Clubs and Disciplinary Matters

When a potential incident is being considered under the disciplinary process (FRA Rules for Competition-Rule 11) the club of the athlete is informed of developments. If a club shares the credit for a runner’s success a club cannot disassociate itself when its runners breach FRA Rules.

This approach also applies to junior runners and it could be argued that junior runners generally have a closer relationship with their club, particularly with a club coach, than do senior runners.

Recently the FRA Committee has become increasingly concerned (as has been reported in The Fellrunner) about the issue of “underage runners” and breaches of the distance limits for junior runners (FRA Rules for Competition- Rule 10). It has been alleged that some clubs have colluded in breaches, either deliberately or by failing to follow the proper race entry process.

The rules which apply to junior fell running are, for good reasons, not necessarily the same as for other disciplines (XC/ Track/Road) but they are clear.

Age on 1^st January in the year of competition (i.e.not age on race date) is a critical factor.

Race Organisers, in order to register and insure their races with the FRA, agree to comply with FRA Rules. As do competitors or, in the case of juniors, the Parent/Legal Guardian.

If a Race Organiser does not have a race entry system that includes DOB for junior runners the organiser will be unable to ensure compliance with Rule 10 particularly if, for example, a parent or coach or club encourages a runner to compete in a race beyond the allowed distance.

From 2012 therefore if a runner is under 18 the Junior Race Entry Form should be used (FRA Safety Requirements for Fell Races-Rule 8) for both senior and junior races and this entry form requires the completion of both Date of Birth and Age on 1^st January in current year by the Parent or Legal Guardian.

Completion of this data will provide some protection from jeopardy for Race Organisers and also prevent the misunderstandings over junior race eligibility which have arisen in the past.

Clubs should take note that breaches of FRA Rules are also breaches of UKA Rules and therefore UKA is informed of disciplinary outcomes, including the name of the Club of the athlete involved.

Graham Breeze (FRA Chairman)
11^th January 2012

That being the case Graham, there is a lot of misleading information out there on the FRA website and published on the calendar.

Just look at the races that are there for seniors and they declare "Minimum Age: 16" when by what you say, it should say "Minimum Age 16 as at 1/1/12 when applied to the 2012 calendar.

Many races under UKA or FRA Rules adopt this terminology leading many athletes and parents to the understanding that age on the day has relevance to the race entry as it does for the VET categories and that the 1/1/12 calculation applies to championships that run through a particular competition year.

Just to underline the confusion, at the World Trials at Witton last year, U16s were allowed to enter the U20 Trial despite the fact that it was over distance as some of those U16s met the WMRA age rules for the World U20s age group.
Yet it was run under FRA Rules.

So I suggest it needs a bit more thoroughness than just the entry forms which based on what you say will also be incorrect.
From 2012 therefore if a runner is under 18 the Junior Race Entry Form should be used
Someone could be 18, but an U18 at the same time.

Rule 10: first sentence indicates that the distance limits (ie the Rule) override what a race organiser might suggest for his race for anyone under 18 on 1.1.2012.

Once you become 18 on the day you literally cease to be a junior and Rule 10 does not apply.

However if you were competing in the "Under 18 and Over 16" Junior Champs because the key date is 1.1.2012 you would still be eligible to be counted as "Under 18" Category for the rest of the 2012 year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Graham Breeze

Rule 10: first sentence indicates that the distance limits (ie the Rule) override what a race organiser might suggest for his race for anyone under 18 on 1.1.2012.

Once you become 18 on the day you literally cease to be a junior and Rule 10 does not apply.

However if you were competing in the "Under 18 and Over 16" Junior Champs because the key date is 1.1.2012 you would still be eligible to be counted as "Under 18" Category for the rest of the 2012 year.

---

Can you guide me to the part of the rules where an 18 year old ceases to be a junior and it becomes "age on day"?

RULE TEN
Race organisers must stipulate age limits for their events but the following maximum distance limits for
juniors must be observed.
Ages are as at 1st January in the year of competition.

My interpretation of this is that the RO has to take the max race distances in to account when stipulating minimum age - so then when the RO puts "Minimum Age 16" and that is how the calendar words it, it can actually be contradictory to the rules.

Let's take Bleasdale Circle - calendar entry is Minimum Age 16, when it should actually say "Minimum Age Group U18s".

You could be 16 between 1/1/12 and the race day at end of Feb, therefore meet the criteria published in the Calendar and yet not be eligible if you check the actual rules.

Flagrant breaches are one thing, but when the sport gives out such mixed messages, it should sort out those mixed messages before it expects everyone to be able to interpret them in the way that the sport wants.

Okay I thought I got it, now I'm confused.

If a Junior runner enters an FRA event during 2012, then they must enter the age category based on their age on 1/1/2012. Is that true?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eleanor

If a Junior runner enters an FRA event during 2012, then they must enter the age category based on their age on 1/1/2012. Is that true?

---

That's the usual situation. Rule 10 sets maximum distance limits for different ages of runners eg Under 14s (ie those aged 12 and 13 on Jan. 1st in the current year) must not run in races longer than 5km.

However the "Rules for Competition" do not actually state the age groupings as such that an individual race organiser must use for his junior races. Whatever the groupings, the organiser will not break the Rules as long as the race distances are set such that the youngest runner in any race does not exceed the maximum distance allowed (as defined by the runner's age on Jan. 1st).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eleanor

Okay I thought I got it, now I'm confused.

If a Junior runner enters an FRA event during 2012, then they must enter the age category based on their age on 1/1/2012. Is that true?

---

Here, here. Me too, I thought I had it, simples, like you say. As a simple muppet relatively new to FRA rules, and certainly to the Junior scene in 2011, that is exactly how I have read it, Eleanor, till reading this thread. So, (said tentatively, not wanting to be confused); my daughter who turns 8 in Feb-2012 and ran in one or two U8 FRA events in 2011, will still be eligible for U8 races in 2012 (as she was 7 on 1st Jan 2012), and she (nay I!) must be careful - later at any time in 2012 when she turns 8 - not to try and enter her in a race distance judged to be too long for someone who is classed as an U8 (such as a U10 race which is >1km and< 2km), since she was not 8 or over on 1-1-12. But, this is the confusing bit, having read the last few posts; if a particular 'advertised minimum age 8' race has a distance of <1 km, then, when she is 8 after Feb, would she (or would she not?) be OK to run that particular 'advertised' race, along with U10s, given that the distance itself didn't break the U8 distance rule? Is this the subtlety WP is getting at, or am I just getting more confued?
PS - I understand the U18/18 'overlap' - as you stop being a junior when you get to 18 birthday.
PPS - and the over 6 rule - you have to be over 6 on the day of the race. That still applies doesn't it, as my youngest just turned 6 in Oct (and only became eligible for U8 on 01-01-12). So my 6 year old and 7 nearly 8 year old can / should both run U8 in 2012.
PPPS - but of course the new forms will trap all this, (stop any confusion) will they?!?

Thanks FJ - Simples, like Eleanor and I both thought. A nice simple user-friendly calculator with easy to follow input / output too.
Two simple rules to follow, with a little quirky overlap for when you turn a big-un at 18.
So, we just need us all (competitors, guardians, ROs, etc) to follow the 2 rules, in 'race-ads / design' as well as 'race-entry'. What could be simpler?;)

[quote]The rules which apply to junior fell running are, for good reasons, not necessarily the same as for other disciplines (XC/ Track/Road) but they are clear.[Quote]

"For good reasons." What good reasons are those, Graham? The danger in fell running according to Richard Askwith is in the blood and sheer slices of mountain danger, an idea that you, I suspect as much as I, don't buy in to.

By "good reasons" I assume you mean that the insurance premiums go up?

I feel our sport will lack credibility as juniors are excluded from participating in events they could do well in.

I accept, however the insurance company will win every time. Which I think is the real point here?

Chris Smale

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FellJunior

The answers are:
Your daughter must run no further than the U8 maximum distance in 2012 in FRA sanctioned races.
Your youngest is eligible to run U8 (distance) races in 2012 and 2013. Minimum 6 on the day of the race is still in force.

The forms are not new as such, but imposing their use hopefully will encourage the right questions to be asked at race registration, which hasn't always happened.
The two eligibility questions are:
1) Age on 1st January this year?
2) Maximum distance for the age group defined by 1)?
If you are still unsure try the age group calculator at www.felljunior.org.uk/FRAJunior on the 'Rules' tab.

---

I think you'll find that's wrong FJ ;)

In 2013 she will be an U10 by my calculation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FellJunior

As WP pointed out there is an overlap when runners reach their 18th birthday.

---

I think you will find that it was Graham who pointed that out. I did ask Graham to identify where it states in the rules that you become a senior when you turn 18. I'm still awaiting the guidance, but there's time yet ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Witton Park

I think you'll find that's wrong FJ ;)

In 2013 she will be an U10 by my calculation.

---

My youngest (Oct b'day, and 6 on 1-1-12) will be U8 in 2012 and and also in 2013 (7 on 1-1-13) as FJ says.
My 7 year old (8 in Feb 2012) will be U8 in 2012 as FJ says, but U10 in 2013 (8 on 1-1-13) as FJ doesn't explicitly say, but intimates.
[aside - but my 7 year old will still be U9 in Tameside school XC running further distances than in FRA, but what has that got to do with FRA....]
I dont think I need the calculator now to work it out and I haven't checked. :w00t:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Witton Park

I think you will find that it was Graham who pointed that out. I did ask Graham to identify where it states in the rules that you become a senior when you turn 18. I'm still awaiting the guidance, but there's time yet ;)

---

Aye, fair point. Maybe it's in the small print :) - or perhaps embeded in Rule 1? - I'll look it up in 10 years time - it might be clearer then :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OB1

My youngest (Oct b'day, and 6 on 1-1-12) will be U8 in 2012 and and also in 2013 (7 on 1-1-13) as FJ says.
My 7 year old (8 in Feb 2012) will be U8 in 2012 as FJ says, but U10 in 2013 (8 on 1-1-13) as FJ doesn't explicitly say, but intimates.
[aside - but my 7 year old will still be U9 in Tameside school XC running further distances than in FRA, but what has that got to do with FRA....]
I dont think I need the calculator now to work it out and I haven't checked. :w00t:

---

Looks like you're due an apology Jim - Sorry :o

A long drive back from Oban, via Lochgilphead and Largs lead me to miss the "youngest" reference :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OB1

Aye, fair point. Maybe it's in the small print :) - or perhaps embeded in Rule 1? - I'll look it up in 10 years time - it might be clearer then :D

---

OB1 - it's a significant point. I'm one of a minority in the sport who has spent time trying to get my head around the rules. Not just FRA Rules, but the UKA Rules which are extremely complex when you get in to issues such as competition year and junior age groups and how that can vary whether you are talking track, road or cross country.
The FRA rules are better and clearer than UKA, but still not as clear as they should be as evidenced by this.

When a race in the Calendar states "Minimum Age 16" there is a significant likelyhood that this information, published in the FRA calendar and on the website is inaccurate and could lead to an athlete entering the race ignorant of that fact.

Should we really be considering holding athletes and clubs responsible if the rule makers who govern the sport have allowed errors / inconsistency to creep in to the information that they put out?
I would suggest not.

Graham refers to the reporting of incidents to UKA as they are the ultimate governing body now. But UKA actively encourage breaches of their own rules. Park Run is insured under UKA and yet they allow people of any age to take part in a 5K race, yet any individually UKA permitted 5K road race would have minimum age of 14.

My conclusion is, send mixed / unclear messages to the sport and you will get unintentional breaches of the rules.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Witton Park

I did ask Graham to identify where it states in the rules that you become a senior when you turn 18. ;)

---

In its attempt to keep the rules simple, which most members wish, the FRA decided that 99.99% of its members did not actually need a specific Rule, bearing in mind the subservience of the FRA to English Law, spelling out that when you attain the age of 18 you cease to be a junior.

But do you acknowledge the inconsistancy then? We are always dealing with matters of age group on here. We have differing calculations for UKA, FRA and BOFRA so is it any wonder that we get these regular requests for clarification.

Age on 1st January in the year of competition (i.e.not age on race date) is a critical factor.
From your first post.

RULE TEN
Race organisers must stipulate age limits for their events but the following maximum distance limits for
juniors must be observed.
Ages are as at 1st January in the year of competition.
.......
Under 18 - 6 miles (9.6k)

While there may be 'mixed messages', Rule 10 always takes precedence
From Fell Junior

So according to the rules an athlete turning 18 today is unable to take part in a fell race beyond 6 miles as they will be an U18 under the rules. That's what is in the rules.

Once you become 18 on the day you literally cease to be a junior and Rule 10 does not apply.
That's a statement from you Graham, but Rule 10 always takes precedent and it is in breach of rule 10.

In its attempt to keep the rules simple, which most members wish, the FRA decided that 99.99% of its members did not actually need a specific Rule, bearing in mind the subservience of the FRA to English Law, spelling out that when you attain the age of 18 you cease to be a junior.
Rule 10 precedent again - I doubt English Law can touch that ;)

However, if we are going to defer to what the actual legal case may be then we do open a can of worms. Is refusing to allow a 16 year old the right to contest a 8 mile fell race such as Auld Lang Syne a breach of their human rights?
NO I don't want to go there either ;)

(and we still haven't cleared up the anomaly about the Calendar's incorrect race age limits)

Just for further info.

UKA Rule 107(6)
(6) Seniors
A Senior is a competitor who is at least 20 years of age on 31st December
in the calendar year of competition.

This applies to Track and Field, but interesting that it is felt the age at which someone is recognised as a senior is built in to the rules and that it isn't 18.
For Road 207(5) and Cross Country 507(5) states aged at least 20 on 31st August prior to the commencement of the Competition Year as defined above.

Check out UKA Rule 207 for Road Running and I think you'll find a cause of the problem.

UKA Rules have set age bands for championships such as a Northern 10 Road Champs as we had at the RV10K or the Northern Road Relays based on age as at 31st August.
But for Open Road Races it is age on the day of the race.

This seems to have been "accepted" as the way individual open fell races are dealt with - that age on the day of the race is relevant. It is the way it is presented in the FRA Calendar and it is the way that ROs present it in their own race literature and deal with it on the day.

So I underline again that it is up to the governing body to :-
1. Make sure their rules are clear.
2. Police the ROs to ensure that they are clear and declaring the age limits "within the rules".
3. If 1 & 2 are done effectively then any breaches by any individuals should be dealt with appropriately.

Without 1 & 2 being in place effectively, I cannot see how you can pursue point 3.

Richard,

I know you enjoy arguing for the sake of arguing.

I could not care less about BOFRA, road, track, tiddlywinks.

FRA Rules are crystal clear and the principles have not changed for years. People may not actually read them or try to undestand them; but 'twas ever thus.

Regards,

Graham

For Senior events all ages are age on the day of the race. In the case of the Senior British and English Championship races this is stated on pages 100 and 103 respectively.

The details of Rule10 have no relevance to organisers of senior Medium and Long races. All they need to know is that an individual is over 18 on the day of the race and therefore the Senior race entry form does not contain a field for "age on 1st Jan." as the Junior form does.

Moreover the Junior race entry form is unsuitable for anyone over 18 on the day of the race because there is nowhere for the individual to sign and he/she doesn't require a parental signature. As I understand it, parents no longer have any legal responsibility for their children from the age of 18.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Graham Breeze

Richard,

I know you enjoy arguing for the sake of arguing.

I could not care less about BOFRA, road, track, tiddlywinks.

FRA Rules are crystal clear and the principles have not changed for years. People may not actually read them or try to undestand them; but 'twas ever thus.

Regards,

Graham

---

Yes I like a good debate, but on this matter you are totally wrong Graham. I am not arguing for the sake of it. I'm arguing for the sake of athletes that you are threatening with disciplinary action because your rules are unclear.
You may think that is debatable, or there are precedents set, or that Johnny the Shoe Shine boy will clear up any issues for us, but there is clearly in Rule 10 an U18 category and a rule that applies to them that they may not run over 6 miles.
There is no rule that mentions that when they reach the age of 18, they become a senior and rule 10 no longer applies to them.

If there was such a element in the rules that would clear that part up.

The FRA Calendar is publishing information that is contradictory to it's own rules eg. The age limits on races like Bleasdale Circle which state an incorrect minimum age.
Fact.

I'm not picking on Bleasdale for any other reason that I know the race - and it's a great fell race.. There are many others this applies to.

You seem to like clarity. I would have thought you would have embraced these points and confirmed that :-

1. The FRA will look at Rule 10 and consider amending it to state that on their 18th birthday all athletes become seniors athletes and are entitled to race on the basis of age on day of the race, whilst still retaining their U18 age category for certain Championship or individual races where that age category applies.

2. The way that age limits are declared in the calendar (and therefore the way ROs submit their information) will be looked at to ensure that an athlete cannot end up by accident in a race they are not eligible for.
eg. Bleasdale should say "Minimum Age Category U18" or "Minimum Age 16 on 1/1 of the event year" - and not Minimum Age 16.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Witton Park

Yes I like a good debate, but on this matter you are totally wrong Graham. I am not arguing for the sake of it. I'm arguing for the sake of athletes that you are threatening with disciplinary action because your rules are unclear.
You may think that is debatable, or there are precedents set, or that Johnny the Shoe Shine boy will clear up any issues for us, but there is clearly in Rule 10 an U18 category and a rule that applies to them that they may not run over 6 miles.
There is no rule that mentions that when they reach the age of 18, they become a senior and rule 10 no longer applies to them.

If there was such a element in the rules that would clear that part up.

The FRA Calendar is publishing information that is contradictory to it's own rules eg. The age limits on races like Bleasdale Circle which state an incorrect minimum age.
Fact.

I'm not picking on Bleasdale for any other reason that I know the race - and it's a great fell race.. There are many others this applies to.

You seem to like clarity. I would have thought you would have embraced these points and confirmed that :-

1. The FRA will look at Rule 10 and consider amending it to state that on their 18th birthday all athletes become seniors athletes and are entitled to race on the basis of age on day of the race, whilst still retaining their U18 age category for certain Championship or individual races where that age category applies.

2. The way that age limits are declared in the calendar (and therefore the way ROs submit their information) will be looked at to ensure that an athlete cannot end up by accident in a race they are not eligible for.
eg. Bleasdale should say "Minimum Age Category U18" or "Minimum Age 16 on 1/1 of the event year" - and not Minimum Age 16.

---

Frankly the prospect of an 18 1/2 year old man (because that is what he is in law) turning up at a fell race and being turned away by the RO or he himself doubting that he was eligible because he wasn't 18 on 1.1.XX (and hadn't checked before setting out) is beyond my comprehension and my knowledge of 25 years of fell racing but if you believe the rules need yet another rule then I will raise your suggestion with the FRA Committee.

And I repeat. These rules have not changed.

I note your second point but at present the future and format of the FRA Calendar is uncertain (as you will see in the next Fellrunner).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Graham Breeze

Frankly the prospect of an 18 1/2 year old man (because that is what he is in law) turning up at a fell race and being turned away by the RO or he himself doubting that he was eligible because he wasn't 18 on 1.1.XX (and hadn't checked before setting out) is beyond my comprehension and my knowledge of 25 years of fell racing but if you believe the rules need yet another rule then I will raise your suggestion with the FRA Committee.

And I repeat. These rules have not changed.

I note your second point but at present the future and format of the FRA Calendar is uncertain (as you will see in the next Fellrunner).

---

The 18 year old rule is clearly taken as a given, but considering that the FRAs overlords :w00t: at UKA feel it appropriate to stipulate when the junior becomes a senior then I think it would be a good idea for the FRA to follow suit.

There's also insurance to consider - as if someone 18 in March, runs in the PPP and has an accident that leads to the insurance being involved, will the insurance question why he is running as under the rules he is an U18.

Perhaps not, but when our esteemed Chairman starts threatening action against rule breaches then we need to make certain that those rules are watertight and consistent.

I've been watching this thread and trying to stay out but...

Those of us who coach juniors and are club officials (WP and me are both) know that the biggest problem is parents rather than clubs or club coaches. I have stressed to parents a number of times that they shouldn't enter their children in incorrect age groups or totally underage. However they still do so and if blocked by the organiser then the kids still start but without numbers. Therefore I hope that the Club/coach isn't disciplined in these circumstances.

What I would like to see is a review of the distances because I do feel that some experienced (mainly male) runners aged 16 or 17 are perfectly capable of running some races over 6 miles. However there are also races that are close to the maximum limit for age that are very tough for kids at the lower end of the age range (an example is my daughter who found one FRA champs U18 race very tough and was distressed at the end, this race had an extra loop, in my mind purely to get the distance in). In practice we would all agree that if an individual is known to the organiser then allowing them to race underage is not a problem for the athlete but is very difficult on the insurance front.

Given that this is so controversial could the committee review and ideally have some scientific basis behind it. Possibilities include dropping the age limit to 17 for medium races etc.

I don't need a detailed argument on here but is this something that could be discussed in the normal circles?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wycoller

I've been watching this thread and trying to stay out but...

Those of us who coach juniors and are club officials (WP and me are both) know that the biggest problem is parents rather than clubs or club coaches. I have stressed to parents a number of times that they shouldn't enter their children in incorrect age groups or totally underage. However they still do so and if blocked by the organiser then the kids still start but without numbers. Therefore I hope that the Club/coach isn't disciplined in these circumstances.

What I would like to see is a review of the distances because I do feel that some experienced (mainly male) runners aged 16 or 17 are perfectly capable of running some races over 6 miles. However there are also races that are close to the maximum limit for age that are very tough for kids at the lower end of the age range (an example is my daughter who found one FRA champs U18 race very tough and was distressed at the end, this race had an extra loop, in my mind purely to get the distance in). In practice we would all agree that if an individual is known to the organiser then allowing them to race underage is not a problem for the athlete but is very difficult on the insurance front.

Given that this is so controversial could the committee review and ideally have some scientific basis behind it. Possibilities include dropping the age limit to 17 for medium races etc.

I don't need a detailed argument on here but is this something that could be discussed in the normal circles?

---

I would advise you to talk to Duncan some time. As it is the FRA is fighting to keep control of its own junior distance rules for fell running and not be swept up under a road/XC/track consistency as the blazers would wish.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Graham Breeze

I would advise you to talk to Duncan some time. As it is the FRA is fighting to keep control of its own junior distance rules for fell running and not be swept up under a road/XC/track consistency as the blazers would wish.

---

I never thought there was any such thing as road/XC/track consistency actually! Anway, I'll not start on this as you've already said that it doesn't interest you ;)

Suffice it to say I am sure that the FRA could always break it's link with UKA/EA if it was felt that they were meddling where they were not welcome.

Hi Wycoller
Yes I think you are right, many 16 & 17 yr olds do have the capability to race over 6 miles comfortably, one lad I know has a 33 minute 10k road pb, and distances is something myself & several others are looking at right now. We are getting as much decent research based material as we can in terms of the physiological and psychological demands made upon young runners.

But as you say, we have to take into account that we are seeking to encourage fell running for all juniors as well as testing them. The fact that your daughter was distressed is a classic example getting the balance right between challenging the best runners & encouraging everyone else to stay in the sport through having an enjoyable experince, building strength, capability and capacity over time. There is also often a huge difference between chronological age & biological age as Im sure you know.

Also, if the races distances were extended, a probable side effect would be increased training volumes to compete well at these distances and I know of 5 young runners currently out with some form of Osgood Schlatters. The feedback Ive got from them is training volumes increased were too fast, not allowing decent time for adaptation. Juniors can be very highly motivated and very willing to push hard and please/impress coaches/parents, so again I feel we have to balance the messages about committment & a hard work ethic with a longer term development approach.

But I'm not a physiologist, hence the discussions with various universities, seeking decent appropriate reasearch papers and thinking about the implications of a change beyond the race itself. And of course, distance is but one component of a fell race, the ascent and particularly the loading on young joints of steep, speedy descents is an aspect that hardly applies to a track 3000m or a 5k road race.

However, as I say, I am thinking about race distances and I always welcome thoughts & feedback on anything that will improve the overall experience for all juniors. At the last junior do on the U18 trophy the past winners made intersting reading, not many still running/racing that we could see.

Duncan

Wow, a bit of reading and catching up to do here in the last 24 hrs - ended up burning friday's Pizza (OH not happy!)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Graham Breeze

In its attempt to keep the rules simple, which most members wish, the FRA decided that 99.99% of its members did not actually need a specific Rule, bearing in mind the subservience of the FRA to English Law, spelling out that when you attain the age of 18 you cease to be a junior.

---

So, maybe we dont have to worry too much until FRA membership breaches 10,000, cos statistically ?!? (OK thats another thread..:D) until then we dont need a specific rule on this cos (until then) only <1 person actually needs it. :sneaky: However, the anecdotal evidence on this thread, for whatever reason, perhaps (?) could be interpreted, as suggesting otherwise.;)

PS. All's well, pizza consumed, as part of carbo-loading for Trigger...and 2012 U8s...

In reply to Fell Junior, the point I was making was that one has to accept the demands of insurance companies. I kind of dismissed the idea that our sport would want to be setting limits on the distances young people ran but it seems you think it should.

I write as one who did a Marathon in 1976 at age 13 years and one day.

It is unfortunate that, whereas in 1976 you could have expected moderately healthy children to run relatively long distances, perhaps you cannot do so now.

What children do badly is short, explosive type events.

It is probably best discussed on a different thread. I respect the insurance issue in so far as it concerns our sport. I only disagree if you are saying there is a physiological basis for it.

Chris Smale

Sorry if this seems like the bleeding obvious by I want to be sure, as I'm advising my club parents on entering races this year. When we say that age categories for FRA Junior races refer to the child's age on 1st Jan in 2012, does this include every event that is listed in the FRA calendar, or just those in the FRA Junior Champs? I'm assuming all events in the calendar, but want to be certain. And a second silly question. If an event is listed on the FRA website events listing, then by definition that event is covered by FRA rules?

Eleanor, bless you, but you've gone and shown them the chinks in our armour, the 'battle' will start again at dawn....I'd better get some sleep....And here was me thinking we'd got it sorted, home and dry.:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eleanor

Sorry if this seems like the bleeding obvious by I want to be sure, as I'm advising my club parents on entering races this year. When we say that age categories for FRA Junior races refer to the child's age on 1st Jan in 2012, does this include every event that is listed in the FRA calendar, or just those in the FRA Junior Champs? I'm assuming all events in the calendar, but want to be certain. And a second silly question. If an event is listed on the FRA website events listing, then by definition that event is covered by FRA rules?

---

Eleanor - I have to agree with OB1 - it looks like you've just crushed some of Graham's dreams :D

Wonderful :thumbup:

Time for another single malt :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eleanor

If an event is listed on the FRA website events listing, then by definition that event is covered by FRA rules?

---

Only events which have their race Permits (and associated UK Athletics insurance) provided by the FRA are run under FRA rules. This includes almost all the events listed in the FRA Calendar which take place in Engand and none of those in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales.

In the printed Calendar those events Permitted by the FRA have "(R)" after the name of the race. The website Calendar also indicates such races.

However the majority of events included in the FRA Calendar but Permitted by bodies other than the FRA are run under identical or very similar rules to the FRA ones.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eleanor

Sorry if this seems like the bleeding obvious by I want to be sure, as I'm advising my club parents on entering races this year. When we say that age categories for FRA Junior races refer to the child's age on 1st Jan in 2012, does this include every event that is listed in the FRA calendar, or just those in the FRA Junior Champs? I'm assuming all events in the calendar, but want to be certain. And a second silly question. If an event is listed on the FRA website events listing, then by definition that event is covered by FRA rules?

---

Eleanor

If a race is listed in the Calendar with an "R" it is Permitted and Insured through the FRA. (see page 11). Some races, eg in Scotland, would not be.

Every RO who seeks a Permitted listing in the Calendar signs an agreement that he will comply with FRA Rules.

Every competitor agrees, if they use the FRA entry form pp16-18, and not the back of an envelope, to comply with FRA Rules.

(This begs the question of whether or not RO who do not use the FRA race entry form breach the FRA Rules but it is very late...)

Fell running is very simple. I understand it. And I, or Jim or Duncan or Margaret will be delighted to answer any questions that you have.

Graham

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Graham Breeze

Eleanor

And I, or Jim or Duncan or Margaret will be delighted to answer any questions that you have.

Graham

---

But would prefer to side-step them if they are tricky ones ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Witton Park

But would prefer to side-step them if they are tricky ones ;)

---

and of course I exempt Duncan from that who I know 100% to play with a straight bat :D

I did think the others did as well, but they are certainly making me question that of late :/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Graham Breeze

If a race is listed in the Calendar with an "R" it is Permitted and Insured through the FRA. (see page 11). Some races, eg in Scotland, would not be.

---

Graham, thanks. I thought so but started to doubt myself. It's my first season officially advising parents and this thread has reminded me that I could drop myself and my club into trouble if I don't get my facts right. I really, really want to get the Ambleside juniors into fell races, and I really, really do not want to get bogged down and / or blamed for misdemeanours. I'm not trying to pick holes in any rules, I just hadn't engaged with these particular ones before. It's enough to get my head round learning to BE a coach and the Level 2 coaching assessments, and if anyone thinks of something else I ought to know but might not, please post it here, as long as you then don't mind me asking stupid questions.

And if you see the Ambleside team at any Junior events, do shout them (and me) some encouragement, as now you know we are new to it!

Just be careful with ages though especially where you live. I believe Ambleside Sports is age at date of first Bofra race normally around 20th May because it is under Bofra rules. Grasmere is age on day because that is what they have always done (as is Kilnsey). Bofra seniors also start at 17 rather than 18 for FRA races.

The age groups aren't always consistent either. This mix of ages in non FRA races is useful because it does mean that they can run some races against different kids. In swimming most of the national age group swimmers have birthdays (I believe) that make them within 4 months of the oldest they can be. The youngest ones never really progress and drop out before they come out of the tight age group categories.

Happy to be consulted - had a quick chat to WP on the start line of a race today. It's a very tricky subject hence why I wondered if there is any science that could be bought into play. My own experience is that you need to be very careful with distance in under 16s but perhaps there may be some scope with 16 and 17 year olds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wycoller

Just be careful with ages though especially where you live. I believe Ambleside Sports is age at date of first Bofra race normally around 20th May because it is under Bofra rules. Grasmere is age on day because that is what they have always done (as is Kilnsey). Bofra seniors also start at 17 rather than 18 for FRA races.

The age groups aren't always consistent either. This mix of ages in non FRA races is useful because it does mean that they can run some races against different kids.

---

Yes you are absolutely right - and it's making a bit of a nightmare out of deciding on events for a Junior Club Championships within our club! If the 'age on day' rule applies and / or age groups are different in some races (u8; u10; u12 vs. U9; U12) then it mucks up scoring points against each other, UNLESS as in many races, they set off all the U12 categories at the same time over the same course. But I don't know all the junior events well enough, to know which do that, and which run different courses. All good fun!