The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1906-12-02
DEBATE on FRESHMAN RULE.
Princeton wants Minor sports Exempt
Yale Accused by Jerseymen.

Princeton wants Minor sports Exempt
Yale Accused by Jerseymen.
An entirely novel view OF the regulation
barring first year men from varsity team
competition is taken by the DoilV Prince
torion. the college daily at Princeton. In an
editorial this paper suggests that prohibition
should properly apply 10 major sport teams
only. The idea advanced is that the rule
is intended to act as a check on students
whose primary object in coming 10 college
is competition in athletics. and that it is an
absurdity to suggest that men will come
to college for the Aake of the minor sports
alone.
The editorial in its significant parts says.
1T seems fitting to bring up the question
of eligibility requirements for membership
on teams such al those representing hockey,
basketball and gymnastics. The rule which
debars all freshmen from competing Oh teams
representing the most important branches Of
athletics has proved itself TO be a de-
cided success. However. this success il due
entirely to the fact that all Of the universities
entering into the agreeme nt held have strictly
TO the spirit of the rule. The question Of the
practicability of making this rule applicable
TO all branches OF athletics now arises. If
such an arrangement should he accompanied
with the same general approx al which has
been freely expressed In regard to the success
vi AAAN IL " . NV NIRAN0 W ~ SNN'NA ahhN
IL would be well worth while,
However. it must be remembered that
such a rule applied to minor athletics would
not have the general support which IL has
had when applied TO the more important
branches. The question as 1t now stands is
of vital importance to Princeton. Should
Princeton freshmen be debarred from com
DetinR on teams which are in intercollegiate
leagues. the other members of which are
ham parn1 hN- No auph rosf riCfinnEg
"The hockey and basketball teams cannot
hone TO compete with the other teams in
their respective lea CUES unless the same ellis i-
hility rule applies to al. Only recently the
gun team lost the Intercollegiate champion
ship by a very narrow margin IA n team two
of whose five members were freshmen. Even
IL the conditions had been different, there IL
q possibility that tho result might have been
the same; but the facts are significant;
The fact that no man would come to college
simply to Compel on a minor athletic team
- only TOO obvious. and " freshmen we're
to be members OF these teams there
would be no danger of "A charge OF CONNER
Cialism. which was in the main the reason
for the adoption of the new. eligibility rules.
it's meeting this week. we trust that II will he
able to find a fair solution to the problem.
The question $50 vita importance and worthy
OF very careful attention.
princeton. with twelve hundred under
graduates. cannot, hope 10 compete with
posed on us alone. II the committee decides
that the conditions as they are AT present
would be most desirable. IL IL essential that
athletic life il 50 closely connected be brought
around 10 the same way OF thinking before
any definite action IL taken"
Tho statement as TO the gun team Is not
exactly comprehensive TO most college men.
The intercollegiate gun association l. made
sylvania. all OF which institutions. have the
rule. and apparently all have OBJ
served H.. The charge or rather the state
effect that Yale violated the rules, because
il was Yale which won the shoot with zoo
points, beating Princeton, which had los.
One of the biggest questions Of the whole
freshman rule business Is the lack OF agree
msnt between the colleges on the subject.
As matters now stand, Harvard. Yale. Prince
ton. Pennsylvania. Cornell. Brown and syria
Cuse are committed 10 the freshman rule OF
The Pa Es1t S IN, G ,Gar d The T TtsF tesl nfye mo, no,
these colleges cannot meet with anything
like a fair deal 10 those VIII have bound them
selves to cut of freshmen from the eligible
A perplevity of this kind came up before
the DHrtmouth-BrOwn football game.
H. was thus set forth by the New Eng
IL is a peculiar fact that Brown and Dart
mStua asrsemc cfSaI Which fbinds them a' TO mo
pose the same eligibility rules. Dart tine
allows freshmen TO play on it, teams. Brown
viding leagues in the National Association
and he Tri-State League are stunned, Dart
mouth 0OeHn ! allow summer Dali. The
colleges have been rivals for years, yet this
ia practically the first year when their written
requirements for athletics have disagreed.
Brown is satisfied to play against Dartmouth.
and the latter IL satisfied to play Brown,
with its. unique rulings. Furthermore.
though there Il no mutual agreement on
eligibility rules. neither eleven will question
the right Of the other TO play certain men,
and the chances are that they viii 20 along
for years playing their big baseball aud
football games without a written UNDER
standing,
This is the first year that freshmen have
been barred from competition by several col
leges. but Dartmouth. Amherst. Williams
and a few others have refused to accept this
rule. while Brown was one OF the first to
exclude freshmen. Had Dartmouth placed
freshmen on the ineligible list. its football
team would have been in a sorry plight. for
six OF the eleven who are considered first
string men are in the first year class. EX-
Guiding the ends. Lang Ia the only man in the
line who IL not q freshman.
Again. Dartmouth does not allow men who
are taking courses in the graduate schools
to play on varsity teams, This means that
no students OF thu Tuck, Thayer and medical
schools are eligible. From year to year
the latter school has had athletes who could
have greatly aided the college teams were
the rules otherwise"