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.Originally Posted by Graham Breeze
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.
Reply With Quote