The Sportsmanship and Ethical Conduct Committee has endorsed a proposal that would establish bylaws governing misconduct during the regular season similar to those bylaws currently in effect during championships competition.

The group supported the idea at its November 3-4 meeting in Phoenix.

The proposed bylaws would be similar to Bylaw 31.02.3, which defines misconduct in championships play, and Bylaw 31.02.10, which outlines possible penalties should a misconduct violation occur.

The committee plans to forward the proposal, which earned approval from the Divisions I, II and III Student-Athlete Advisory Committees at their summer meetings, to the Division I Championships/Competition Cabinet and the Divisions II and III Management Councils for consideration at their February and April meetings, respectively. The committee also will seek the support of conferences because enforcement of any proposed regular-season rules would fall to them.

The committee also acted on a sports-wagering matter at its November meeting. After a discussion of Proposal No. 2003-85, which would amend the reinstatement process outlined in Bylaw 10.3.1 to allow student-athletes who are first-time sports-wagering offenders to appeal any penalty to the student-athlete reinstatement committee, the Committee on Sportsmanship and Ethical Conduct reaffirmed its position that the original application of the bylaw should not be changed. Currently, any student-athlete who is found in violation of the bylaw is prohibited from appealing the penalty.

In addition, the committee voted to submit an editorial clarification to Bylaw 10.3.1 to clarify the definition of organized gambling activity and to include participation in pools, auctions and fantasy leagues as examples of such activity. Committee members believe there is ambiguity on what constitutes gambling activities and that more definition is necessary, particularly on issues such as fantasy leagues, which people may not consider gambling.

The committee also approved a letter expressing its concern, as well as concerns from the Committee on Women's Athletics and the Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sports, about the sponsorship of competitive events by companies that may depict student-athlete groups in a disrespectful, demeaning or degrading manner. The committee also was concerned about the mixed messages being sent by member institutions that endorse a sponsorship relationship or participation in activities associated with companies whose broad product lines may not be approved by the NCAA. Though subgroups of products may be approved for use by student-athletes, the committee believes broad sponsorship has implied all products to be approved for student-athlete use. The committee believes the distinction is not clear.

"Over the last year we have convinced all three committees to agree to jointly support a letter to the membership to encourage them not to support activities sponsored by such companies or magazines," said Woody Gibson, committee chair and athletics director at High Point University.

The committees will seek permission from the Management Councils and the presidential bodies to distribute the letter to the membership.

In other actions, the Sportsmanship and Ethical Conduct Committee approved a new sportsmanship poster. The poster, which is entitled "Be a Hero ... Little Eyes are Watching" will be made available to the membership soon.