League Officials Show Confusion

Reactions on the case of Edward W. Cuffe '61 in the past two days have shown one result of increased legislation of athletics--confusion.

Among the statements received from men in positions of responsibility in the Ivy League, the Eastern Collegiate Athletic Conference, and the Harvard Administration have been the following:

"The Ivy Committee on Eligibility makes exceptions to the transfer rule in special cases."

"We can't make exceptions to the transfer rule."

"The Ivy League has a four-year rule, made a year and a half ago."

"The Ivy League has a five-year rule. We've never had a four-year rule; it was discussed, but never put through."

"Ed Cuffe couldn't play basketball this year for any school in the country."

"You can, in the ECAC at least, play one freshman year and three varsity years, even though you sit out one transfer year. But you can't do this in the Ivy League."

According to the General Rules and Practices of the Ivy Committees on Eligibility, a student may not represent his institution in intercollegiate competition "for more than a period of five consecutive years from the date of his first matriculation at any university, college, or junior college."

To some, this constitutes a "five-year" rule. But most of the exemptions that are usually tacked on to the ECAC and NCAA five-year rules are subsumed by the Ivy League's: the only exception among the Ivies to the five-year limit is the draft. The rule is further tightened by a note that says, "Eligibility after eight terms of college will not normally be granted. . ," with a longer list of exceptions, and one that stipulates, "Transfer students are not to postpone their years of eligibility."

Dean Watson said yesterday, "We could have made an exception for Cuffe, but we have been strict on this rule." No tragic hero, Cuffe is content not playing basketball.

But the feeling is inescapable that Article VIII of the General Rules should be more often invoked: "Exceptions to these rules may be allowed in individual cases in which the circumstances are unusual and the Committee on Eligibility is of the opinion that the exception will be in accord with the spirit of the Presidents' Agreement.