3tard wrote:

I am i wrong in saying that many of the guys in american 2v's and 3v's arent entering student events because their uni isn't letting them? I feel like many 2v boats are easily good enough to win student events, let alone enter them 

But if there are say four rowers coming over from an American Uni to race in a Thames Cup 8 (Prime example: there are (at least) 4 princetonians in the Elizabethan 8). Why cant they enter the Visitors (or find a cox and race the PA) as Princeton? 

The answer is because they want a little red box and they see the club events as being easier. Which undermines the event somewhat.... 

clubmand wrote:

Anonymousrower wrote:

Stopwatch wrote:

Can't say I agree. Club and student events were split for a reason, and an entire boat full of students who haven't represented a given club all season but then turn up at hrr as their "club", simply doesn't make sense, it's trying to circumvent the split that the Stewards put in place.

The other argument that is often used with such crews is that they would get hammered at intermediate level. Well tough, it's not the Stewards responsibility to ensure that everyone has a good chance of winning, if your crew is only eligible to race at inter level but would get hammered at inter level, that's just the way it is, deal with it rather than trying to pot hunt.

The same logic applies to these loyal club rowers that want an easy ride to a henley medal. The standard of club rowing is piss poor right now, schoolboy crews can challenge most of them, it needs to improve and a few crews that do that will get everyone to pull their fingers out and stop thinking that they're owed anything by the stewards because they class themselves as honest club athletes. Why don't you just deal with the fact that this happens every year and get on with it.

This is so disjointed. The standard of club rowing is actually pretty high. At Met when the wind died down c.50% of club crews were below or around the 6.15 mark which is significantly quicker than equivalent scores a decade ago. Schoolboys beating them? The standard of schoolboy rowing is incredibly high. More money and resources are poured into the top end of schoolboy rowing every year, something that the average club can never hope to match. It is only really the top 6-8 schools that are quicker than most club crews as well, Eton, Radley, Pauls, Shrewsbury etc, and they regularly match most temple crews as well. 

What we see in club rowing is the disappearance of many smaller less equipped clubs from competing at Henley. The likes of Staines, Mortlake, Sons of the Thames, Bradford, Weybridge, Broxbourne, Grosvenor, Curlew have all struggled to qualify boats in the last 5 years, and the loss of diversity in the club events is something to be concerned about. 

Pull their fingers out? I am not sure how much more training, time and finances most club crews could put into their rowing. It is this attitude that makes club rowing unsustainable for most, and increases the turnover of athletes at clubs. 

It is about creating a level playing field where athletes of similar backgrounds and commitments can race against each other. Problem is that unlike school and student events the qualification rules for club events are far more of a grey area, and it is these that the stewards need to look at. 

 

It's exceptionally hard for smaller clubs to even get a foot in the door, with the recent publicity of the event the standard of the 'club' events has skyrocketed. How can you place the likes of the above clubs on the same field as some of these 'club' entries? Full time, top U23, University athletes have no business in the club event and should be pushed into competing in the intermediate or open events. 

How often does a small club get past Thursday? I'm not suggesting they are handed a medal but levelling the field a little would encourage some depth to be built at clubs rather than them just not bothering at events anymore. Ultimately what's even the point of showing up when they see the likes of leander, molesey etc enter a 'club' event when they are sticking out full time guys. 

Training around a 9-5 is completely possible (Thames in 2015/2016) but it can't be done for the years it takes to get to the top of club level by the majority. 

 

It seems to me that a number of people on here are getting their own message confused... How can one say with one breath that club rowers should just get better/fitter/stronger/faster if they have problems with students in club events and then with the next breath state that the student rowers should be allowed in the club events so that they don't get thumped in intermediate events... Surely the answer to any of the aforementioned issues is that the stewards should just follow their own rules to the letter in the same way as they would expect most club crews to. 

Sculler wrote:

clubmand wrote:

Anonymousrower wrote:

The same logic applies to these loyal club rowers that want an easy ride to a henley medal. The standard of club rowing is piss poor right now, schoolboy crews can challenge most of them, it needs to improve and a few crews that do that will get everyone to pull their fingers out and stop thinking that they're owed anything by the stewards because they class themselves as honest club athletes. Why don't you just deal with the fact that this happens every year and get on with it.

This is so disjointed. The standard of club rowing is actually pretty high. At Met when the wind died down c.50% of club crews were below or around the 6.15 mark which is significantly quicker than equivalent scores a decade ago. Schoolboys beating them? The standard of schoolboy rowing is incredibly high. More money and resources are poured into the top end of schoolboy rowing every year, something that the average club can never hope to match. It is only really the top 6-8 schools that are quicker than most club crews as well, Eton, Radley, Pauls, Shrewsbury etc, and they regularly match most temple crews as well. 

What we see in club rowing is the disappearance of many smaller less equipped clubs from competing at Henley. The likes of Staines, Mortlake, Sons of the Thames, Bradford, Weybridge, Broxbourne, Grosvenor, Curlew have all struggled to qualify boats in the last 5 years, and the loss of diversity in the club events is something to be concerned about. 

Pull their fingers out? I am not sure how much more training, time and finances most club crews could put into their rowing. It is this attitude that makes club rowing unsustainable for most, and increases the turnover of athletes at clubs. 

It is about creating a level playing field where athletes of similar backgrounds and commitments can race against each other. Problem is that unlike school and student events the qualification rules for club events are far more of a grey area, and it is these that the stewards need to look at. 

 

It's exceptionally hard for smaller clubs to even get a foot in the door, with the recent publicity of the event the standard of the 'club' events has skyrocketed. How can you place the likes of the above clubs on the same field as some of these 'club' entries? Full time, top U23, University athletes have no business in the club event and should be pushed into competing in the intermediate or open events. 

How often does a small club get past Thursday? I'm not suggesting they are handed a medal but levelling the field a little would encourage some depth to be built at clubs rather than them just not bothering at events anymore. Ultimately what's even the point of showing up when they see the likes of leander, molesey etc enter a 'club' event when they are sticking out full time guys. 

Training around a 9-5 is completely possible (Thames in 2015/2016) but it can't be done for the years it takes to get to the top of club level by the majority. 

 

That's what I mean by sustainability. For smaller clubs what we are seeing is a crew coming about every 4-5 years who train at that level for 1-2 years to qualify and then more often than not stop rowing. In recent years we have seen this at Broxbourne, AK, and Derby. I can only see an increase in this trend as club athletes make a one off push for Henley qualification and then leave the sport. At my club this has a knock on effect as we see massive turnover in members from year to year, and puts more pressure on the volunteer committee of long term members to keep the wheels spinning. 
 

TopWorkM8 wrote:

youreallwet wrote:

if you are complaining about an essentially scratch 4+ made up of members of a uni 4v being too good to enter your event its time to re-consider whether rowing is your sport.

those people who hark the death of club rowing are the same people who chastise others for wanting to represent their clubs. 

'Scratch'... despite the fact they have all been rowing at uni together for the last year, got taught to row together, and have most likely been rowing together over the last few weeks pre-henley (Taurus rowers rowing together for good couple of months, elizabethan have been out on the tideway, team keane have been rowing together a while now and all rowed for oubc together).

Yeah. Good one. Move along.

Well said.

Whether there are a scratch crew or not, a student crew should not be club eligible. The clue is in the name... Also, 4V (if that is really the level they are at...) is still a pretty high standard in the states and even in the UK, we've seen essentially 3V crews (Brookes) pulling 5.55s (Met) which is far beyond the reach of most club athletes.