This weekend, shuttles teeming with crimson-clad Harvard students will descend upon New Haven, kicking off the 130th episode of the annual ritual known succinctly as “The Game.” But for the many students who made the pilgrimage in 2011—when Yale last hosted Harvard—the pregame festivities Saturday will appear markedly more reserved this time around. In response to a U-Haul accident during the 2011 game’s tailgate which killed one tailgater and injured two others, Yale has tightened its tailgating regulations; for example, students this year can expect a ban on kegs and a shorter tailgate ending at kickoff. These policies may look heavy-handed, but there must be an emphasis on responsibility at The Game—one that was absent in the tragic accident in 2011.

It is not hard to imagine that tailgates can get out of hand. Even less so to imagine that thousands of excited Harvard and Yale students, assembled for the biggest sporting event of the year, could create a dangerous tailgating environment. And although the 2011 accident was not the direct fault of alcohol, we needn’t wait for an incident involving alcohol to consider enacting responsible tailgating rules. Instead, in the wake of tragedy, we must reevaluate all policies—not only those involving U-Haul trucks—in order to promote a safer experience for tailgaters.

We should note that these changes are not a kneejerk response by Yale but a step forward in a continuing dialogue about how to make tailgating a fun but safe experience for students and alumni. Harvard, for its part, banned U-Haul trucks in 2004. The next year, Yale followed with new tailgating regulations, and since then, both Harvard and Yale have periodically instituted new rules to ensure student safety. And while we have long been critical of Harvard’s draconian tailgating policies, we consider Yale’s decision a sensible reaction to an accident that exposed the shortcomings of its tailgating policies and the resulting responsibility gap.

Of course, given the complicated nature of crafting tailgate rules, it is better to err on the side of caution, even if the changes appear heavy-handed. Nevertheless, both Yale and Harvard should take student feedback into account and work with student organizations to come to mutually agreeable rules. After all, student feedback is the best indicator of how students will respond to new rules; in the absence of a student-administration dialogue, increasingly strict policies could push tailgating into dorms and off-campus houses, altogether defeating the purpose of tightening regulations. We cannot prescribe the exact route that Yale should take moving forward, but we hope that Yale will take students’ concerns—like those of Harvard’s House Committees—into account to ensure that its changes are having the desired effect.

At the end of the day—or, at least, at the 12 p.m. kickoff—what’s important is that student are able to enjoy this great tradition as safely and responsibly as college students possibly can. Whatever the merits of the specific new policies, we commend Yale for taking measures to promote a safe tailgating environment. And if nothing else, at least Harvard students will be released from their tailgates early enough to watch the Yale football team get pulverized—for the seventh time in a row.