Official Interpretation of Rule 168.7/116.12

In 2002 there were a number of incidents in GB involving the interpretation of IAAF rule 168.7/UKA rule 116.12. In consequence of this Graham Knight, UK Technical Director for Sprints, Hurdles and Relays, met with David Littlewood and leading officials in Birmingham in November, and a representative group in Twickenham in February.

David, who is probably the most experienced official in Britain at international level, agreed to circulate his interpretation of the rule,-initially to the officials at the Southern Champs in Portsmouth over the weekend of June 21/22, and eventually to all officials in the country.David's readiness to take this action is appreciated by all athletes and coaches involved in hurdling, and, while everyone accepts that the referee's decision in all sports is final, it is refreshing to know that dialogue is possible, even if unanimity of agreement on the rule is not reached.

The ultimate outcome is the rewording of the rule by the IAAF to cover every possible interpretation, BUT even then there is bound to be a word or phrase which someone will feel to be open to interpretation

 

A PERSONAL COMMENT

What follows are some thoughts on the problems experienced last year over interpretation of the last clause of UKA Rule 116.12. (i.e. “…in the opinion of the Referee deliberately knock down any hurdle by hand or foot shall be disqualified”) which is identical to the equivalent IAAF Rule.

The part of the rule relating to ‘the foot’ was just tacked on to the original rule many years ago by the IAAF. In nearly 30 years as a Grade 1 Track Judge I have only once taken action under this rule and then only to warn the athlete concerned for a subsequent final and I have never seen this invoked during 16 World Championships I have attended, or during a number of visits abroad as an IAAF Technical Delegate. It also formed no part of any of the courses I have attended as an International Technical Official, nor, indeed, the examinations, written and oral, associated with these courses. We need, therefore, to be seen to be interpreting this rule in the same way as the rest of the world.

We are all quite happy about athletes having to knock down hurdles with their hands because they have lost balance and cannot make an attempt to clear the obstacle. To me, the addition of the words “or foot’ should be regarded in the same light. (i.e. an athlete treading on top of a hurdle because he/she is unable to gain a stride pattern to make any genuine attempt to clear.

As has been pointed out most hurdles knocked down in the course of a 110m event are not brought down by the foot but by the calf or the buttocks. Neither of these circumstances allow a Referee to take action under the Rule anyway.

The opinion of leading athletes (e.g. Colin Jackson, Jon Ridgeon, Tony Jarrett) is that if the hurdle is correctly weighted the loss of momentum and stride caused by knocking down a hurdle is considerable and that no hurdler would aim to be penalised in this way deliberately. I would broadly agree with these sentiments.

David Littlewood

9 July 2003