Richard Bates wrote:
That would open up a can of worms. It's one step from accepting "unofficial" teams, to having rival entries both claiming to represent the university/association etc etc. Then you draw other member associations into having conflicting opinions on the matter and before you know it you have a split in the 'governing body' itself. And then it's a small step to two governing bodies and then... "let's play darts!" (or worse "let's get ready to rummmmble...")
If for example, the President of University X does not want to be a member of BUCA, and a group of four players from X want to play in a University team in the event, I don't see the problem. There won't be rival entries, I'm just saying that if there is no plan to field an official entry, then an unofficial one won't cause a problem. Of course if there are competing claims, then the official one wins every time. It would be a last resort to let an unofficial team in, but I don't see why a University would be so daft as to cut off their nose to spite their face.
David Sedgwick wrote:
Alex, I believe that Worcestershire enter the MCCU Open (Minor) Division and the U140 Division, but not the U180 or the U160. Presumably one of the reasons is that you don't want to spread your limited resources too thinly. Suppose someone with no authority to act or speak on behalf of Worcestershire were to approach the MCCU and say that he wanted to run a Worcestershire U160 team, offering to pay the entry fee. Would you be content for the MCCU to agree to this?
The MCCU would probably inform Worcestershire CA, and after a few talks to smooth it out/explain why they weren't contacted first, I doubt the Worcestershire CA would say no, particularly if they incur no costs. Someone in Worcestershire wanted an U160 team this year. The reply was that there was no one really around to run it (busy running other things), and would he be interested in running it himself. That was the end of the conversation.
Relating this to BUCA, I doubt anyone would protest in such a situation. I doubt that any society who had such a President would not remain in the job for long. Given that student turnarounds are perhaps 3-4 years, it would be quickly forgotten. By contrast, the people on the current SCCU board probably haven't changed much in the last 30 years.