Back to Topics

Instant DQ for false starts sucks

David Millar 6 months ago

It's bad for kids races.
It's bad for adults.
It's especially bad without electronic blocks.
It's bad for World Champions.
And it's bad for TV.

2 views

Categories: track and field
Comments22 comments

 Rees Buck 4 weeks ago

And the issue has made it to Letsrun's front page, and they don't think that the DQ is useful for the sport either:

Giving A Trophy To Every Little Kid Is Bad, But We're Not Sure If This Is The Solution
Usain Bolt Can Relate 8-Year-Olds Brought To Tears In NZ As Track & Field's No-False-Start Rule Is Enforced Strictly In Local 60m Sprint - http://www.letsrun.com/

skillo 1 month ago

Biltong, your imitation is the sincerest form of flattery that you could give me. Actually, that's not a bad idea with the professional aspect; especially when you see what some parents spend on the the latest designer running gear for their young kids. We could also call it the 'haves and have nots' grand prix series. We could give the 'haves' numerous chances at false starts given that it's not fair to penalise the 'haves' because they look cool and have 'talent' and disqualify those from the 'have nots' for daring to start in the first place.

Biltong 1 month ago

Skillo, did you not realise that the person clapping those two lumps of wood together all those years ago was actually trying to kill you. Even then you were making plenty of enemies. I always wondered why your head seemed narrower than most and you seem to be hearing impaired.
I woke up this morning with a solution to this disqualification issue for young kids. It was so simple it was almost like two lumps of wood had hit me in the face. Divide children's athletics into a professional and amateur circuit. Yes, I know this may sound radical, but it could actually work. One competition would be an exact replica of the Grand Prix Circuit in Europe while the other would be an exact replica of the traditional lolly scramble circuit in New Zealand. Imagine the scene when a professional 5 year old athlete gets disqualified for false starting in a 100m race. Instead of athlete and coach and parents bursting into uncontrollable tears the athlete would return to the gear area where he/she would proceed to rip at least four pairs of $1000 racing spikes to shreds using a pair of specially designed garden shears. Of course this televised/youtubed/twittered episode would be viewed by the original shoe maker - no, not the shoe sponsor, the actual maker - a dollar a day worker from some distant land. He/she would be thinking "Now I know why they pay me so little for making these shoes - they are worth less than nothing to these magnificent professional athletes". My mind is at peace. Now the lolly scramble circuit would be much more laid back - with athletes allowed to wander into the track race or field event at any time and from any direction. Parents and coaches could sit in the stands and have a great time trying to pick out which race was which and whether a race was actually a race or whether a field event was just a bunch of kids throwing stuff around on the field or just playing in sand pits while munching on their lollies. It is amazing how one can sleep on a problem and wake up with the perfect solution. It is almost as if when we dream we enter a world where anything is possible and everything is impossible.

skillo 1 month ago

Hell Biltong, you were lucky to have a starting gun to start. your races We had a hand clap or two blocks of wood being banged together for our races.
I agree with Fleet Feet etc; how many chances does a person get in cirstances such as this, given how quickly these meetings can get behind time wise etc

Biltong 1 month ago

DC - that was a strange comparison you made between football/tennis and athletics. In senior football an offside is not a red card offence nor is a double fault in tennis an automatic disqualification. In senor athletics a false start IS a disqualification. If parents and coaches are prepared to rate their child athletes by exact electronic times, then they have to put up with the disqualication rule. You can't have your cake and eat it too. However, I think it would be better if under 12 athletes were best left to start any way they wish (crouch, standing or whatever) as long as they don't cross the line before the start gun fires or wooshes. This is how we used to do athletics in our day at that tender age. There would be no records as such and the electronic times would just be a guide, though not an exact one. I think some take under 12 athletics too seriously. It impacts on the kids and that is why you get all this spluttering, crying etc etc when someone gets disqualified or just has a bad race. Anyhow, as fleet_feet mentioned this particular athlete had been warned twice. The race has got to start sometime.

fleet_feet 1 month ago

I dont think many of you know the full story as it was a very Biased article.
The child mentioned in the article was warned twice to be more still on the startline however she continued to behave in the same manner.
That is why she was DQ'd
The rule was applied with Discrestion in this instance.

cdm 1 month ago

here in Oz they still have the one false start rule for 12 and unders (ie Little A's) and this year for 12,13 and 14yo they kept the one false start rule for this year to allow athletes to adapt but reinforced they will be dq'd next year. i thught that it worked pretty well and was a good way to 'stagger' teh change. Agree with above that for stage of development and learning dq'g 7yos sucks. But for seniors and age groupers (16,19s) totally agree with andrew mac

Rees Buck 1 month ago

No need to worry Ned, I'm sure the parents and the kids involved will be likely looking for other sports where an 8 year old wont get disqualified for a small mistake.
Just imagine how much fun soccer would be for a young kid if an offside was an automatic Red card, or a double fault in tennis resulted in a DQ?

Athletics in NZ needs to consider these things carefully next time they wonder what needs to change to increase participation and enjoyment in our sport. - dc

Ned70 1 month ago

Best to toughen these young prospective athletes now ay If they can't handle a DQ, how are they going to cope when they get invovled in representative selection wrangles down the track? :P

Rees Buck 1 month ago

How the rule is interpreted in NZ for domestic meetings is up to Athletics NZ, or whichever Association manages the meeting, and therefore can be applied in the way which best fits the situation.

To have young children disqualified on first infraction at a meet like Colgates does nothing positive for the sport. This rule which is set for adults at adult meetings should be applied for young children in a manner which fits their level of development, the competency of their likely Coaching input, the importance of the meeting and most importantly, with regards to the positive and negative outcomes which may result in applying it in a specific way. - dc

David Millar 5 months ago

F-Feet:- The rule covering slight movement without taking off is 162.2
To DQ someone at the start for being 'disingenious' apply rule 162.5. But there must be a warning prior to a DQ.
I'm not sure about applying it to fidgety kids at the start line but DQ is just mean.
Both rules copied below:

IAAF COMPETITION RULES 2010-2011
Rule 162.2. All races shall be started by the report of the Starter’s gun fired upwards after he has ascertained that athletes are steady and in the correct starting position. If, for any reason, the Starter is not satisfied that all is ready for the start to proceed after the athletes are on their marks, he shall order all athletes to withdraw from their marks and the Starter’s Assistants shall place them on the assembly line again.
Rule 162.5. On the command “On your marks” or “Set”, as the case may be, all athletes shall at once and without delay assume their full and final set position. Where an athlete in the judgement of the Starter,
(a) after the command “On your marks” or “Set”, and before the report of the gun, causes the start to be aborted, for instance by raising a hand and/or standing or sitting up in the case of a crouch start, without a valid reason, (such reason to be evaluated by the relevant Referee); or
(b) fails to comply with the commands “On your marks” or “Set” as appropriate, or does not place himself in his final starting position after a reasonable time; or
(c) after the command “On your marks” or “Set” disturbs other athletes in the race through sound or otherwise, the Starter shall abort the start.
The Referee may warn the athlete for improper conduct (disqualify in case of a second infringement of the Rule during the same competition), according to Rules 125.5 and 145.2. In cases where an extraneous reason was considered to be the cause for aborting the start, or the Referee does not agree with the Starter’s decision, a green card shall be shown to all the athletes to indicate that a false start was not committed by any athlete.

Physeder 5 months ago

I know where David is coming from. I had a kid from my School chucked out last year from a Provincial Sec School Champs. (I did not Coach Him). But I was not watching the start ... However, even though I did my Sprint Coaching paper in the US 35 years ago the guys who took us really emphasised that the rise to the set position was one movement and one only if you flinched or made any slight movements it was considered a false start. The problem back then was not the movements at the set but the athletes trying to beat the start or anticipating so they went right on the gun. Then most of the field would jog down the track to "settle" themselves and generally "kill time". I like what happens now but I know that there have always been some starters who love(d) to ping someone. But that is another story !!!!!!!

fleet_feet 5 months ago

Rule 162.6

An athlete, after assuming a full and final set position, shall not
commence his start until after receiving the report of the gun. If, in the
judgement of the Starter or Recallers, he does so any earlier, it shall
be deemed a false start.
Surely if an athlete makes any movement then they are commencing their start,.
As a starter you are to hold all the field untill all athletes are still. Once you are still you have "assumed your full and final start position" If you move after your final set position you have false started. Thats the rule

David Millar 5 months ago

More concerning is the incorrect local interpretation of a false start. Unfortunately, at some local meets, too many athletes in laned events have been DQ'ed for slight movement during the "set" without taking off.... Sad!

Physeder 6 months ago

Interesting debate. I can see the points of view but I fully agree with Andrew. As he said the whole deal is about reaction not Anticipation.
I can go back to the days of "multiple" false starts and these could hold meets up quite substantially.
I can recall one of the NAIA Nationals I was at in the Seventies. (Yes ! NAIA was a Power then). The 100 was almost a farce as the mind games (and trash talk !! ) and false starts of a heap of athletes pushed the meet programme deep into the night. We are talking some Olympic medallists here as well as everyday College sprinters.
Since those days I have watched the false start rule evolve to what it is now and to be honest I like it. It is quick and clean.

When did I run my 800 .. something like 11:00 at night !!!!!
BTW : Best trash talk that Meet when one of the Athletes broke and jogged down the track. One of the "Non" Breakers called out "Get your Black ass back here". The Breaker replied "All you gonna see is this Black ass" .... BTW : No white guys in that race !!!!!

Andrew Maclennan 6 months ago

It's a great rule. Start running before the gun goes and you're out. Simple and how it should be. Starting is supposed to be a REACTION to a noise not an ANTICIPATION as to when the gun might go. When the gun goes start running!!!!!!!!! Simple, clean and if you're going to try and anticipate the noise rather than react to it then prepare for the consequences.

It's only become a big deal because of Bolt anyway, if it was anyone else like Dwain Chamber's or Christine Ohuruogu's etc then no-one has made a song and dance about them have they...

Liam Woolford 6 months ago

I'm not to sure on what the effects of changing the rule would be but personally I'd give each race 2 false starts before people got eliminated for it, and I'd give each individual 1 false start. Just my idea, could be improved no doubt.

Rees Buck 6 months ago

I think David and Biltong are both right.

There are good reasons for the rule as it stands, which is why it was changed in the first place. However, it clearly is resulting in some possibly unintended negative outcomes and does need to be reviewed to see if there are some ammendments which could keep the intent of the rule but avoid situations like NYGP earlier in the year, and Daegu on the weekend.
Have there been any issues with the rule on NZ soil?? - dc

fano 6 months ago

I doubt if Usain had not false started there would be no talk about it. Even if he is the biggest super star in the sport, he knows what's up, still got a 200m to do.

Sarah Biss 6 months ago

I agree with David.

Biltong 6 months ago

Rant Start:
It's good for teaching kids not to wrongly anticipate
It's good for TV spectators who don't have time to sit around and wait 30 minutes for a race to start
It's good for those who bet on long odds
It's good for TV to see an athlete ranting and raving
It's good that technology is used to reduce any athlete's unfair advantage
It's good that it teaches athletes that life can be fair without cheating
Rant Stop

Recent Activity