DQ the cheats

[IanDarkpeak]

Ian,

The Rules are UKA rules. The FRA will not allow discretion because everyone claims to be a "special case". The FRA view is on page 8 of the Summer Fellrunner.

We appreciate the difficulty a RO may have and we know of cases where the junior lied about his age on the entry form, or persuaded the RO to let him run and we have contacted ROs in the past warning them of the need to be vigilant. A sanction against a RO could include the FRA refusing the race insurance and excluding all his/her events from future Calendars.

GB

Ok fair comment, I can see the logic in that.

[Clash City Rocker]

Interesting this one, I would say that if a junior and parent deliberately hid the facts from the RO then I agree with Graham whole heartedly.

But is there a case for some discretion where a top junior approaches a RO with parental consent and ask's permission laying all the facts and experience before him/her? How else do they gain experience in harder races. I can think of 3 or 4 juniors in the peak who are more than capable of racing 20+ miles, one did a bg Last year and another has run the 50 mile boundary run since he was 14.

yet another was allowed to run round a medium but not enter the race, he would have come in the top 10 had he been allowed to enter.

I certainly see the point of protecting the youth from harm and parental pressure, just wondered what the thoughts are from Graham and the youth coaches out there, Discuss

IDP I am with GB on this as history will show a succession of juniors approaching whatever the next age limit pleading their own inborn uniqueness to be able to run ever increasing distances better than anyone else ever has. History does not however detail their steady progression from successful juniors to successful senior very often. Why because in the words of the Specials they have "done too much much too young" and are burned out and knackered. As coaches of juniors we have a responsibility to protect them from their biggest danger - themselves (excluding pushy parents as thats a given). I have no problem with juniors training over longer distances within reason (I would question what a 50 mile boundary run is doing to someones body as they develop) and indeed would seek to build this into plans where appropriate as there is a different purpose to this and its not done at race pace so is less likely to be harmful.

[FellJunior]

I have been involved in a few of this year's transgressions; some unintentional through ignorance of the 1st January rule by competitor and/or RO (which is no defence of course), and one quite deliberate as referred to by Graham. By various means, RO of championship races and their registration teams are being reminded of the age qualification and distance limits rules, and the need to check date of birth, rather than just accept an entry for a particular age group. Many adults accompanying young runners at races assume that, as for seniors, 'age on the day' is the determining factor.

Sharp eyed readers of the Pennine Bridleway Relay rules may have noticed that the definition of minimum age for the under 6 mile leg 4 is now quite explicit, and refers to the UKA rules. As elsewhere there should be no excuses for entering under age runners. If this is the lengths that RO have to go to, then so be it.

However this year, I have been asked by more than one parent, why they cannot sign a disclaimer for senior races to 'let the RO off the hook' in the event of an incident involving their under age child. This fails to recognise that a third party can bring an action against an RO in a court of law, and demonstrates a disturbing ignorance of how the law can be applied, over and above any UKA rules or bits of paper.

[IainR]

I agree with FJ.. we were warned about this when we allowed under 18's on our evening runs, even though the parents consented, we were actually warned that should an accident happen a third party, for example their school, could come after us. We allowed them along, but a training run is less formal than a race and they were never left unattended... well we did lose one of them once... but not for long...

[fozzy]

I agree with FJ.. we were warned about this when we allowed under 18's on our evening runs, even though the parents consented, we were actually warned that should an accident happen a third party, for example their school, could come after us. We allowed them along, but a training run is less formal than a race and they were never left unattended... well we did lose one of them once... but not for long...

Good Grief! Stop the Press. I think we've finally found something that we all agree on! :wink:

[Witton Park]

It's also fair to say that if you allow someone in a race under age, after they have signed a disclaimer, as an RO what would happen then if that under age child caused an injury to another runner.
I could see the RO in deep water there, having already signed up to the Safety Requirements that dictate the accepted age limits.

However, with my other hat firmly on, there is ample evidence that some of the race limits, not just for fell, but for endurance runners progressing through their teens are ill judged.

A young endurance runner of say 14 would be far less likely to come to any grief in say a 4 mile trail race such as they have in Astley Park Chorley, than in a sprint hurdles race.
I also often see 10K race where they have age limit at 16 or 17, when UKA rules state 15.

I actually think that fell running gets it about right with the age and distances. But the closest comparison is XC - our U13 Girls are running around 2.5km / 1.5 mile cross country races in flat parks and yet can run up to 3 miles on fell terrain a U14s.

[Graham Breeze]

It's also fair to say that if you allow someone in a race under age, after they have signed a disclaimer, as an RO what would happen then if that under age child caused an injury to another runner.
I could see the RO in deep water there, having already signed up to the Safety Requirements that dictate the accepted age limits.

However, with my other hat firmly on, there is ample evidence that some of the race limits, not just for fell, but for endurance runners progressing through their teens are ill judged.

A young endurance runner of say 14 would be far less likely to come to any grief in say a 4 mile trail race such as they have in Astley Park Chorley, than in a sprint hurdles race.
I also often see 10K race where they have age limit at 16 or 17, when UKA rules state 15.

I actually think that fell running gets it about right with the age and distances. But the closest comparison is XC - our U13 Girls are running around 2.5km / 1.5 mile cross country races in flat parks and yet can run up to 3 miles on fell terrain a U14s.

Two points:

1. I believe UKA are currently considering age/distance limits. I think the FRA will comment on the differences between, say, a fell race and a road race ie "apples and oranges".


2. "Hard cases make bad law" as in "Ian Holmes ran a marathon when he was 16 or something and it didn't do him any harm". Well, maybe not, but there is only one Ian Holmes, hindsight is always 20:20 and we can only have one rule. Not one rule for the weak and another for prodigies.

[Witton Park]

Two points:

1. I believe UKA are currently considering age/distance limits. I think the FRA will comment on the differences between, say, a fell race and a road race ie "apples and oranges".


2. "Hard cases make bad law" as in "Ian Holmes ran a marathon when he was 16 or something and it didn't do him any harm". Well, maybe not, but there is only one Ian Holmes, hindsight is always 20:20 and we can only have one rule. Not one rule for the weak and another for prodigies.

I agree on the above points. What I would say is that we treat our young endurance runners with kid gloves in T&F and Cross Country. Talking to an old grandee of endurance running who coaches and has a sub 4 mile to his name, he thinks 1 track session a week up to U15, a bit of grass work and some drills is all that's needed.
He will talk of burnout, over-training injuries etc, but he only has a couple of adult athletes.

Back to fell specific, ROs have to take the ultimate responsibility, but clubs, coaches and parents have to bear their part.

I had my first taste of the Bunny Runs last year and will be back again - great event, great fun and the juniors that went over thoroughly enjoyed it.

But I know there were U10s in the races at times and certainly quite a few U12s. I nearly fell over some of them as they had a tendency to sprint off and then die a death after 150m as we hit the narrow climb.
Whether Dave knew, I don't know, but parents knew, coaches knew and they are all compromising the RO, the athlete who is too young and the safety of all the other athletes who have to be wary of youngsters who are sometimes below waist height to them.

How would the Mum or Dad of a 9 year old reacted had I tripped over them and knocked them head first in to a rock?

[Sara]

I agree on the above points. What I would say is that we treat our young endurance runners with kid gloves in T&F and Cross Country. Talking to an old grandee of endurance running who coaches and has a sub 4 mile to his name, he thinks 1 track session a week up to U15, a bit of grass work and some drills is all that's needed.
He will talk of burnout, over-training injuries etc, but he only has a couple of adult athletes.

Back to fell specific, ROs have to take the ultimate responsibility, but clubs, coaches and parents have to bear their part.

I had my first taste of the Bunny Runs last year and will be back again - great event, great fun and the juniors that went over thoroughly enjoyed it.

But I know there were U10s in the races at times and certainly quite a few U12s. I nearly fell over some of them as they had a tendency to sprint off and then die a death after 150m as we hit the narrow climb.
Whether Dave knew, I don't know, but parents knew, coaches knew and they are all compromising the RO, the athlete who is too young and the safety of all the other athletes who have to be wary of youngsters who are sometimes below waist height to them.

How would the Mum or Dad of a 9 year old reacted had I tripped over them and knocked them head first in to a rock?

Well not themselves because they are are responsible parents and not their little darling, obviously, and not Dave 'cos he walks on water.

That leaves just you Richard.

[Witton Park]

Well not themselves because they are are responsible parents and not their little darling, obviously, and not Dave 'cos he walks on water.

That leaves just you Richard.

I'm afraid you'll have to explain yourself here - your statement doesn't make any sense - well what not themselves?