also take the view that everyone they allow to join the club should be eligible to play for the team. I believe this is also the view of the British Universities Sports Association (BUSA) but am unsure - is Ultimate affiliated to BUSA? This model then, seeks to include all members of an institution (including staff) to play for that institution. But excludes all members of institutions which cannot raise a team. Model 2: Student competitions are there to provide a different kind/level of competition to that of the open tournaments. This model suggests that students represent a broadly homogenous population and that the idea is to bring those people together to play without the distractions of other types of people. One justification for this would be to say that it keeps out most of the very experienced players, consequently producing a less imposing atmosphere for less experienced players. It may also be true that students have more of a common bond - providing a more sociable atmosphere than open tournaments. This model of course excludes the more experienced players, staff etc but would seek to include all students from all over - therefore not requiring the once a week practice with the geographically closest student team. At the moment we appear to have settled on a doubly exclusive compromise which results in the ideologies behind neither model being successfully implemented. I think it makes more sense to actually choose a model to work by and then make the rules accordingly. I think to continue to promote Ultimate we should err on the side of inclusion rather than exclusion. I am offering this merely as a topic for discussion, I think it is something student clubs should be thinking about. It is not a battlecry demanding that changes be made - as I have already said I am delighted we have easy rules to follow, even if I don't think they are ideal. Nor is it sour grapes because we have had to turn players away both from regionals and the league - with both models I suggest, we would have had to turn some players away who have every right to feel they should be allowed to compete and I'm quite sure most teams find themselves in a similar position to us. What does everyone else think? I hope people will think about it and if discussion seems to desire it then perhaps the student coordinator (Simon Weeks) will decide to review the rules some time in the future. Feel free to reply either directly or to britdisc, Dave. Mud Culture/Far Flung. david@mcg.gla.ac.uk