It's a lot of running to do for naught.

The Harvard cross-country team ended its season two weeks ago by qualifying for the NCAA finals. Although the Crimson finished with a less-than-impressive 3-9 record, it was ranked fourth in New England and managed to place fourteenth in the NCAA's qualifying meet, thus earning the right to compete in the national finals.

In a surprise move, however, the Crimson harriers were denied permission to participate in the national competition. The Harvard Athletic Department last week cited a tight athletic budget as the main reason for the refusal. But for athletes and coaches alike, the decision has raised questions about priorities in Harvard athletics.

Crimson Captain Bill Okerman says he is disappointed with the decision. "In the first place, it's discouraging to an athlete when they (the athletic administration) say you can't run in a race. The idea of athletics is to get athletes to compete," Okerman said last night.

"But it's harder to tell an athlete he can't go to a final championship that he's qualified for," Okerman, a senior, said. "That's harder than telling him he's not good enough to qualify to begin with."

Okerman said he doesn't believe Harvard lacks the money to back the team. "If we had a better team, we would have gone. The money could have, and should have, been found. What it really boiled down to was that Harvard's qualifying standards were more stringent than the NCAA's qualifying standards," he added.

Without the Athletic Department's permission, even outside financial assistance was out of the question, Okerman said. "They wouldn't even allow our supporters to donate money. We had the support of friends, but not the athletic office."

Three-Year Policy

Athletic Director Robert Watson was unavailable for comment yesterday, but Assistant Director Baaron R. Pittenger said the department decision can be explained in simple terms. "In the last three years, the financial situation for athletics has tightened," Pittenger said.

"we made it clear that mere qualification for NCAA competition did not mean that we would send any team or individual for such competition," he added.

"Now, even if a team does qualify for national competition," Pittenger said, "that team must show a reasonable expectation for doing well."

"Obviously, a 3-9 season's record, seventh in the heptagonals, and fourteenth in the qualifying meet, does not give us reason to expect a productive showing," Pittenger said.

"The team qualified through a mere quirk in the system."

Argued Strongly

Asked for his reaction last night, Harvard cross-country Coach Bill McCurdy seemed sympathetic with both sides.

"I argued as strongly as I could, especially for Fitzsimmons, but the board decided that our performance was just not strong enough to warrant expenditure to send us," McCurdy said.

Freshman harrier Peter Fitzsimmons would have qualified for the nationals on an individual basis by placing 30th in the qualifying meet. As it turned out, according to Okerman, a UMass runner who placed 42nd in the qualifying meet behind Fitzsimmons was sent to the finals by his school, and garnered All-American honors on the basis of his performance in the finals.

"There was every justification to send Fitzsimmons with the kind of year he had," said McCurdy. "But it was a tough decision all around. Unfortunately for us, this time, things just didn't go our way."

Fitzsimmons, contacted last night, said "it didn't really matter that much" that Harvard didn't send him to the NCAA s. "It was the end of the season, and I was tired," he said.

"Cross-country is not a revenue sport," Fitzsimmons said, "but we work as hard as the football or hockey teams and should be treated with equality."

Okerman was somewhat less sympathetic.

"We all would have given anything to run in the NCAAs," Okerman said. "It means a lot to an athlete to qualify in such a meet, and the fact remains, we did make the qualifying standards," he added. "It's just a real disappointment."