[CUCBC Captains] Racing Regulations vote - attention required

[Thomas Walton]

Dear Captains,

Please find an important email from Pete Convey below.  This requires
immediate attention relating to the rules copied below: a link to online
voting is at the bottom of this email.

*Current *rule wordings:
1.a. That only resident *bona fide* student members of the University who
are also members of the CUCBC be eligible to row or steer in CUCBC races,
except as specified in Rule 40. For the purposes of this regulation a *bona
fide* student is defined as one who is *in statu pupillari* and is
therefore:
i. a matriculated member of a College; and
ii. currently reading for a recognised degree of the University; and
iii. fulfilling the University residence requirements in both time and
place.
2.d. Postgraduate members of the University are eligible to compete for
their College in CUCBC races until the end of the term in which they sit
their first viva voce or other final examination

Pete and Ian are away from this evening so please contact me if you have any
queries.

Thomas

----------------------------

Dear Captains

Further to my recent messages about exceptional rowers, a case has arisen
that appears to me to have merit but to fall outside current rule wording,
such that I/CUCBC does not have the authority to grant an exception without
the agreement of captains. While the case relates to a single crew/college,
I would like the issue to be considered on a generic basis.

The issue is as follows: a postgraduate has submitted and been examined on a
thesis, and been asked to extensively revise, resubmit and be be
re-examined. This contravenes the current rule 2d (below), which explicitly
refers to the 'first viva', and this wording has previously been
intentionally agreed by captains in order to stop any possibility of an
individual for whatever reason having an unreasonable delay between first
and second vivas (being re-examined is an unusual event in itself), and also
to avoid any possibility of an extended period between being examined and
actually taking the degree (hence the verb 'graduate' is not used to
indicate the end of the degree period). However, for a postgraduate in this
situation, who does resubmit without unreasonable delay, and is now given a
second viva date, being barred from eligibility can appear to contradict
rule 1a (below). Although this is not the case (rule 2 follows on from rule
1 and qualifies it), at the very least some rewording is required to avoid
this confusion, and there is also then the possibility to recognise this
situation explicitly.

I see two possible options for resolving this, that I would ask captains to
vote on electronically:

(a) to move the current rule 2.d. unchanged into rule 1, making it 1.d.
[This would maintain the status quo, and would represent captains making a
statement that they consider the date of first viva as representing the
effective end of the degree for CUCBC eligibility purposes.]

(b) move as in (a), but additionally reword as follows: *Postgraduate
members of the University are eligible to compete for their College in CUCBC
races until the end of the term in which they sit their viva voce or other
final examination; this would normally be their first viva voce examination,
except in cases where resubmission and a second viva voce are required by
the University authorities, in which case the CUCBC should be satisfied that
there has been no unreasonable delay inserted and in particular that rule
1a(iii) is satisfied. For the purposes of deciding eligibility, viva voce
examinations completed during any period between University terms are
considered as the previous term.*
[This would permit eligibility for a person who has been asked to resubmit
and be re-examined, and has done so with no delay or indication of 'playing
the system', and the final sentence is a separate 'tidying up' that has been
required for a while to take account of viva's that take place in the
holidays, which should also be inserted if captains vote for option (a).]

As Chairman, my recommendation is for option (b), as this appears to be a
'fair' resolution, while still giving us the ability to reject manipulated
requests.

I would ask captains (and eligible committee members) to vote for either
option (a) or option (b), and to do so rapidly (let's say by 17.00 on
Friday), as in the current issue both the club and individual concerned need
to know where they stand without delay.  To vote, please login to the CUCBC
website using your username/password (as for Bumps entries) and then go to
http://www.cucbc.org/voting/20090520-RacingRegs , where both options are
described again, and you can submit your vote.

Pete
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cucbc.org/pipermail/captains_lists.cucbc.org/attachments/20090520/a20c8be9/attachment.htm>