Brass Band Registry Rules: Time for a Refresh?

Is Real Change Needed to Secure the Future of Brass Band Contests?

From news announcements to commentary on recent contest performances, there has been a lot of discussion on the subject of registration for brass band contests.

This isn’t a new debate. 

Registration has been a point of discussion since I first started contesting, nearly 15 years ago and with an increase in banders leaving the community in recent years, it’s something that seems to be making contesting (specifically regulated contests, such as the Regionals, The Spring Festival and The Open) more restrictive to the potential detriment of the bands looking to compete. From bands struggling to fill their seats for contesfs under the current rules, especially when it comes to the ever-changing percussion requirements, it seems to be that the need to review our current system is more important than ever.

Strap in and get a brew and a biscuit - this is going to be a long one. 

A Level Playing Field

For starters, let’s look at what these rules are trying to achieve - to make contests a level playing field as much as possible. 

Regulating who can and can’t perform with a band in order to avoid foul play isn’t new. Rules surrounding the eligibility of players have been around since the beginning of contesting, with regulations being even tighter than they are today. 

For example, in the rules stipulated in September 1907 for the Belle Vue contest:

• Every member of the band must be a resident in the town, or within a distance of four miles or thereabouts

• All players must have been members of the band for more than 3 months

• Any member who, within six months of the date of the close of entries, has played regularly with a professional orchestra, will be considered a professional and therefore not allowed to compete as a player with the band

• Every performer must be in a position to prove that he derives his chief income apart from playing music

Looking at these rules - many of today's bandspeople wouldn’t be able to either play for the band they currently play for or compete at all! Thankfully, registry rules aren’t quite as restrictive as this any more, but that’s because of three main reasons:

• Banding isn’t as popular as it once was 

• There aren’t as many bandspeople as there once was

• Banding isn’t as financially supportive for bandspeople as it was in the last century - people were literally put into certain jobs or moved to certain areas in order to play for a particular band!

The state of banding is vastly different than even a few decades ago, so the question that needs to be considered is - are registration rules as relevant and beneficial now, as they were then and what are the current rules actually restricting?

Addressing the Brass Elephant in the Room

Let’s get one thing out in the open and it may ruffle some feathers, but if we're not frank on this subject, what's the point?

There are bands that still try to strategically place ‘deps’ in seats in order to gain an advantage. Whether that is bumping an existing player out in favour of a ‘better player’ or (more commonly) filling a vacant seat with a temporary dep for very obvious reasons.

There, I've said it - everybody exhale. I know this happens, you know this happens - no matter any excuses or justifications given - we’ve all seen it happen. That’s why we still have registry rules. But how frequently does this actually happen and does it offer that much of an advantage?

As a player who’s played with bands that have tried to compete honestly in regulated competitions and have come up against hardship trying to fill seats whilst adhering to the rules, I’ll admit that it has irked me in the past to see bands finding a way around the rules to use ‘strategic deps’. I’ve felt that frustration, but now looking at it with a bit more of a mature perspective - I simply laugh, because the concept of 'strategically hiring players' is more ridiculous than Donald Trump’s inner monologue and here’s why.

Reality Check: We're Doing This For Ourselves!

At today's contests, more often than not it’s banders on the stage, banders in the box and banders in the audience. So, the thought of  spending the precious time and energy we have on this earth finding a way to get that ‘big name’ (inverted commas, because in most circumstances, no one outside of the banding world knows who they are) to play in a band to gain an advantage in a contest we put on FOR OURSELVES to increase the chances of getting to another contest that we put on…FOR OURSELVES, is just a bit potty really. Furthermore, if rumours are to be believed (and it’s the banding world, so who really knows), there are bands spending money on strategic players to gain an advantage. I hope that isn’t true, because that is just barmy.

So, to combat this completely pointless (outside of banding) form of cheating, we make the rules tighter to try and stop it. But bands find a way around it - they have for time immemorial and especially of late. It’s laughable.

You know what’s not laughable? The bands whom these rules actually affect. The bands who face having to go on without a full complement or face not competing at all. Whilst the above band gets away with it. In a similar vain I worry for bands who are looking at the test pieces for next year and are wondering how they are going to meet the percussion requirements. 

That’s not laughable. 

That’s a failure with the system. 

It’s Just Not Cricket - It’s Banding

I’ve seen the anger displayed on social media and within bandrooms at the results of certain bands getting away with hiring certain players within their ranks for important contests. Do you know where this anger stems from?

I’ll give you a clue - it isn’t just sour grapes. To my mind there are two main fuels of this anger:

1. Bands who have had to struggle to register eligible players only to watch a band find a loophole in the rules to strategically hire players

2. Bands that have worked incredibly hard to achieve an honest performance with the same players they will be performing with at concerts weeks down the road to be beaten by a band who’ve hired ‘well-known’ temporary players - in other words it wasn’t a fair match on a level playing field

Can we blame those who feel disgruntled? No, but at the end of the day - according to the rules, it’s perfectly legal for the band to hire these players. So, then it’s just a question of ethics, which usually results in a question posed on a social media forum for people to argue over like two seals with one fish. 

The frustration may be up for debate, but the result - people leaving the movement as a result of having to contend with perceived ‘foul play’ - is a very real risk that needs to be genuinely considered. 

Honestly, I'm less bothered about the bands acting 'dishonestly' - you do you, babe. I'm more bothered about bands being unable to compete because they can't use certain players because of the rules. Players, I may add who are ready and willing to play - more on that shortly.

Pause for Thought

Honestly, at this point we need to take a step back and ask ourselves three key questions, regarding brass band registration rules:

• Question 1: Are the rules serving their actual purpose?

  • Preventing bands from strategically using players to gain an advantage

  • Making contesting a fair, level playing field

  • Ensuring contests are about genuine music-making and not game-playing

Answering as a bander who has seen bands ‘strategically’ hiring players in the last 6 months - I would say no, they’re not. 

• Are they serving the needs of the brass band world e.g.

  • Preventing bands from folding?

  • Encouraging bands to take part in contests?

Answering as a bander - the widespread discontent on social media and people becoming disillusioned with contests would say otherwise.

• Are we worried about handling the change if we scrap/relax brass band registration rules

  • How do we stop bands acting dishonourably?

  • How do we keep control over contests?

  • Is this going to create more work?

I imagine yes - and it’s a fair worry, so let’s have a look at that…

Do We Fear Change?

Looking at the facts. It’s 2024 and our registry system still relies on physical cards and a paper system that makes applying for a passport seem like a doddle. It’s long-winded, prone to error and susceptible to mistakes made within the postal service that have real and sometimes devastating consequences for bands. Add in time-sensitive rules and you have the recipe for the perfect administrative tempest. 

So, why haven’t we digitised it? Surely that’s the sensible thing to do? The registry could have an online database with each band having a record containing the information of their personnel, including a passport photo with their name, etc. Need to change a player - no problem, done with the touch of a button. Need to add a new player to your band - whizz the registry an email. Need a list of personnel competing at a contest to check that the band is only using their registered players? Print the list from the database, complete with photos.

No more faffing with paper records, deadlines are not being put at risk with slow or inefficient postal services, the entire process is more efficient -  I can’t find a reason why this doesn’t make sense. So, why don’t we do it?

Maybe it’s down to funds. But I have a feeling it’s down to the big changes that overhauling this system would cause for those in charge of it. I appreciate and am grateful for those in charge of sorting out registrations - I see the stressful process when you post about it online and this isn’t me taking a chance to have a pop at you - I want this to be more straightforward for you and for us. 

In short, as a movement we seem to want to try to hold on to the way we’ve always done things, even when it isn’t always the most logical direction. And I get it - change means more work (even if just for the short term) and handling errors until we get the change right. It’s stepping into the unknown and the people who deal with registrations are already pushed as it is. I would implore the likes of Brass Bands England and the Arts Council to help us modernise this system or the help of people within our community who know their way around a computer and could build a system or help those involved with the registry to use a system.

What is more important? Figuring out this hurdle or the threat to the survival of our movement, because eventually this is what it’s going to come down to.

Is it Time We Retired the Regulations?

Now before you come after me with pitchforks - please hear me out first! 

I’m a bander who is signed full time with a band. Rainford Band is my band, I'm proud to play with them and they take priority. However, I regularly dep for the bands at contests with relaxed or no registration rules - even for bands who are in the same section. It’s a mutually beneficial arrangement - I enjoy playing and spending time friends in other bands (isn’t this what it should be about?!) and the band gets a player that contributes towards them being able to compete without an empty seat. It furthers camaraderie, it keeps those contests afloat with entries from bands, the local pubs benefit from our custom - it’s a win, win (or a win, win, win if you’re in the prizes). And I’m certainly not the only bander with this mindset. 

It would be beneficial for younger players too, who may not be ready to sit in a band that is capable of going to the Open or the Albert Hall full time, but could help that band out with no complications posed to their current band. I would have loved to have had that opportunity when I was younger. There's no obligation for the band in question to sign them if they're not ready to join their ranks and no worries placed on the youngster's current band to let them go and they get a fantastic experience at one of our most prestigious contests.

Can we make this about music-making and not who is playing with who?!

Conclusion

So, the way I see it, the rules aren’t really prohibiting foul play, but can definitely inhibit a band from taking part and there’s banders out there willing to play with more than one band - surely there is an argument for retiring the rules and just letting people play - especially with the inconsistent requirements for percussionists. If the players are willing to play with more than one band - let them play, I say! We are doing it for ourselves after all. 

Would it be worth trialling it at least and seeing what the outcome is?

One thing is for sure - we can’t carry on with our heads in the sand. This needs to be reviewed with an open mind and a bit of a reality check for the sake of the future of brass banding and contests.