The Blue Ox Rugby Football Club has won the past two regional competitions and has qualified to play in this year’s national championship, but the team is unable to compete because it is not affiliated with St. Thomas.
The National Small College Rugby Organization organizes the collegiate national championship event and is required to follow the guidelines put forth by USA Rugby. “Section 4. Collegiate Club” of the USA Rugby Eligibility Regulations states that all collegiate club teams must be recognized and in good standing with their college or university.
Senior Sam Glynn, captain of the Blue Ox RFC, said although the team is currently not allowed to play, the team is trying to resolve the issue with Stephen Cohen, NSCRO coordinator, and USA Rugby Collegiate Coordinator Todd Bell, a St. Thomas graduate.
“Both Todd Bell and [Stephen Cohen] are very surprised, and a little caught off-guard, with our situation,” Glynn said. “So hopefully they can accommodate for our unique predicament.”
St. Thomas’ problematic history with other rugby clubs
In past years, St. Thomas has sponsored two separate rugby football clubs. Margaret Cahill, director of Campus Life, said St. Thomas revoked school sponsorship for both clubs because of the way players acted off the field.
According to past Aquin articles, former rugby teams have been thrown out of local bars, distributed a “blatantly obscene” song book through St. Thomas’ post office, taken a St. Thomas-funded road trip down to Mexico without the university knowing, and been cited for disorderly behavior in restaurants.
Glynn said he completely understands where St. Thomas is coming from, considering past experiences with rugby clubs. At the same time, however, Glynn said he is frustrated because the Blue Ox RFC isn’t like its hard-partying predecessors. This year’s rugby club members are dedicated and focused on respecting the community in which they go to school and live, and want to prove they aren’t hooligans, Glynn said.
“We are trying to play rugby at the highest level possible as opposed to being a glorified party team,” Glynn said. “Our team is comprised of intelligent, diverse and respectful young men who, even though we aren’t sponsored, represent our school with the highest regards.”
But the university isn’t budging.
“I understand that they’re frustrated … and we wish them the best,” Cahill said. “But you know, a second chance was already given, and it was worse and wasn’t that long ago.”
The Blue Ox RFC’s future
The Blue Ox RFC has much more to worry about than whether or not it will be able to play in the national championship this year. Since the team has won the regional championship the past two years, the Minnesota Rugby Association is required to move it into a higher division. If the Blue Ox RFC were to participate in Division II, they would also be required to be affiliated with a university if they wanted to compete.
Despite the worries, coach Rob Holder said the team had a fantastic season.
“When you also take in consideration that we started later than most of our competition, we were up against the wall,” Holder said. “The guys came together, trained hard and ended up putting their best two games together at the end of the season. You can’t ask for anything more as a coach.”
The players also said they couldn’t have been happier with how the rest of the season went, despite not knowing whether they’ll participate in the national championship.
“Our athletics are nearly the best in Minnesota, so why not continue to build on that reputation with a sport that is thriving and with a team that has shown success,” Glynn said. “I may not see the Tommies on the rugby pitch while I’m at St. Thomas, but my deepest wish is to one day come back to visit my alma mater and see the … most distinctive parts of my college career.”
But according to Cahill, this is an unlikely outcome.
“It is extremely unfortunate and it’s really hard to have to share that decision with students, because I know that it’s the action of previous students that are affecting the actions going forward,” Cahill said. “But the actions were serious and [the university is] not going back on it.”
Kristi Battarbee can be reached at batt3378@stthomas.edu.
Margaret Cahill just doesn’t get it. This team is a completely different set of students from the past, with a different mindset, and a hugely successful record. A total shame the school can’t give this new team another chance. It’s the school’s loss.
It’s a terrible shame that Margaret Cahill is looking at this situation from behind a desk instead of getting to know the current (and only legitimate) St. Thomas rugby team. This team is a rugby team first and foremost unlike the previous “social teams” that played rugby. Rugby is a completely different game in the United States than it was even 10 years ago. Minnesota High Schools now have 80+ Boys and Girls (U19 and U17 age grouping) teams, 37+ College Men’s and Women’s teams, and 12 Senior Men’s and Women’s teams. Rugby has also become an Olympic sport.
The St. Thomas administrators can continue making themselves a caricature of out-of-touch college bureaucracy, or they can accept the Blue Ox as an official club and reap the benefits of having one of the best rugby teams in the small-school division.
With the Spearhead Rugby Academy nearby, and great coaches available in Rob Holder, I hope St. Thomas make the correct choice and takes the opportunity to develop an elite rugby team for the future.
In terms of college, “not that long ago” translates to an entirely new set of students who behave differently, are under new organization, and have proven how hard they are willing to work to play a sport they love, all the while respecting St Thomas’ rules and codes of conduct even though they are currently unaffiliated with the University! This would not be a “third chance” for the team, this would actually be the first for all these guys who had nothing to do with the misbehavior of previous students.
I agree whole-heartedly with Mr. Engrav. The school aspires to be the new Notre Dame of the midwest and yet is unwilling to take a chance in furthering its reputation with a highly successful and respectable rugby team. When did the University become more about the administration than the students? St. Thomas, this isn’t the way to become the new Notre Dame.
Notre Dame recently started a highly successful rugby team. Every 5 years, every trace of a previous institution is gone unless there’s a coach or other person to perpetuate a culture. In this case, the Blue Ox happen to have inherited one of the most successful and classy college rugby coaches in the country (Rob Holder), a man who runs a college rugby academy, who has managed our national men’s team in a World Cup, and has coached to a national college championship. St Thomas is treating rugby like a fraternity, with endemic problems (partying, etc) and peers to emulate (other fraternities). The peers rugby emulates in this case are more like U of MN, UW Madison, Notre Dame, etc., clubs full of athletes committed to their sport, or even St Thomas’ own sports teams. Here’s an idea… make it a varsity sport! That way rugby would A) be subject to the full scope of the university’s disciplinary processes B) allow the school to compete with similar schools and attract a new demographic of HIGHLY successful and dedicated athletes C) acknowledge that rugby became a professional sport 15 years ago, and is culturally totally different from the past D) avoid punishing a group of students who among them has done nothing but achieve success and E) capitalize on Holder’s gifts.
I think the real question here is whether this “strike”/chance system UST is suing is really practical in this context. For example, when a criminal steals one, two, three times, you can reasonably associate stealing to this individual and “cut him off.” Now, when a group of people/organization with sustained ideology practices undesirable actions one, two, three times within a community, you might be able to associate their actions with the ideology of the group and even the individuals and reasonably “cut them off.” Can UST say that Blue Ox Rugby has some sort of sustained undesirable traditions/ideologies that you can attribute to the current players/students? Can you say that Blue Ox embodies these tenets, past players embodied those same tenets, so it holds that new players will produce undesirable actions as well? Is it macho-rugby-ism? Hooligan-ism? I don’t think you can. I don’t think that re-evaluation and “another chance” makes UST sacrifice its principles because these are new students participating in a club whose purposes is not directly linked to any bad behaviors. However, it becomes difficult when representatives of UST give absolute statements like, “But the actions were serious and [the university is] not going back on it, ” that they would have…
How many more articles like this will surface before the administration shows a sizable group of St. Thomas students an ounce of respect? This is the latest plea in a string of attempts to gain some sort of recognition or negotiation from Margaret Cahill. This time this well-written and well-researched article coincides with a National tournament. The Blue Ox’s path to Nationals was hard fought and the manner in which they won was most admirable. The dedication, heart and sportsmanship these students showed made me proud t be a Blue Ox and St. Thomas alum. But what more can the Blue Ox do? Last year the Blue Ox won the State and Regional tournaments. This year they have followed it up by retaining the Minnesota State crown. They would be heading to Nationals with a right to feel confident if things were different.
It breaks my heart to think that the effort and energy of a handful of dedicated St. Thomas rugby players over the years will be completely undermined and undervalued yet again. This is an uncompromising and pigheaded attitude and players’ friends, families, roommates and professors should speak out. This is what we need if St. Thomas is to send its rugby team to Nationals.
I would like to briefly and respectfully correct Ms. Cahill’s view of a “problematic history” with other clubs. One only needs to look to university archives, back to the June 1914 issue of “The St. Thomas Purple and Grey” (predecessor to the Aquin, and, indeed, TommieMedia), in Vol. II Iss. 3, to read the following quote from student journalist Richard Doherty, himself a predecessor to our friend Kristi Battarbee. He writes, “Nor in this onward march of progress…in pursuit of art and science…was the training in athletics…for a moment e’er forgotten. Till at last she well nigh rivals…all her sister institutions…in the game of college Rugby.
This beyond all doubt was proven…in the contest last Thanksgiving…when the famous Marquette warriors…on their home grounds were defeated…by the heroes of St. Thomas.” In the time since, UST has seen 9 University Presidents, (look it up), 95 graduating classes, 3 school newspapers, 3 new campuses, 1 new gender, 2 law schools, dozens of buildings, and evolution from “College” to “University” and tens of thousands of alumni. Perhaps the only constant through the years, albeit with some unfortunate exceptions? THE HEROES OF ST. THOMAS RUGBY. Congratulations to each and every Blue Ox and lets hope UST realizes its…
error sooner rather than later.
What is more damaging to UST: a club sport with a history of partying or repeated news of how the school refuses to support 40 or so of its students?
If the administration thinks for one second that rugby is the only UST sport that partakes in some revelry, it is quite mistaken. Please don’t visit any football houses on game day evenings, and don’t check up on the basketball players during playoffs. Don’t look in to lacrosse initiations, and please don’t follow the hockey teams to Plum’s.
I’m not saying “everyone else is doing it, so rugby should be able to too!” Rather, my point is that holding the rugby team to a higher standard than every other group of St. Thomas athletes is unfair. If a football party gets busted, like they do most weekends, the school doesn’t drop the football program. Coach Caruso and the deans handle it.
Punishing the current rugby players for the sins of those that came before them just doesn’t make sense. Rugby is not the problem. Those former players were. I understand reprimanding those individuals for their wrongs, but why should today’s players suffer the consequences?
The administration should feel ashamed. What lesson is it teaching these players? What message is it sharing with everyone who hears about its unconscionable…
…policy?
I’d like to first offer my deepest gratitude for all of you who have taken the time to raise your voice about the plight of the Blue Ox. Having been here from the beginning, it has been my pleasure to watch this team rise from a “rag tag bunch of dreamers” to an elite rugby club BY OURSELVES. There is no doubt in my mind that the Blue Ox will continue on whether we can ever get recognized or not. Whether St. Thomas likes it or not, there will be rugby at St. Thomas for a long time, whether they sponsor us or not. I can assure all of you that Todd Bell from USA Rugby is doing all that he can to help get us recognized by UST and able to play in the national tournament. I would like to speak out in Margaret Cahill’s defense. She is the first step we have to get through to become a UST team. When rugby got kicked off campus, the decision went all the way up to Fr. Dease. To get this team back on campus, we have much bigger fish to fry than Margaret Cahill, and I don’t want her to be blamed for everything. There are a lot more people who are turning their back on rugby right now, and that is what needs to change. I respect the University of St. Thomas. This is a wonderful institution and I’m proud to be a student here, but the fact that they are denying myself and my
teammates the right to represent our school on the national level leaves me at a loss of words. Again thank you all for your support, keep positive, and I am supremely confident that the University will come to their senses about this topic.
The train of thought used to justify the current ban on rugby at UST is both backwards and illogical. It makes not sense at all to punish people with no blemish on their record for the misgivings and transgressions of others that just happened to play the same sport. These days, St. Thomas spends millions of dollars on athletics, yet they refuse to recognize a team that could bring them more honor on the national stage? Give me a break. Our courses here teach us to use common sense thinking, yet this behavior is often not exhibited by some of the people who run this school.
See the link I posted… Notre Dame rugby went through the EXACT same process a few years ago. If ST is looking to emulate ND, it should take its cue from South Bend and exercise a bit of discretion and self-reflection. Nobody stands to lose pride or come out of this seeming “soft” on bad behavior, it’s just callous to put a lifetime ban on something as basic and positive as athletics.
Mind boggling… Gentlemen please do not allow this decision to tarnish your year with the club, you have displayed exemplary dedication to the club and it has resulted in another successful season. I second all of the sentiments laid out above, from the fact that other clubs / sports teams are allowed missteps and rugby is not too the idea that a game (in this case rugby) dictates some sort of character malfunction. I hope to all of you that this decision is reversed or that Mr. Todd Bell comes through for you all. I find it hard to believe that a group of hard partying hooligans could qualify for a national championship berth. Best of luck to you all.
Grant and Lauren hit it right on the head. First of all, if there is going to be a crackdown on problematic behavior on campus, why are the varsity sports treated any differently? Shouldn’t the crackdown be worse for varsity sports, considering the university funding level is much higher for them? Shouldn’t those students be held to a higher standard, as representing the University directly, rather than through USG approval? When was the last time an entire varsity team was sanctioned for actions off campus? I find it hard to believe that there have been no obscene songs, bouncer involvement in bars, and all around bad behavior from varsity teams. True, frequency of offense comes into play, but when were these incidents? Are any of those men even remotely involved with the team? I understand that the issue is higher than Margaret Cahill, but come on. It seems like half the members of Blue Ox are in SJV. You can’t tell me that they are more of a threat to PR and the campus community than the basketball, football or swimming teams…
We changed English curriculum based on the needs and realities of current students. It was based off of relevant and current data, dialogue, and a determination to get it done. In the case of rugby on campus, the relevant and current data appears to support school sponsorship, as does the determination and dedication of the team and its players. It appears that the dialogue, an integral part of any college or university, is the only part we find lacking. As a supporter of rugby in the Midwest, a game that has grown and matured by leaps and bounds, it’s an extreme disappointment to see the team knocking at the door of school sponsorship and a potential national title, with no one willing to answer. That’s not the St. Thomas I know. That’s not the St. Thomas I want to know. With the proliferation of rugby across Minnesota and beyond, I’d be hard pressed to believe that the UST entrepreneurial spirit could not find a way to make it successful here at UST. Policies for club sports at UST are in the Clubs and Orgs Handbook. We have them for a reason…none of our relevant/current data suggests that they would violate those policies, and nothing says we should prevent them from being a club team just because former individuals represented the sport and university poorly. Time to…
Six years ago, the UST Quiz Bowl team earned local notoriety for an incident in which one of its more… enthusiastic… players got into a dispute with a moderator at a competition and threw a buzzer system against a wall. It was not a good moment for UST or UST Quiz Bowl.
Four years ago (2006), the UST Quiz Bowl team shut down. Its senior leadership had graduated, and there wasn’t enough interest to sustain the team.
Three years ago (2007), I arrived on campus. I tried to sign up for Quiz Bowl, and discovered that few people were aware it had ever existed and those who did had no idea whether it was still running. By the next year, 2008, virtually all institutional memory of Quiz Bowl was gone, and existed only in veteran employees of Campus Life.
That was when I restarted the QB team with new members and new management. We still occasionally hear stories on the local circuit about the “old” UST QB team, but everyone recognizes that our club and that one have absolutely no continuity with one another — and there was only a two-year gap between us.
“Not that long ago” for a veteran employee is “several years beyond the limits of memory” for students — and they should not be denied opportunities because of students long-since departed. Right?
…
…
Well said.(All of the above.) My UST freshman son played for Blue Ox this year and couldn’t have been happier. He is also on a member of Liturgical Choir and is a member of the Philosophy Club. Individually, all the members of Blue Ox are involved with a variety of wholesome activities on the UST campus. There is no reason to believe that collectively this group of hard working young men, guided by a coach recently featured in the Pioneer Press as a dedicated man with a calling to help worthy athletes, would ever bring shame to St. Thomas University. Hold your heads high boys.
As an Alum of UST, I can’t believe what I’m reading here. I know the rugby students that caused the issues are as old as I am. We’re both not in college anymore. I hope Dease and the rest of the UST community can understand that people move on and new generations are born. I would like to say forgive the team, but it’s a different team. Different students. Different times. Please don’t limit future education based on old grudges.