row2k


Support row2k!
Advertiser Index


Row2k Polls

What do you think the NCAA rule is on shirt-betting?

974 Votes

Not allowed 37.6%
Definitely allowed 31.0%
It is not clear 14.4%
No one knows 11.4%
I dont know  5.6%
past row2k polls

Comments

Log in to comment
jll1016
03/13/2012  12:46:07 PM
While I am sure this discussion is long over, I used to bet shirts while rowing in college (98-02) and am now a DI rowing coach myself. Because of my history I asked for clarification on the shirt betting rule when I began coaching at this level. It is allowed. Due to the fact that it has been a long standing tradition in the sport it is "grandfathered" in as legal. The rule 10.3.1.1 states that the provisions of the rule "are not applicable to TRADITIONAL WAGERS." It goes on to state that the "items wagered must be indicative of the involved institutions." Shirt betting is a taditional wager in the sport of rowing and we are betting institutional shirts.

jmw1x
02/28/2012  3:51:57 PM
1 people like this
May be Greg Ruckmann should sue the NCAA!!! ;-)

Kevin Harris
02/26/2012  10:23:45 AM
Hey Gang, In fact it is allowed. The original ruling in 1995-96 when the legislation was introduced prohibited shirt betting. There was such a hue and cry from the rowing community against it, that the rule was changed with a specific expemtion for betting shirts. At some point that rule was obviously rewritten by the NCAA without the specific rowing language. I would assume that it had to do with other sports having the same issue. As Bill Zack and the NCAA were quoted as saying in the Nocera article, shirt betting is legal and has been since 1996-97. I am little surprised that more people don't remember that discussion, especially within the CRCA.

oldrower
02/26/2012  6:50:14 AM
10.3.1.1 Was meant for the cups/trophys/etc... that many teams traditionally play for (mostly in football). Nowhere does it specifically say that betting shirts between individual athletes are allowed - and because of that, no NCAA compliance officer is going to "interpret" the rule to allow for something called shirt "betting". When women's rowing became an NCAA sport this was a very big part of the discussion (that athletes would lose the ability to bet shirts). It never has been allowed...and I doubt it ever will....

WI LTWT
02/25/2012  2:20:19 PM
Has the NCAA ever made a move to crack down on the behavior? No, in my view that means they don't see it as a violation. Men's and Lightweight rowing are not NCAA sanctioned sports. Yet, if those teams are considered varsity sports by the school's athletic department, then all athletes participating in those sports must be in compliance with NCAA regulations (academic and otherwise). Our compliance department always told our teams (Men, Women, and Lightweights) that shirt betting was ALLOWED. If it is allowed for the men and lightweights at NCAA regulated institutions, why wouldn't it be allowed for open weight women. After all, we were all required to follow the same rules.

Moose
02/24/2012  12:35:27 PM
Given the severe consequences of an NCAA rules violation, I think many compliance offices come out with overly strict in-house policies if there is any ambiguity in the rulebook, just to be safe. For instance, forbidding athletes from joining March Madness contests (with no money involved), restricting harmless contact between athletes, boosters, recruits, etc. I wouldn't be surprised if many ADs forbid rowing teams from betting shirts despite this exception, just to avoid the off-chance getting blasted with some embarrassing "Athletes caught gambling" headline. There are enough examples of overzealous, draconian sanctions that there exists a sort of "reign of terror" where responsible coaches aren't willing to toe the line. Regardless of what the rulebook says, I think its fair to say the NCAA is responsible for the de-facto demise of shirt betting.

Nick Baker
02/24/2012  10:21:09 AM
2 people like this
10.3.1.1 Exception. [#] The provisions of Bylaw 10.3 are not applicable to traditional wagers between institutions (e.g., traditional rivalry) or in conjunction with particular contests (e.g., bowl games). Items wagered must be representative of the involved institutions or the states in which they are located. (Adopted: 4/26/07 effective 8/1/07) I think like most 'laws' it comes down to how you interpret the bylaw 10.3.1.1 when it says traditional wagers. Anyone that has worked in college athletes in the past 20 years know that each deparment has a compliance department and each department interprets these laws differently. Not until the NCAA or the conference offers interpretations are the rules more clarified.

kmuhl
02/23/2012  9:36:04 AM
Using the LSDBi, which most likely you have to work in an NCAA compliance office to access this Rules Interpretation Database, last year, my compliance office verified that the last interpretation from the NCAA indicated it WAS allowed. This may have changed in the last year or so...I have not asked anyone to look for new interpretations on the rule, specifically for Rowing.

strokinit87
02/23/2012  8:30:56 AM
I thought it was just frowned upon.. Like using HGH

row2k
02/23/2012  5:29:33 AM
See these two articles from our news feed the past week: http://nocera.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/22/waityou-can-bet-your-shirt-in-womens-rowing-or-can-you/ http://nocera.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/17/the-stupidest-n-c-a-a-rule/

DTuten
02/23/2012  5:07:16 AM
NCAA bylaw 10.3-It is not allowed. Not sure why this is a question.

mhcopa
02/26/2012  2:07:18 PM
10.3.1.1 says that the rule does not apply to traditional wagers between schools. Why would betting shirts not be considered a traditional wager?

darkspeed
02/23/2012  10:28:19 AM
10.3.1.1 it is allowed


zouf
02/24/2012  9:06:59 AM
Source, please. All references to 10.3.1.1 I found do not allow for shirt betting.



FOLLOW US
LEGAL
Copyright © 1997-2014
row2k media
All Rights Reserved.
Privacy Policy