PGCE students ineligible for The Boat Race – Reflections

This article was written anonymously as an ‘Opinions’ piece and does not necessarily reflect the views or reflections of JRN as a platform.

During this Boat Race season, there has been ongoing conversation between both Oxford and Cambridge around the eligibility of students studying for PGCE qualifications. The Joint Agreement, made between both clubs, states that “All participants must be full-time students (in residence for the whole academic year) studying on a course which requires compulsory matriculation and leads to an Oxford or Cambridge degree-level qualification”, thus damaging ‘the spirit of the race’. This phrase is taken to mean protecting a competitive but fair race. In previous editions of the event, PGCE students participated in the race, which caused some confusion about their continued involvement.

The Interpretation Panel, established by the Joint Agreement to adjudicate on disputes or clarify rules, has ruled this week in favour of banning PGCE students, only weeks from the Race itself and amidst final selection.

The Boat Race issued a statement highlighting the agreement that both clubs had reached. Part of the statement focused on eligibility criteria read: ‘Those criteria are jointly agreed by the two competing Clubs, with no involvement from The Boat Race Company Limited (BRCL) or any third party. Similarly, both Clubs agree to the existence and ultimate authority of an independent Interpretation Panel to provide rulings on any disputes, or to clarify rules where necessary. The Clubs are signatories to a Joint Agreement and agree to be bound by a ruling of the Interpretation Panel with no further recourse.‘

Part of the argument against allowing PGCE students to row in The Boat Race is the suggestion that the qualification is part-time, not a degree-level qualification, as it only awards 60 of the 180 credits needed for a Masters, and is mainly vocational rather than academic. This is an irrelevant distinction, as the rules do not state specific credits required, only that it must be ‘degree-level.’ The number of credits relates to the work undertaken for a course, though this varies widely, and a PGCE is massively time-consuming. The UK Government website lists that a PGCE is a level seven qualification. This is equivalent to a Masters-level study, as repeated on Oxford and Cambridge University PGCE webpages.

Oxford’s position also argues the PGCE is ineligible as students spend more hours gaining practical experience rather than being taught. Some Masters courses have as few as three taught hours a week (MPhil in Health, Medicine and Society), and some Undergraduate courses (such as History) have only two hours a week taught. A PGCE student spends around 13 hours a week being taught in faculty on top of countless hours spent in school performing the demanding job of a teacher. Furthermore, students in other practical courses, such as Clinical Medicine or Veterinary Medicine, are eligible. Either way, why should a course which is predominantly practical be excluded? Appealing against the PCGE on these grounds is unclear at best and cruel at worst.

The PGCE course is incredibly time-consuming and physically and mentally demanding. Those pursuing a PGCE choose the course because they want to teach and row because they love the sport. Participating in rowing alongside their intensive course is a personal choice driven by passion. It is not easy and a challenging balance. If anything, it is to the detriment of their training. Students spend so much time ensuring they meet academic and sporting demands that there is no downtime. The idea that the course is less demanding and gives students an advantage over their opposition is nonsensical.

Apparently, OUBC (in its previous and current iterations) has understood the rule to exclude PGCE students for years without seeking clarification from CUBC. Oxford have known previous students at Cambridge to compete whilst studying for a PGCE. It seems strange that the conflicting interpretations would not be mentioned until now. A cynic may view this as the actions of a club whose squads have seen consecutive losses in many of The Boat Races, not an attempt to maintain of ‘the spirit of The Boat Race.’

It is surprising that Oxford, Cambridge, or the Interpretation Panel would allow a rule change or interpretation to take effect mid-season given the disruption it can cause. Henley Royal Regatta announces event and rule changes after their Annual General Meeting in December, allowing seven months for clubs and crews to adjust and prepare. Once decisions are made, they rarely change further, especially not with less than two months left. Many crews, having already planned their travel and accommodation, would rightly feel frustrated and disadvantaged due to the sudden shift.

Even if Henley Royal Regatta were to announce rules with just under four months’ notice, there are numerous other events to enter, offering entry flexibility. This flexibility is not afforded to students of Oxbridge, who only have three Boat Races (Blue Boat, Reserves, and Lightweights) to potentially race – all of which are subject to the same rules. If a student has already made it through pre-season and training from September until December, it is likely that they are well-committed and have a strong chance of competing for their respective university. Implementing a rule change mid-season undermines this investment, leading to a multifaceted loss: financial, mental, and the dashed hope of eligibility. Additionally, it adds extra challenge to the trialling process as students continue to train, not knowing if the rule may change again.

Oxford knows the ramifications of continuing this dispute. Crew selection is already difficult for many, as it affects the entire team and can be uplifting and crushing. Adding this additional destabilising factor into the process is incredibly demanding, especially considering the already emotionally charged nature of trialling. Winning a seat for one person means losing out on a massive opportunity for another. Students invest so much time and energy into this process. Earning a seat comes at a significant emotional and physical cost. Coaches do not relish informing an athlete they lost their seat as they know the pain this causes. It is worse to inform a student the seat they earned in the Blue Boat has been taken from them. This pain also extends to those who lost their seat race. To learn the person they lost to now cannot race only serves to cause further upset and tensions. Questions arise concerning the finality of this decision, given it has already changed multiple times, with neither coaches nor students having any clarity. Coaches will have to devote more time to ensuring the well-being of their squads, which will undoubtedly affect the delivery of training across the year.

Oxford have levied complaints against Cambridge’s culture, attempting to brand the Light Blues as disingenuous cheaters who tried to fill their boats with ineligible students. This is a misrepresentation of the club, which focuses on training and encouraging students to achieve their potential as elite-level athletes, winning The Boat Race as a result rather than a chief motivator. While it is understandable that a club would strive to improve its results after years of losses and explore various avenues for success, Oxford seems more focused on preventing and disrupting Cambridge’s winning campaigns rather than squad improvement.

Those pursuing a PGCE are young adults who have chosen to spend over 25 hours a week trialling whilst studying what could be considered one of the most time-consuming courses possible at Oxbridge. The grounds on which Oxford’s appeal stands seem arbitrary and could be angled at several other courses. Both Oxford and Cambridge will now have spent most of the season focused on arguing over a point of semantics, the former showing a complete lack of sympathy for those affected students. The 2025 Boat Race can be seen as more of a battle on paper rather than on the water. It cannot be in ‘the spirit of the race’ to cause so much turmoil, mutual animosity, and loss of respect, nor can inter-club politics be worth the tears and shattered dreams of students who are unlucky enough to be caught in the crossfire.

References

1. Boat Race Statement – https://www.theboatrace.org/news/statement-from-the-boat-race-company
2. Cambridge Statement – https://cubc.org.uk/2025/03/17/statement-on-the-eligibility-of-pgce-students-for-the-boat-race/

About The Author

Guest Writer

See author's posts