Age limits

[Witton Park]

Let me give you an example.

This year FRA Champs Pendle, happens to be an Open race and also the Lancs Fell Champs.

2012
U12 Race is 3km Open, Lancs Champs and FRA Champs age on 1st Jan. Very straight forward as we all work to the same date.

Under the new rules his U12 Race age on day still is 3K. The only real difference it makes to David at Pendle is the calculation, that some current U10s with DOB between Jan 1st and race day will become U12s.

When I come along with my Lancs Champs, I will have to adopt those age groups. I can live with that as long as David allows me to piggy-back Pendle as other than those with birthdays around the first week of April, birthdays will be consistent each year. So Lancs Champs races will still be a 2 year progression.
My problem comes if David says he can't host for me and I have to look for another race - perhaps Darwen in August as we are not awash with Fell races for juniors that I can use as an option.
Then I could have runners with birthdays in that April - August period staying in the same age category for 3 years.

That is further complicated when Duncan approaches Pendle, as David has to make the race accommodate the FRA Champs 1st Jan requirements.

So when David permits this existing race how does he do it? It will be really interesting to see the paperwork for the RO and the entry forms.

I think when you start to get your heads around that, the penny may drop.

[Witton Park]

Under current rules, I have an U14 athlete going to the Hellifield Gala at the weekend. Can they chose to run in the U12 race? If not, why?

[Witton Park]

Yes Jim, I understand all that, but when you set maximum race distances for specified age groups, you establish a format. You only need to look at FRA Junior fell races across the calendar and the vast majority work to the current age bands ie exactly the same as FRA Champs.
I'm not aware of any that run as U13/U15 etc

That makes life fairly easy for the Jnr Co-ordinator to link in to existing races to put a series together. He approaches a race and they do not need to change their format, other than making preparations for the bigger fields they are likely to get.

Now that isn't so easy.

We'll see in practise won't we.

Just to clarify one thing. There isn't any vested interest in this for me (other than my concern about selecting races for County Champs). My athletes compete almost only in the FRA Series, County and Inter Counties and International trials.
So we aren't involved in some of the series / mini-leagues as I prefer them to have a mix of events rather than fell, fell, fell...

I am looking at it from the perspective of RO, parent, athlete and administrator.

We had a simple system, understood by all in Junior Fell and easily explained to those coming in new. That system was almost universal amongst FRA sanctioned races.

Now, as you can see by some of the "explanations" we will have 2 types of age qualification, and we will even have races in which the way the age is calculated will change from year to year.

That is further complication, which I think will lead to confusion, and I still haven't seen a convincing case made for the change.

[Witton Park]

For FRA Fell Races, the minimum age for competition is six years, and the following distance limits must
be applied.
Under 8 - 1 kilometre
Under 10 - 2 kilometres
Under 12 - 3 kilometres
Under 14 - 5 kilometres
Under 16 - 7 kilometres
Under 18 - 10 kilometres

That might not be setting out rules governing age groups for the sport, but it identifies distance criteria for "specified age groups"

That's not false, untrue, or misleading - it's a fact. The distance rules apply to age groups tiered at 2 year intervals.

Incidentally, do you think that Duncan is planning to incorporate the Charlesworth Carnival in to the series? I doubt it is even on his radar. Looking at the format it would be extremely difficult because it operates to it's own set of age groupings.

[Witton Park]

By the way Jim, are you for or against this rule change?

[Clash City Rocker]

Enough discussion heres the solution. We had something that worked and worked well yet proposed changes have caused potential disruption to the equilibrium. For ALL races organised as junior races and therefore compliant with distance guidelines juniors should race in the age category that is defined by their age as of Jan 1st ie things stay the same. However for a race that is organised as an open (senior) race for which juniors are allowed to take part providing the distances are Ok the n they should enter depending on their age on the day of the race.
Everyones happy. Thank you.

[Will_B]

Just seen the announcement on the front page and don't understand what was so difficult to understand about the old rules, I understand its a bit unfair and therefore difficult to understand in principle, but confusing to work out? Not really

[Hobbsy]

The front page cites 'unprecendented problems with underage competitors' as being the reason for the rule change! Absolute tosh - what is so difficult about age on 1st January? Every other junior sport has a cut-off point at which you change age-group, be it Football, Rugby, Cricket etc etc.
We now have a situation where kids will change age-groups during the year, except for the English Championships. What about clubs' own championships? Unless we only include the English Champ races, how on earth are we supposed to have a competition for specific age-groups, if kids will potentially change during the year?!
If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

[Witton Park]

This proposed rule change is ill thought out. The only people "welcoming it" whether on here, via email, or verbally seem to be a few of the FRA Committee. It was passed to MRAG OK, but when faced with a proposal like this from the FRA I doubt that MRAG would have sufficient background and strong views on junior fell running to be able to examine it properly.

It is a very political move. It stems from rules breaches and it seems to me that the committee don't want to deal with them.

Age group rule breaches such as U10 & U12 athletes running at the Bunny's, despite Dave having done all he can to prevent it as RO, are down to a combination of :-
1. kids wanting to race even though they know they are too young.
2. Parents letting them - in fact supporting them and signing off the entry form.
3. Clubs turning a blind eye to it.

I have asked how this change to the rules will help such as Dave avoid under age athletes taking part. Truth is, it won't.

Truth is, they are wantonly breaching the rules and that should be dealt with by the disciplinary committee.

My advise to such as Dave would be to ban entries from clubs who have had under age athletes run. That will force the clubs hands and avoids singling out a 10 year old kid who shouldn't have been put in the race anyway.

Anyway, everyone knows what I think.

It's about time the junior committee was constituted properly, had representation on the full FRA committee and that rules applying to juniors could not go through unless passed by both Jnr and Snr FRA committees before being passed on through the chain.

[Witton Park]

Rule 10 (UKA 410) defines maximum distance limits; it does not and never has defined age groups. Historically, it has been convenient to link the 2 definitions, but nothing more. There are several races in the calendar, which use different age groupings and qualifying dates to suit local circumstances and requirements, but they still comply with Rule 10 and will continue to do so.
RO are and always have been free to use any criteria to define age groups for their races, provided the youngest runner does not exceed their maximum distance. Therefore there is no need to change the format of any junior race and in particular the qualifying date for age group definitions. However, in future it will be easier at registration for senior races to check eligibility of junior runners - "how old are you today?"
Bottom line - nothing changes for junior races or series, no ambiguity at senior races shorter than 10Km.

so are you in favour of the change Jim?