The first weekly installment of Official's Corner Mondays. In this new editorial feature, MileStat will critique and examine all sides of certain rules in track and field.
Photo By: Patty Morgan
Let me start off by giving my credentials. I am national level USATF certified official. I have officiated for close to six years now and have officiated meets in Maryland, DC, Virginia, and Kentucky. My specialties have and continue to be the high jump and finish line of which I have officiated at all levels. Though I have been an official, I have also been a coach, athlete, and supporter of the sport for many years and come to the table with a variety of opinions and views on certain rules... this is my view and attempt to show both sides of the story. What is to follow is 100% opinion and meant as an editorial piece.
My opinion is good and all but what is important to me is hearing what everyone else's opinion is. To do that, comment below or tweet @MileStatdotcom using the #OCMONDAYS
Photo by Mary Ann Magnant
There is one rule in track and field, well implementation of a rule that I have yet to fully grasp. This rule or ruling is not allowing athletes to compete in multiple events between jumps in the vertical, mainly high, jumps. By this I mean at most meets, that I have ever been associated with, that if your athlete, John Doe, was competing in another event such as the 200m dash he would have to check out and come back at the new height. This makes zero sense to me as a coach and official. I believe that officials and coaches are there to facilitate the competition not to limit it. Don't get me wrong I love when a meet runs efficiently and is over by 4pm but honestly I am there to work not to cut corners. This of course is not to say anyone is doing anything wrong, I am very appreciative of the hard work meet directors, coaches, and officials do.
For those that are lost, let's take a step back. In the high jump there is a rule that states the cross bar may never come back down (unless in a jump off) for a competitor to clear a height. Once all competitors have attempted a height the bar moves up and never down. This makes the event unique and take precedence over events like the long and triple jump where a competitor can go do another event come back and still be on a level playing field. That is not the case in high jump because the way things are now is that if an athlete leaves and doesn't get back until after their event they must jump at whatever height the bar has been moved to.
Photo by: Jon Fleming
Here is a common scenario. John Doe is competing in the high jump, he clears 6'0" but has to run the 300m hurdles. He checks out of the event, runs the hurdles, has a few minutes (sometimes less depending on the officials) and then must come in at whatever height the is bar at, let's say the bar is now at 6'6". John just cleared 6' and likely would have cleared a school record 6'2" but now he has little chance of making a 6" pr after running that grueling event. The reason behind not waiting is two-fold. One, coaches and officials want the event to be run as fast and effeciantly as possible, they want to be done with it sooner more then later, and there is nothing wrong with that. Two, it is considered unfair by many to make the other athletes, let's say the other four who cleared 6' to wait at 6'2" until John came back.
I would be lying if I didn't partially agree with both sides of the argument. But here is my problem, the officials and meet staff are there for the athetes not vice-a-versa. An athlete should not be penalized for being such a good athlete that they can qualify in multiple events, and yes that is penalizing them. Not allowing John his fair chance at the very next height is robbing him of an opportunity. Having athletes sit around and wait is not unfair at all, because everyone else would wait for them too. It is silly in my mind to try and make a meet shorter by installing this judgement made by meet management, games committee.
So now that you obviously know I have issues with this rule, here is how I mitigate it, and I definitely have faced adversity with it. When I start the event I explain all the rules to both the coaches and athletes, this is after I have checked with the games committee to make sure these will not be overruled. I tell them that you may check out only for running events, vertical jumps take precendence over horizontal jumps because you can go out of order in the horizontal jumps. I tell them that you must check out with my me no earlier then second/third call for your event and that you must check back in no more then five minutes after the completion of your running event. That ruling, coupled with a strict 60 seconds to jump and two good bar-tenders has made me never have a competiton run late. It is simple to me, allow the athletes their fair chance to compete in multiple events and run an efficient pit to counter any wait time you may encounter.
Though I have a very strong opinion about this and have had instances where athletes I was coaching were forced to come in at a new height almost six inches taller then their last clearance, I completly understand and abide by the correct rule when necessary. This is not some rule that is just as the high school level either, this rule goes up and down the sport at all levels and is obvisouly there for a reason. The vertical jumps (pole vault and high jump) are the only events in track and field that you must fail to win. They can go for hours and hours with a large field and at times and have checking out rules that can easily be abused. In summation, rules are generally there to serve a purpose... most of the time rules are added, not taken away.
Do I think this is a huge issue? No, I think it is small compared to some rules and rulings in the sport but definitely think it is worth a thought. What do you think?