If you miss too many classes or don't do your homework, there are academic consequences for your actions. Now, members of the men's tennis team are dealing with similar realities due to a new rule system instituted by coach Doug Eng.
The team has added a policy that keeps track of misdemeanors such as missing practice, failing a conditioning test or using foul language. Each offense earns guilty players a certain number of points, and accruing 10 points may mean removal from the team.
"It was done to make the guys more accountable," Eng said. "I think a lot of teams actually have it. Professional teams have it. They just have it in terms of money — for example, if you do this you are fined $10,000 or $50,000.
"Everyone has to be accountable," he continued. "If you don't show up for practice or miss a couple games, you are off the team."
Eng felt that in the past, the team had been too lenient in its enforcement of the basic rules that other teams follow. His goal in instituting these new criteria is to show his players that they must be committed to the team and the NCAA policies regarding Div. III tennis. He also wants to quantify the team's actions so that the coaching staff can keep tabs on how the players have been behaving.
"I have been really nice to them, and I think they know that," Eng said. "We [have] allow[ed] them to do things other coaches don't allow. So we are going to run it basically conventional this year.
"We used the first-class treatment, but now they are being put in coach," he added.
Eng said larger penalties that are worth five points are given for missing a match or skipping as many as four practices in a two week span. In addition to the demerits that come with these actions, Eng said that the players' behavior will be reflected in their status in the lineup. Different spots on the ladder will be decided based not only on an individual's level of play, but also on his attitude.
"We have two scales — one is the ladder, the other is the penalty," Eng said. "If you are No. 1 on the team and only show up twice a week for two weeks, you are not really No.1 even if you are playing well because you are not earning it.
"What they might not be happy about is I have moved them down in the ladder," he continued. "If they lose a couple points they will be moved down and someone else will get to play."
Some of the players, while not voicing entirely negative reactions to the new system, were skeptical about whether the policy will work.
"I think the idea of what Doug is trying to do is good," said one player who requested anonymity because of the subject's sensitive nature. "He is trying to make people accountable and show up for practice. Trying to get people to be more accountable is the aim of this new policy.
"Is it going to significantly change anything for the better?" he asked. "Probably not, but obviously I could be wrong. It is a good idea in theory, but I don't necessarily see it changing anything that significantly for the better."
Others, however, believe that Eng's measures might be taking things a bit too far — particularly considering that, according to one player, publicly criticizing the team could result in deductions of up to seven points.
"I think personally [the policy] is going a little too far in terms of disciplinary action, but I'm not going to argue it, and it hasn't had any serious repercussions for anyone yet," said another player who also requested anonymity. "As a principle, I think it is a little too harsh in terms of a disciplinary reaction."
Some players are also frustrated by the new standards regarding behavior during a match. One player pointed out that Roger Federer's fine-inducing expletives at the U.S. Open two weeks ago would get him almost halfway kicked off the Tufts team.
But Eng emphasized that one of the goals of the point system was to remind the players of the sport's rules and ensure that they keep their composure.
"We didn't make any rules up," Eng said. "Some of the guys are not clear about that. Maybe 90 percent of players know about [the NCAA rules] and some players don't.
"We are basically saying that if, for instance, you get in an argument with a player, that is a two point penalty, and an argument with another coach, that is a five point [penalty]," he added. "We have had that happen in the past and that should not happen. That is not becoming of a Tufts athlete."
In the past, some players have pleaded their own case when the coaches have tried to enact disciplinary actions. Eng hopes that the new policy will help avoid such instances in the future.
"If you have someone trying to be a lawyer and saying there is nothing written in the rule book that says I shouldn't be back or shouldn't be starting, now we can say well you didn't come to practice or you showed up twice in two weeks," he said.
The rules remain discretionary, with Eng noting that he can choose to not take away all the points for a certain offense. Though the rules are not new, Eng feels that the coaches need to keep track of offenses more efficiently and let the players know they have to act in a responsible manner.
"We are not any more strict; we are probably more loose than a lot of teams," he said. "Now we are just codifying it."
