New Rules
- distancejumper
- PV Pro
- Posts: 390
- Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2004 9:10 pm
- Location: Spring Vally, MN
- Contact:
New Rules
There are some new rules that have been proposed. One proposed rule is that a judge can dq someone if the way they vault is dangerous and theres a chance they get hurt.
ANother rule is that if the dont land in the P.L.Z., it counts as a scratch.
I'm just seeing what other people think of these proposals.
ANother rule is that if the dont land in the P.L.Z., it counts as a scratch.
I'm just seeing what other people think of these proposals.
- CHC04Vault
- PV Follower
- Posts: 541
- Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 7:14 pm
- Location: Baltimore, MD
- Contact:
I don't think an official should have the power to dictate who jumps or not, as it is subjective, politicals can get involved and thus hamper true compition. As for the PLZ, i agree that you SHOULD land in it, but i do not think that u should be given a MISS if u succesfully clear the height. As Becca proposed earlier you should be given 3 warning before u get kicked out of the height, this is alot better of a rule. But in general, i find all new rules stupid and ridiculous. Yes, we have had accidents, but we are forcing changes of equitment to be safe when we should be changing coachin techniques (or the lack there of in many cases) so that we vault safely. Pretty much its to the same extent that u can give every football player a neck stabalizer so they wount snap their neck...or u can teach them to tackle with their head up.
"Good my jump, it will be done" Bubka
- rainbowgirl28
- I'm in Charge
- Posts: 30435
- Joined: Sat Aug 31, 2002 1:59 pm
- Expertise: Former College Vaulter, I coach and officiate as life allows
- Lifetime Best: 11'6"
- Gender: Female
- World Record Holder?: Renaud Lavillenie
- Favorite Vaulter: Casey Carrigan
- Location: A Temperate Island
- Contact:
Sounds like a good idea to me.
As far as the three strikes rule goes (which I did not invent, credit goes to Kris Allison, Tim Reilly, and others I am sure), the warnings you receive for missing the PLZ would not count as misses at a particular height.
If you had 3 strikes and got out, you would be given credit for the highest bar you did clear.
As far as the three strikes rule goes (which I did not invent, credit goes to Kris Allison, Tim Reilly, and others I am sure), the warnings you receive for missing the PLZ would not count as misses at a particular height.
If you had 3 strikes and got out, you would be given credit for the highest bar you did clear.
- USMC Vaulter
- PV Pro
- Posts: 318
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 9:35 am
- Location: San Antonio
- Contact:
I dont think not landing in the PLZ should ever count as a scratch. I've seen quite a few ELITE VAULTERS clear a bar and not land in the PLZ - Bubka being one of them.
An official should not have the authority to abitrarily disquality a competitor because 'he thinks' the vaulter is being unsafe. This would lead to far too many problems, arguements, hidden agendas, etc. However, if you WERE going to make a safety rule like this, the 3 strikes for not landing in the PLZ is the way to go - it is something that can be easily observed and as long as the rule is written clearly, its not a bad idea.
A slight problem with the PLZ rule, is that not all pole vault mats have these markings on them. By making this a rule, you would then also have to add the PLZ (originally called a coach's box) as a MANDATORY item on the mats. Meaning that schools would have to fork out another couple thousand bucks for a new top cover. Also meaning that alot of schools would ONCE AGAIN not be in regs, and not be able to compete - which could ultimately be another blow to the sport that would lead to even more schools dropping it all together.
Just a few things to think about.
An official should not have the authority to abitrarily disquality a competitor because 'he thinks' the vaulter is being unsafe. This would lead to far too many problems, arguements, hidden agendas, etc. However, if you WERE going to make a safety rule like this, the 3 strikes for not landing in the PLZ is the way to go - it is something that can be easily observed and as long as the rule is written clearly, its not a bad idea.
A slight problem with the PLZ rule, is that not all pole vault mats have these markings on them. By making this a rule, you would then also have to add the PLZ (originally called a coach's box) as a MANDATORY item on the mats. Meaning that schools would have to fork out another couple thousand bucks for a new top cover. Also meaning that alot of schools would ONCE AGAIN not be in regs, and not be able to compete - which could ultimately be another blow to the sport that would lead to even more schools dropping it all together.
Just a few things to think about.
- rainbowgirl28
- I'm in Charge
- Posts: 30435
- Joined: Sat Aug 31, 2002 1:59 pm
- Expertise: Former College Vaulter, I coach and officiate as life allows
- Lifetime Best: 11'6"
- Gender: Female
- World Record Holder?: Renaud Lavillenie
- Favorite Vaulter: Casey Carrigan
- Location: A Temperate Island
- Contact:
- USMC Vaulter
- PV Pro
- Posts: 318
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 9:35 am
- Location: San Antonio
- Contact:
- rainbowgirl28
- I'm in Charge
- Posts: 30435
- Joined: Sat Aug 31, 2002 1:59 pm
- Expertise: Former College Vaulter, I coach and officiate as life allows
- Lifetime Best: 11'6"
- Gender: Female
- World Record Holder?: Renaud Lavillenie
- Favorite Vaulter: Casey Carrigan
- Location: A Temperate Island
- Contact:
USMC Vaulter wrote:rainbowgirl28 wrote:But see that's the nice thing about the PLZ... you can make one out of spray paint or white athletic tape.
Good point - what is the standard on the PLZ? (i.e the dimensions, how big, exact placement, etc) Is there a current 'standard' for where manufacturers place them?
Yes, the ASTM already set a standard for the PLZ. I don't know it off the top of my head, but Jan could tell you. It's probably up on http://www.skyjumpers.com/
- USMC Vaulter
- PV Pro
- Posts: 318
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 9:35 am
- Location: San Antonio
- Contact:
- Robert schmitt
- PV Lover
- Posts: 1108
- Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 7:41 pm
- Location: Mount Vernon, WA
- Contact:
rainbowgirl28 wrote:Sounds like a good idea to me.
As far as the three strikes rule goes (which I did not invent, credit goes to Kris Allison, Tim Reilly, and others I am sure), the warnings you receive for missing the PLZ would not count as misses at a particular height.
If you had 3 strikes and got out, you would be given credit for the highest bar you did clear.
I'm with ya
An optimist is one who sees a light in darkness....a pessimist blows it out.
- SlickVT
- PV Follower
- Posts: 554
- Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 1:06 pm
- Expertise: Former College Vaulter, Post-Collegiate Vaulter, College Coach, High School Coach
- Location: Blacksburg VA
The scratch if you miss the PLZ is ridiculous. If this keeps up, the pole vault will end up being an event with pads 50 yards in every direction, motorcycle helmets, spotters, and DQ's for not having a perfectly straight vault.
Gimme a break...
Gimme a break...
Vertical Technique Pole Vault Club
Blacksburg, Virginia
verticaltechnique.com
Blacksburg, Virginia
verticaltechnique.com
I heard this was the proposed safety equipment for '06. Seems like we need protection from ourselves.
Last edited by achtungpv on Tue Apr 26, 2005 10:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"You have some interesting coaching theories that seem to have little potential."
- CHC04Vault
- PV Follower
- Posts: 541
- Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 7:14 pm
- Location: Baltimore, MD
- Contact:
Return to “Pole Vault - General”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 58 guests