Quote Originally Posted by OB1 View Post
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
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.