This March 14, Senator Pia Cayetano announced on Twitter that she filed House Bill 2166, calling it the Student-Athletes Rights Bill. Cayetano ended her tweet with, “No more #2yrresidencyrule,” referring to the highly controversial University Athletic Association of the Philippines (UAAP) rule.
This rule requires student-athletes who graduate from a participating UAAP school to a different UAAP university to sit out two years for residency. However, before the rule was put into effect, UAAP rules already stated that those in such a situation need only sit out one year.
While perhaps the main reason for enforcing it is to veer away from the “piracy” of talented players—a trend that has become prolific in the UAAP the past few years—I believe that the rule also stunts the growth and development of athletes.
It has officially been a year since the new UAAP rule was put into effect after a five-to-two vote—wherein only the Ateneo and the University of the Philippines opposed the amendment. Former Far Eastern University-Diliman standoutJerie Pingoy—after whom the rule received its unofficial moniker—is now officially a sophomore in the Ateneo. Though Pingoy was not allowed to play in the UAAP this year, he played with Team Glory Be and went on to play a key role in the team’s championship win in the Fr. Martin Cup.
In contrast, University of the Philippine’s Lady Tanker Mikee Bartolome, who was formerly from the University of Santo Tomas (UST) high school, was granted a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) by a Quezon City Regional Trial Court for the New UAAP Rule just in time for UAAP Swimming Season 76.
The UAAP board tried to pacify the situation, asking the league’s commissioner to bar Bartolome from participating because, though she received a TRO for the new UAAP rule, the one-year residency rule was still in effect. However, Bartolome was still allowed to swim. Despite her record-breaking performance, several teams—namely the Lady Tankers of De La Salle University and UST—boycotted the competition as a sign of protest.
Pingoy’s and Bartolome’s stories are just some of those that played out this year. We may have overlooked the other student-athletes who had to endure the same stress because of this rule. The rule does not discriminate based on sport or school; it concerns every single student athlete participating in the UAAP.
I have high hopes for Cayetano’s move to file the Student Athletes Rights Bill. Not only does it concern the welfare of the student athlete, but it also implies the responsibilities of the student athlete himself. Above all, I believe in the fight against the infamous new UAAP rule.
And while I understand the purpose of having athletes pursue their sports under the same school that nurtured and trained them in their field, requiring them to sit out two years is completely unnecessary. In the two years that he or she sits out, so much potential is wasted, unless he or she is fielded in other tournaments—which are probably not at the same caliber as the UAAP.
A year has gone since the new UAAP rule has been passed. Perhaps it is time to revisit the UAAP rules that have been implemented and ask, is change necessary or not?
