At the middle of it all was the use of former University Athletic Association of the Philippines (UAAP), National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) and national team players in a number of sports, among them basketball, volleyball, chess, and soccer.
According to organizers of the eight-year league, the minutes of the Jan. 7, 2006 meeting of the technical committee of the interschool friendship games stated that ‘ex-UAAP players will be allowed to play for their respective schools provided that not more than three will be allowed to play at any given time.’
This part of the minutes was quoted in a letter that was given, albeit, belatedly on March 12, by the chairman of the technical committee in response to a request for clarification by one of the member schools. The requesting school had stated that the games had already started and yet the eligibility rules were not formally written up in a document signed by the participating teams.
Interestingly, there was no mention, however, if such minutes were later approved in a duly constituted meeting or if they were approved, de facto, by the mere fact that representatives of three other schools purportedly signed the chairman’s March 7 letter that answered the request of the inquiring school for clarification.
Whether these rules were properly disseminated and agreements actually signed by team representatives before the start of the tournament is one issue. But, assuming for the sake of argument that they were properly disseminated, that the majority agreed to these rules and that they were properly signed before the start of the tournament, there is the bigger question of the nature and objectives of these so-called friendship games.
The use of former varsity and national players in so-called friendship games among companies in one industry, in inter-color tournaments, in competitions among socio-civic clubs such as the Rotary Club, Lions, Jaycees, etc and now, graduate schools, has always been a contentious issue. And very often, to settle the issue, teams, out of a sense of camaraderie, take the path of least resistance and defer to the wish of the host who is allowed to formulate the rules in accordance with its own internal objectives and situation.
A revisiting of the original objectives of these so-called Friendship Games has to be done. This is needed to render some informed judgment on former varsity and national players competing in tournaments that are essentially meant to promote friendship through the fielding of players who are bona fide students of the schools they represent and not through those former elite athletes who practically made careers of playing a particular sport not too long ago.
For if the objective is to open up opportunities for those who otherwise would not have the chance to play in the friendship games, then getting Manny Pacquiao to compete in boxing (assuming Pacquiao was eligible to go to graduate school and boxing is a sport in these so-called friendship games), would be totally unacceptable for several reasons.
Pacquiao has had his chance as a professional boxer to display his wares on other occasions. There would be a terrible mismatch.
Admittedly, the Pacquiao case may be an exaggerated example. How about then the retired Hector Calma who suited up for the national basketball team, Northern Cement and San Miguel in the Philippine Basketball Association?
Assuming Calma is enrolled in any of the participating schools and joins two other former UAAP and NCAA cagers in basketball competitions in the same team to faithfully comply with the ‘three-player at any given time’ rule, would their playing in the league against graduate students who are just there basically for fellowship, exercise and community building, help achieve the friendship objectives of the league?
Calma and players like him also had other chances in the past to do their thing. If we were to allow Calma and two other ex-varsity players to compete, say in basketball, Calma and company would then constitute 60 percent of the team at any given time during the game. That would be enough to materially affect the outcome of the game. If that is the case, we may as well make these so-called inter graduate school friendship games the Veterans or Masters extension of the regular varsity UAAP and NCAA games.
Insofar as the ex-varsity and national players are concerned, would they be happy and feel affirmed if they beat the hell out of full-time graduate students and working professionals who did not have the same rigorous preparation and support as these ex-varsity and national players had? These former elite athletes are probably enjoying some support again in graduate school, assuming they are graduate students in the truest sense of the term.
Participants and organizers must think in terms of the hierarchy of principles. There are many principles we are trying to promote in games of this nature: friendship (how can you achieve this when scores are lopsided because of the involvement of ex-elite athletes?); Sports for All through participation by bona fide students regardless of talent and expertise, etc.
What is the most important principle in these friendship games we are trying to promote and advocate? If it’s winning through students who are not graduate students in the truest sense, we may as well forget these games.