Best Practices - USATF LDR Referee Case Book

Best Practices - USATF Long Distance Running Referee Case Book Rulings explained

Effective Jul 18, 2020

USATF Masters

Long Distance Running

LDR Referee’s Case Book

Best Practices

Editor

Bill Quinlisk

An official publication of USA Track & Field

130 East Washington Street, Suite 800

Indianapolis, IN 46204

317-261-0500 | Fax 317-261-0514 | www.usatf.org

USA Track & Field is the National Governing Body for Track and Field, Long Distance Running and Race Walking, and is the United States member of World Athletics

USATF Long Distance Running

LDR Referee’s Case Book

Best Practices

This USA Track & Field Long Distance Running LDR Referee’s Case Book contains actual situations and rulings taken from recent USA Track & Field (USATF) Long Distance Running (LDR) Championships – Road and Cross Country – Open, U20 and Master. Rulings specific to Mountain, Ultra and Trail (MUT) and Youth are not included except as general LDR rules apply.

This LDR Referee’s Case Book is designed to be shared with the LDR community of officials, administrators, coaches and runners in an attempt to explain recent rulings and to establish consistency in interpretation of USATF Operating Regulations and USATF Competition Rules.

As technological changes continue to impact our sport, Championship competition rulings have become focused on the ‘before’ and ‘after’ of the actual race and less focused on situations arising within the race itself as you shall see.

We will cite the rule involved, offer a situation, give the actual ruling and offer an explanation of the ruling. This LDR Referee’s Case Book follows the numeric order of the rule cited as they appear in the 2020 USATF Competition Rules found at:

https://www.usatf.org/governance/rule-books

Feedback is always welcome. Consider this an on-going project. We are always looking for new situations that pertain to LDR events.

Send your situations to: Bill Quinlisk at crosscountry@usatf.org

Vice-Chair, USATF Masters LDR;

Masters Cross Country Rep;

Championships Coordinator, USATF Cross Country Council;

USATF Official #018316, Grade 3 Master-Level LDR Referee

Rule 1

National Championships

Rule 1.1 - Eligibility:

(a) In the Open Men's and Women's Indoor and Outdoor Track and Field Championships, the U20 (formerly Junior) Men's and Women's Track and Field Championships, the Men's and Women's Race Walking Championships, the Men's and Women's Open, U20, and Masters Cross Country Championships, and the Men's and Women's Long Distance Running Championships, only citizens of the United States who are eligible to represent the United States in all levels of international competition are eligible to compete. (In the Men's and Women's Race Walking Championships, Men's Long Distance Running Championships, and Masters Cross Country Championships, others may compete in a separate non-scoring division or race.)

(b) In addition, in Long Distance Running and Race Walking, US citizens who are not eligible to represent the USA in International competition are allowed to participate in any USA National Championship that is not the sole selection event for an international team.

(c) The Masters Track and Field Championships are open to all member athletes of USATF or of other World Athletics member federations.

(d) The Masters Long Distance Running Championships are open to all member athletes of USATF, including Permanent Residents. However, only U.S. citizens shall be awarded individual championship awards or score for a team.

SITUATION 1A

Non-citizen Open runner eligibility - Lee T. (age 32) wishes to enter, compete and score for his Open Men’s club team in the Open Men’s race at the USA Cross Country Championships. He is not a US citizen but he is a USATF member and a resident alien. Is he eligible to enter, compete and score for a team?

Rule 1 - SITUATION 1A – RULING

No, Lee T. may not enter and may not compete in the Open Men’s race at the USA Cross Country Championships.

Rule 1 - SITUATION 1A – EXPLANATION

The terms of Rule 15.2 (Men’s and Women’s Cross Country Championships) specifically indicate that eligibility for this race is based on Rule 1.1.a. The terms of Rule 1.1.a do not allow non-US citizens to compete in Open Cross Country Championships. Per Rule 111 the USATF Cross Country Council shall appoint a Games Committee and prior to the start of the competition, the Games Committee would rule on any eligibility issues. Per Rule 125, once the competition has begun, it would be up to the Referee to rule on any eligibility issues. This situation should never advance that far. The USATF online entry system for the Open division of the USA Cross Country Championships is usually set up so that non-citizens are not permitted to enter. In addition, a ‘citizenship’ column can be included as part of the USATF online entry system’s download available to the Games Committee. The Games Committee (or their designee) should be vetting the database prior to the competition in order to head off all eligibility issues. More common issues often involve Team Eligibility as explained in Rule 4.2. If the online entry system is set up properly then non-US citizens would not be allowed to enter the Open division of the USA Cross Country championships.

If this were a Men’s LDR Championship on the road, then it would be up to the Men’s LDR Sports Committee or their appointed Games Committee to decide if they would include a separate non-scoring division or race to accommodate non-citizens. Such a separate non-scoring division is not permitted in Open Cross Country Championships except for teams representing branches of the Armed Services as indicated in Rule 15.

SITUATION 1B

Non-citizen Master runner eligibility - Lee T. (age 42) wishes to enter, compete and score for his M40+ club team in the Master Men’s race at the USA Cross Country Championships. He is not a US citizen but he is a USATF member and a resident alien. Is he eligible to enter, compete and score for a team?

Rule 1 - SITUATION 1B – RULING

Yes, Lee T. may enter and compete in the Master Men’s race at the USA Cross Country Championships but he may not be awarded individual championship awards or score for his club team.

Rule 1 - SITUATION 1B – EXPLANATION

Rule 1.1.a explains that in Master Cross Country Championships, USATF member athletes who are not US citizens may not enter and compete unless a separate non-scoring division or race has been established by the Cross Country Council or their appointed Games Committee. Currently, for all USATF National Masters Cross Country Championships, a separate non-scoring division has been established by the Games Committee. This is consistent with the terms of Rule 1.1.d, Rule 5.2 and Rule 341.5 which apply to Masters LDR Championships. There is some confusion in the USATF Governance Handbook – Operating Regulations as to whether or not Masters Cross Country Championships are to be treated the same as other Master LDR Championships. The current USATF Operating Regulations give the Games Committee control of Masters Cross Country to both the Masters LDR Sports Committee and to the Cross Country Council. However, by mutual agreement, the Cross Country Council serves as the Games Committee for all Master Cross Country Championships. In any case, Master LDR and cross country non-citizen runners may compete but are not eligible to win awards or score for a team. They are considered to be in a separate non-scoring division of the race.

The Games Committee and the Referee should contact the timing service provider to label these athletes as non-scoring in the entry database and on all results. Prior to the start of the competition, the Games Committee would rule on any eligibility issues. Once the competition has begun, it would be up to the Referee to rule on any eligibility issue. The Games Committee should, whenever possible, attempt to notify all non-citizen USATF member Master athletes who enter Master Cross Country Championships that although they may compete in the race, they are not eligible to win awards or score for a team.

Rule 5.2 states that “In Masters LDR, including cross country, non-U.S. citizens, including permanent residents, who are member athletes of USATF, may be awarded separate non-championship medals whenever they would otherwise displace a U.S citizen eligible for awards”. It is suggested that you check each event’s website information to see if such awards will be provided.

Rule 144 – ASSISTANCE TO ATHLETES

Rule 144.2 - Except as provided in road races (Rule 241) and in long distance walking events (Rule 232), during the progress of an event a competitor who has received any assistance whatsoever may be disqualified by the Referee. “Assistance” is the conveying of advice, information or direct help to a competitor by any means, including a technical device.

144.3 - The following shall be considered examples of assistance:

(a) Pacing in running or walking events by persons not participating in the event, by competitors lapped or about to be lapped, or by any kind of technical device other than those permitted under Rule 144.4(e) and Rule 144.4(h). See Rule 250 through Rule 252 for Cross Country, Mountain and Trail Running.

(b) The visible possession or use by athletes of video, audio, or communications devices in the competition area. The Games Committee for an LDR event may allow the use of portable listening devices not capable of receiving communication; however, those competing in championships for awards, medals, or prize money may not use such devices. See Rule 250 through 252 for Cross Country, Mountain and Trail Running.

(c) The use of any technology or appliance that provides the user with an unfair advantage which would not have been obtainable using equipment complying with the Rules.

NOTE: Shoes complying with Rule 143 are permitted.

(d) The use of any mechanical aid, unless the competitor can establish on the balance of probabilities that the use of such an aid would not provide an overall competitive advantage over a competitor not using such aid.

(e) Provision of advice or other support by any official of the competition not related to, required or allowed by the specific role of the official in the competition at the time. This includes items such as coaching advice, providing take-off point information in a jumping event, and time or distance gaps in a race. Specifically excluded from providing assistance is indicating the take-off point for a failure in the horizontal jumps, time announcements allowed in Rule 163.15.

(f) Receiving physical support from another (other than from another competitor in the event helping to recover to a standing position) that assists in making forward progress in the race.

4. The following shall not be considered assistance:

(a) Verbal or other communication, without the use of any technical device, from an individual who is not in the competition area to a competitor who is in the competition area. In order to facilitate this communication and not to disturb the staging of the competition, it is recommended that a place in the stands, close to the immediate site of each field event, be reserved for the competitors’ coaches.

NOTE: Coaches complying otherwise with Rule 241.2 may communicate with their competitors.

SITUATION 144A

Use of wrist chronometer during LDR Championship race

Jo P. wishes to wear her Garmin Forerunner while competing in the USA 5 km Championships and asks the Referee at the Technical Meeting if it is legal for her to do so.

Rule 144 - SITUATION 144A – RULING - Yes, Jo P. may wear her Garmin Forerunner during the race.

Rule 144 - SITUATION 144A – EXPLANATION

Since the Garmin Forerunner is not capable of communication with any other person, it is not considered assistance and allowable within the rules as a "wrist chronometer, heart rate monitors, speed distance monitors, stride sensors or similar device". See Rule 144.4f

SITUATION 144B

Use of cell phone during LDR Championship race

Competitor wearing bib number 264 is observed by an official talking on their cell phone while running in the USATF Masters 8 km Championships. The official files a report with the Referee immediately.

Rule 144 - SITUATION 144B – RULING - The Referee may disqualify Competitor 264.

Rule 144 - SITUATION 144B – EXPLANATION

The Referee may disqualify Competitor 264 for violating Rule 144.3b.

It is suggested that the Referee question Competitor 264 to ascertain the reason for the cell phone call during a championship race. If the Referee is satisfied that there was a reasonable explanation for the call – i.e., family medical emergency, then the Referee may chose not to disqualify the runner. See Rules 125.2, 125.6 and 125.10.

SITUATION 144C

Runner receives assistance during race

As he approaches the finish line of the USA 15 km Championships, runner Emmanuel B. collapses to the ground 30m from the finish due to leg cramping. Before the event medical staff or any event official can reach him his wife enters the course and helps him stand up. Leaning on her shoulder for the final 30m Emmanuel finally limps across the finish line to a rousing ovation. He is treated by the medical staff for 15 minutes for leg cramping before he is able to stand and walk.

C1: He is observed by an Umpire who reports a violation of Rule 144.2 to the Chief Umpire, who reports it to the Referee,

C2: He is observed by a Finish Line Judge, who reports a violation of Rule 144.2 to the Referee,

C3: He is observed receiving assistance by the Referee,

C4: He is observed by one of the Timing crew who reports a possible violation of Rule 144.2 to the Referee.

SITUATION 144C – RULING

In Situations C1, C2 and C3 the Referee shall disqualify Emmanuel B. from the event for receiving assistance from his wife in finishing the race which is a violation of Rule 144.3.f.

In Situation C4 - Is the member of the Timing crew a certified USATF official? Probably, not.

The Referee should conduct an inquiry including questioning the certified officials assigned to the finish line area and review any available officially designated imaging systems or any other video evidence to determine if a violation of Rule 144.3.f occurred. In Situation C4 the Referee may disqualify Emmanuel B. for a violation of Rule 144.3.f the Referee feels that the evidence supports the call.

SITUATION 144C – EXPLANATION

It is apparent that Emmanuel B. would not have finished the race under his own power without the assistance of his wife. The disqualification for receiving assistance or “direct help” is justified. In Situation C4, the decision on whether or not to disqualify the runner should be based solely on the evidence collected by the Referee and is a judgment call since the report came from a non-certified race official (Rule 110.2).

Rule 146 – PROTESTS

Rule 146 - PROTESTS

1. Protests concerning the team status or eligibility of an entered competitor must be made to the Chair of the Games Committee prior to the commencement of the meet or to the Referee during the meet.

SITUATION 146A

Protest concerning team status and runner eligibility after competing in a non-sanctioned event

The Coach of a USATF member club cross country team asks the Cross Country Games Committee the following eligibility question one month prior to the USATF National Club Cross Country Championships: “Can you run for one club team (that is a USATF member club) in local non-USATF sanctioned races and then run for another team in USATF sanctioned team competition?

Rule 146 - SITUATION 146A – RULING

Yes, you can run for one club (USATF member club or not) in a local non-sanctioned race and then run for another USATF member club in USATF sanctioned team competition.

The Coach should be commended for handling this question well before the championship date.

Rule 146 - SITUATION 146A – EXPLANATION

A runner may choose to become a member of as many clubs (USATF member clubs or not) as they wish. However, a runner may only compete for one USATF member club at a time in USATF sanctioned competition. A runner’s “official” USATF member club affiliation must be reflected in that runner’s USATF online membership profile. The membership profile can only be changed by the runner’s local USATF Association’s Membership Chairperson or the USATF National Office Member Services Department, (Contact: membership@usatf.org ) upon the athlete’s request.

USATF Operating Regulations (4.C.2) govern the transfer of membership between clubs. These regulations apply to ‘sanctioned competition’. If a runner chooses to compete in a non-sanctioned event (an event where the race may or may not follow USATF competition rules and regulations) then USATF would have no standing to rule one way or another on a runner's eligibility and participation unless it involved international competition. Prior to the start of the competition, the Games Committee would rule on any eligibility issues. Once the competition has begun, it would be up to the Referee to rule on any eligibility issue. The USATF National Office Events Dept. and local Association Membership Chair can offer advice and assistance regarding eligibility issues.

SITUATION 146B

Protest concerning all-star team status

The Coach of a USATF member club cross country team asks the Championship Games Committee the following eligibility question one month prior to the USATF National Club Cross Country Championships:

“In our area we have a very strong local club tradition. We often run in USATF sanctioned local events but do not feel competitive enough to participate in USATF National Championships. Part of this feeling comes from our belief that in other areas member clubs are forming “all-star” teams to compete at USATF National Championships. How do we level the playing field and get all member clubs to follow the rules for team eligibility?”

Rule 146 - SITUATION 146B – RULING

If the coach has reason to believe that a member club has entered an ineligible runner according to the terms of USATF Competition Rule 4.2 – Eligibility for Team Championships (Rule 341.8 for Masters), then a written protest should be filed by an “athlete or an official representative of an athlete” and submitted to the Games Committee prior to the commencement of the meet. Specific information and all available pertinent facts should be presented in the written protest. The Games Committee shall decide the protest at once. (See Rule 146.3 and 146.10 for further conditions.)

Rule 146 - SITUATION 146B – EXPLANATION

USATF Competition Rule 4.2 governs Eligibility for Open Team Championships for “Long Distance Running, Open Cross Country and Open Track & Field Club competition”. Apparently Rule 4.2 does not apply to the U20 division. U20 cross country team eligibility shall be governed by Rule 1.1 and Rule 15. Masters LDR rules on team eligibility are very clearly stated in Rule 341.8. By past practice and cross country championship operating procedures Rule 341.8 should also be applied to Masters cross country. In USATF Master LDR Championships (including cross country), a Master team may have one and only one runner from outside their association per team. The Master rule is different than the Open and rule.

The intent of these rules was to:

1. Eliminate any National "all-star" teams, and

2. Create an enforceable and fair policy for team eligibility.

Enforcement has been strict and consistent since these rules went in effect. It is believed that there have not been any "all-star" teams competing in our USATF National LDR and Cross Country Championships. The Games Committees would act quickly to investigate any and reports to the contrary. It is up to your local association, member clubs, member athletes and officials with cooperation from the USATF National Office to police USATF Operating Regulation 4.C.2 regarding team transfers. The Games Committee will only rule on specific situations that are presented to them prior to or during an LDR Championship event. Prior to the start of the competition, the Games Committee would rule on any eligibility issues. Once the competition has begun, it would be up to the Referee to rule on any eligibility issue.

2019 USATF Governance Manual - Regulation 4 – Representation

B – Residency Exceptions - 2 – Team Scoring

“Sports Committees and Councils may establish athlete eligibility and residency requirements for team scoring at their respective championships. These requirements shall be reflected in the competition rules.”

It is true that Sports Committees and Councils have, over the years, established additional eligibility and residency requirements for their respective championships. These should be part of the event entry information and must be posted in a timely manner for all competitors prior to the event. Any and all additional championship eligibility requirements should be submitted as amendment proposals to the Competition Rules at the earliest opportunity.

Rule 146

1. Protests concerning the team status or eligibility of an entered competitor must be made to the Chair of the Games Committee prior to the commencement of the meet, or to the Referee during the meet.

2. Protests concerning the result or conduct of an event shall be made to the Referee at once and no later than 30 minutes after the announcement of the results of that event except for the following:

a. For Men’s and Women’s Long Distance Running, the time period shall normally be 24 hours, except for the Professional Section of road races, as defined in the race material (website, entry form, etc.), where the time period shall be 30 minutes.

b. For Cross Country and Masters Long Distance Running Championships the time period shall be one hour.

SITUATION 146C

Protest concerning corrections of race results

At the USA Masters 8 km Road Championships the Overall Master Championship results are posted onsite at 11:00 a.m. and so noted on the posting and onsite announcements.

C1: At 11:45 a.m., Runner A informs the Referee that their name and result is missing from the posted results. Runner A claims to have finished around 30:00 - gun time. Runner A is still wearing their race bib with the bib transponder antennae attached. The antennae do not appear to be damaged.

C2: At 2:15 p.m., Runner B informs the Referee that their name and result is missing from the posted results. Runner B claims to have finished around 30:30 - gun time. Runner B is still wearing their race bib with the transponder antennae attached. The antennae do not appear to be damaged.

C3: At 11:45 a.m., Runner C informs the Referee that their name and result is missing from the posted results. Runner C claims to have finished around 33:30 - gun time. Runner C informs the Referee that she did not wear her race bib because she forgot it back at the hotel and didn’t realize until just before the gun went off that she didn’t have her bib with the transponder antennae.

Rule 146 - SITUATION 146C – RULINGS

Note: Transponder signals are not fool-proof. Sometimes they do not work properly to capture the finish of all runners. That is why back-up systems are required, especially at championships. Situations where transponders have not worked properly arise at almost every LDR National Championships such that we no longer consider these “official protests” if we are notified within the protest period. They are treated as amended results similar to an editorial change.

C1: Since Runner A brought the issue to the attention of the Referee within the one hour protest period then the Referee must investigate and address the problem. If the Referee can verify that Runner A ran the race and finished, then Runner A shall be inserted in all official results with the time verified by the back-up systems.

C2: Since Runner B brought the issue to the attention of the Referee well after the one hour protest period expired, then the Referee will not act to investigate nor address the problem. Runner B will not appear in the results. Note: When this actually occurred at one of the LDR Championships, the Referee did investigate and discovered Runner B’s results were verified by the back-up systems. Feeling sorry for Runner B who traveled across the country for the event, the Referee caused Runner B’s results (finish time) to be inserted at the bottom of the official overall results with an asterisk indicating that Runner B was disqualified. Runner B was not included in team scoring, age group results or age group results.

C3: Since Runner C brought the issue to the attention of the Referee within the one hour protest period then the Referee may investigate and address the problem. However, Runner C would be subject to possible disqualification under Rule 143.4, 143.6 and 143.9 for failing to wear the bib and transponder as issued.

Rule 146 - SITUATION 146C – EXPLANATION

Since Runners A and C brought the issues to the attention of the Referee within the one hour protest period then the Referee should investigate and address the problems.

As part of this investigation the Referee should seek to obtain evidence that Runners A and C actually ran and finished the race. The timing services provider is required by Rule 341.10 to provide a fully automatic timing camera or video system to validate times and places as a back-up to the primary transponder timing system. Usually the timing services provider would review this back-up system to ensure that no runners were missed by the primary system. In order to attempt to verify the claims from Runners A and C the Referee should view the back-up cameras looking for Runners A and C. There should also be other back-up systems in place. All possible evidence should be examined. Any Officials on the course should be consulted. Results from any split timing mats at the start or on the course should be examined. Other possible evidence might include bib recording sheets from officials, video backup systems on the course and at the finish, select time lists from the finish line. In fact, any and all back-up timing/recording systems and/or officials’ data should be examined.

If the Referee can identify Runners A and C as having competed in the race and having finished the race and verify their place and time, then the Referee should instruct the timing services provider to insert Runners A and C into the official overall results. Age group results, age-graded results and team results should also be updated and re-issued. These amended results should be posted as soon as possible with the posting time noted on the results. Runner C would then be subject to disqualification under Rule 143.4, 143.6 and 143.9 for failing to wear the bib and transponder as issued. The Clerk should have noticed the missing bib/transponder when Runner C checked in prior to the start.

Runner B’s situation is different from the other two runners. Since Runner B brought the issue to the attention of the Referee well after the one hour protest period expired, then the Referee will not act to investigate nor address the problem. Runner B will not appear in the results.

Note: As noted above in the ruling, when this actually occurred at one of the Master LDR Championships, the Referee did investigate and discovered Runner B’s results were verified by the back-up systems. Feeling sorry for Runner B who traveled across the country for the event, the Referee caused Runner B’s results (finish time) to be inserted at the bottom of the official overall results with an asterisk indicating that Runner B was disqualified. Runner B was not included in team scoring, age group results or age group results. It was small consolation that Runner B’s name and time did appear somewhere in the overall results.

Rule 163 – RUNNING COMPETITION

Rule 163.1 - Competitors shall be placed at the finish in the order in which any part of their bodies

(i.e., the “torso,” as distinguished from the head, neck, arms, hands, legs, or feet) reaches the finish line

SITUATION 163A

Who won?

At the Men’s USA 12 km Championships, two runners cross the finish line in an apparent tie.

Runner #22 has a transponder gun time of 34:28.21. Runner #15 has a transponder gun time of 34:28.23. The side-scan camera shows Runner #15 torso ahead of Runner #22 at the finish line.

Rule 163 – SITUATION 163A - RULING

Runner #15 shall be declared the winner with Runner #22 placed in 2^nd. Both runners official time shall be recorded as 34:29. Publishing times to 1/10^th of a second to illustrate differences in finishers would not help in this situation as both times would be 34:28.3. Perhaps a note in the results indicating that the places were separated by a Judge’s decision would be appropriate.

Rule 163 – SITUATION 163A – EXPLANATION

Transponder timing alone should not be used to officially place runners at USATF National LDR Championships. There must be an imaging system placed on the finish line to validate places. It is strongly recommended that any USATF sanctioned race that determines a championship and/or offers prize money places a side-scan imaging system on the finish line to determine placing.

The torso still defines a runner’s finish in all LDR events. (See Rule 165.4) The camera images should be reviewed by a certified Photo Finish Judge and/or the Referee to officially place all runners.

Currently, best practices at USATF LDR Championship events as described in USATF LDR Championship Guidelines and USATF Competition Rules require three independent timing systems. Transponder (“Chip”) timing is required as the primary timing system to establish a baseline listing for both place and time of all competitors. Examples of acceptable backup systems include: a second set of timing mats/wire receivers, a head-on camera system, a second transponder timing device or “chip” worn by the runner and the side transponder receivers/side wire receivers (i.e., Flashpoint). Official timers at the finish line (an actual person with a timing device) incorporating select timing procedures are used by most professional timing service providers as an additional quality control. Perhaps the most important addition to the timing services’ arsenal of redundancy has been the use of a digital line-scan imaging system (i.e., Lynx camera) now mandated at the finish line at all USATF LDR Championship events to record and examine all finishers. Due to inconsistencies in transponder timing system captures, it is mandated that a review of the entire race verifying the finishing order of all championship runners be made using the finish line digital line-scan imaging system prior to posting the initial results. This is especially important where prize money, selection for international teams, team scoring based on place and various age groups awards, e.g., Master age division medalists, are involved. Digital line-scan camera images can also be important where road race record performance verification may be needed. Most Fully Automatic Timing (FAT) systems common to Track & Field meets use a digital line-scan camera. While use of a digital line-scan camera (i.e., Lynx camera) at the finish line of most LDR events will probably not satisfy the definition of fully automatic timing since it will not be started automatically, it will be extremely useful in verifying finish order. Times produced in this manner should be considered hand-times and rounded to the next slower full second.

Rule 251 – CROSS COUNTRY COURSE

2. The rules of Long Distance Running, Rule 240 through Rule 246, shall apply where appropriate unless otherwise modified in this section.

NOTE: The LDR Rules include Course Certification, Medical / Refreshment Services, Start Line Requirements / Procedure, Course Markings, Course Monitoring, Finish Line Requirements / Procedure, Timing / Placing / Results Recording Procedure and Team Scoring.

Rule 243.4 – Any competitor who has been found by the Referee and/or Jury of Appeal to have gained an unfair advantage by intentionally shortening the route of the race ("cutting the course") shall be immediately disqualified from the competition. See also Rule 163.6.

Rule 163.6 - Leaving Track or Course:

(a) No competitor, after voluntarily leaving the track or course, except in compliance with Rule 170.16, shall be allowed to rejoin a race either for the purpose of gaining a place or to pace or to assist another competitor. The competitor shall be recorded as not finishing the event. A competitor attempting to re-enter the race shall be disqualified.

SITUATION 251A

Protest concerning cutting the cross country course

At the USA Cross Country Championships the three lead runners miss a critical turn and run 50m off course before they realize their mistake. An Umpire reports to the Referee that the three runners left the course. The Referee disqualifies all three runners. All three runners file protests with the Referee within the one hour protest period.

A1: The course is marked with chalk on the ground, but not with banners or flags. The three runners shortened the distance to be covered.

A2: The course is clearly marked with flags and a chalk line on the ground. The three runners shortened the distance to be covered.

A3: The course is marked with chalk on the ground, but not with banners or flags. The three runners did not shorten the distance to be covered, in fact, they ran long.

A4: The course is clearly marked with flags and a chalk line on the ground. The three runners did not shorten the distance to be covered, in fact, they ran long.

Rule 251 - SITUATION 251A – RULINGS

A1: Protest denied. The athlete (or an official representative of the athlete) may file an appeal of the decision of the Referee with the Jury of Appeals within 30 minutes of being advised that their protest was denied.

A2: Protest denied. The athlete (or an official representative of the athlete) may file an appeal of the decision of the Referee with the Jury of Appeals within 30 minutes of being advised that their protest was denied.

A3: Protest upheld. The runners did not shorten the distance to be covered and should not be disqualified.

A4: Protest upheld. The runners did not shorten the distance to be covered and should not be disqualified.

Rule 251 - SITUATION 251A – EXPLANATIONS

The two key issues to be examined by the Referee are:

1. Did the runners voluntarily shorten the course?

2. Was the course well-marked?

We have all heard that “it is the runner’s responsibility to know the course”. This may seem to be common sense and usual practice but this caveat does NOT appear in USATF Competition Rules. However, it is clear in the rules that it is the responsibility of the organizing body to provide a well-marked course. This includes providing markings and monitors on the course where necessary. (See Rule 243 for exact language) In marking a cross country course flagging is preferred, but not mandated; a white chalk line is suggested, but not mandated; umpires are suggested as needed, but not mandated.

In Situations A3 and A4 the runners did NOT shorten the course. Therefore they should not be disqualified under Rule 243.4. In Situations A1 and A2, it would be up to the Referee to determine if the course was well marked. The Referee should question the umpire to ascertain the specifics of the situation. Questions that should be asked include, but are not limited to, the following:

a. Was an umpire/course monitor stationed at this location on the course and if so, what actions did they take?

b. Were the markings adequate and appropriate at this location of the course?

c. If the chalk line was the only marking at this location of the course, was it clearly visible? Had it become covered or worn away?

The answers to these questions will assist the Referee’s decision. The Referee should always review the course before the meet begins to ensure that the course is well-marked and should advise the organizing body to any corrections needed in the course markings. It never hurts to have several markings for any change of direction on a course especially if umpires/course monitors are not available. After any situation where runners leave the course during a race, the Referee should ensure that markings are adequate at that location for subsequent races (if any). Additional umpires/course monitors could be assigned as needed. These situations are less frequent lately due to repetitive loop courses that have a running alley flagged for the entire loop. However, any and all turn points away from the main loop should always be examined by the Referee before the race to ensure appropriate markings and/or staffing. Please refer to Rule 243 and Rule 251.

Rule 251.3 – APPAREL

Rule 251.3 - The jersey or singlet worn by the members of a team in cross country shall be basically identical for each member in color and style, and must be clearly visible throughout the race, i.e., worn as the outer garment if other apparel items are worn underneath by one or more team members. Because of the nature of cross country running, the preferences of individual athletes in certain weather situations will allow other apparel items to vary widely without penalty. Individuals not complying may be disqualified from scoring for a team.

Rule 341.9 – MASTERS LDR -Unless the Championship event has issued items such as letters or distinguishing numbers to identify teams, see Rule 251.3 for apparel requirements in team-scored Championships.

SITUATION 251A

Legal Uniform or not?

The Coach of a USATF member club Master cross country team asks the Cross Country Games Committee the following uniform question one month prior to the USA Cross Country Championships where there will be team scoring in their age division:

“How strict will the standards be on matching uniforms? We may have one guy with the same singlet as everyone else (color, style, etc.) but he won't have the same team logo on the front. We're trying to resolve this before the meet.”

Rule 251 - SITUATION 251A – RULING

The Games Committee may examine photos of the different team uniform singlets in question and offer advice as to whether or not they appear to satisfy the requirements of Rule 251.3. However, the final determination can only be made when the team checks in with the Clerk of Course prior to the start of their race.

Rule 251 - SITUATION 251A – EXPLANATION AND EXAMPLES

The Coach is to be commended for attempting to resolve their team uniform question in advance of the competition. However, the Games Committee may only offer an opinion prior to the event. Day-of-race conditions may dictate changes in planned club team uniform apparel. The actual determination on the compliance of team apparel with the conditions of Rule 251.3 can only be done with the Clerk of Course on race day. Teams can protest to the Referee after the Clerk has ruled. Of course, for Championship events the Referee is appointed by the Games Committee (appropriate Sports Committee) and his rulings would probably be in line with Games Committee policies. The Games Committee establishes the Championship Operating Procedures where they may clarify their interpretation of “basically identical in color and style” for the advance benefit of officials and competitors.

The Games Committee may issue items such as letters or distinguishing numbers to identify teams.

At a recent Masters LDR Team Championship, the Clerk issued small stick-on letters “A” and “B” to members of one club’s M40+ “A” team and M40+ “B” team to help identify which team they represented. Runners from that club’s “A” and “B” teams in the same age division all wore identical singlets since not all clubs have more than one version of their club team uniform.

In establishing Championship Procedures, Games Committees should be aware of potential hardships involved by clubs in complying with the team uniform rule. Manufacturers have been known to incrementally change uniform design from year to year thus making it next to impossible to obtain a single uniform that exactly matches previous uniform orders in exact color and style. The intent of the uniform rule is not to force club teams to purchase new uniforms each and every year due to personnel changes. Referees should operate under the “spirit of the rule” when uniform situations arise. The main question to consider when examining different uniforms should be whether or not officials and fellow competitors would believe that the runners in question all belong to the same club team.

It is suggested that if teams appear late at the start line with questionable uniforms the Clerk can use a cell phone camera to take a photo of their team uniforms as evidence in case of subsequent protests.

The key phrase "basically identical in color and style" is open to interpretation. Without actually seeing different singlets, no one could make a ruling.

Rule 341 – MASTERS LONG DISTANCE CHAMPIONSHIPS

RULE 341.4: The age of the competitor on the day of the start of the race determines the age division. A runner may compete in a younger division as a team member. If he/she runs on a younger team, the runner may still compete as an individual in his/her true age division if both divisions are run simultaneously. Only a birth certificate or a U.S. passport will be acceptable as proof of age.

SITUATION 341A

Master runner on younger age division team – same race

John X., a M63 runner from Club Northwest, wishes to run on the Club Northwest M50+ team at the USA Masters 5 km Championships and still remain eligible for individual awards in the M60-64 age group. Note: there is only one Men’s race at the USA Masters 5 km Championships and all individual age divisions and all team divisions compete together.

Rule 341 - SITUATION 341A – RULING

John X. may compete as a member of Club Northwest’s M50+ team and also be eligible for individual awards in the M60-64 age group since all runners and teams run simultaneously in one race.

Rule 341 - SITUATION 341A – EXPLANATION

Since all runners and teams compete in the same race John X. would still be directly competing against the other runners in the M60-64 age group while competing for the Club Northwest M50+ team. He would be wearing a uniform identical with the other members of the Club Northwest M50+ team while wearing an age/gender “back” bib showing the M60-64 age division. He is thus identifiable for competition purposes to all other racers as a member of the Club Northwest M50+ team (by uniform) and at the same time identifiable as a runner in the M60-64 age group (by age/gender “back” bib).

SITUATION 341B

Master runner on younger age division team – not same race

Bob Z., a M52 runner from the Ann Arbor Track Club, wishes to run on the Ann Arbor Track Club’s M40+ team at the USA Masters 5 km Cross Country Championships and still remain eligible for individual awards in the M50-54 age group. Note: there are separate M40-49 and M50-59 races at the USA Masters 5 km Cross Country Championships.

Rule 341 - SITUATION 341B – RULING

Bob Z. may NOT compete for the Ann Arbor Track Club’s M40+ team and still remain eligible for individual awards in the M50-54 age group since both divisions are not run simultaneously.

Bob Z. must choose either:

Choice 1: Compete for the Ann Arbor Track Club’s M40+ team by running in the M40-49 race thus forfeiting his eligibility for individual awards in the M50-54 age group,

Choice 2: Retain eligibility for awards in the M50-54 age group by competing in the M50-59 race thus forfeiting his eligibility to compete for the Ann Arbor Track Club’s M40+ team.

Rule 341 - SITUATION 341B – EXPLANATION

Note that if the condition of Rule 341.4 is not met and both divisions are NOT run simultaneously, then Bob Z. would be forced to choose one of two options. If he competes for the Ann Arbor Track Club’s M40+ team he must run in the M40-49 race. He would not be eligible for individual awards in his M50-54 age group since he would not be competing directly against the other runners in the M50-54 age group who would be competing in the M50-59 race. If Bob Z. opts to run in the M50-59 race, then he would be eligible for individual awards in his 50-54 group but could not be a member of the Ann Arbor Track Club’s M40+ team which must run in the M40+ race.

SPECIAL LEMMA TO RULE 341.4 - RULING

It has been ruled that a runner cannot enter two separate Master races at the same distance at the same Master Championship. Thus Bob Z. could not run in both the M40+ race and then run again in the M50+ race. He must choose only one race when team age divisions are not run simultaneously. While not directly stated in the USATF Competition Rules that a runner may not run in 2 separate races at the same distance at the same event, it is logically implied by Rule 341.4. However, runners have been permitted to compete in a Master division race and an Open division race at the same Championship. They must enter and pay for both races and should be assigned two separate bib numbers.

Vice-Chair, USATF Masters LDR;

Masters Cross Country Rep;

Championships Coordinator, USATF Cross Country Council;

USATF Official #018316, Grade 3 Master-Level LDR Referee.

Send comments and questions to: Bill Quinlisk at crosscountry@usatf.org

USATF web links – as of May 1, 2020

USATF Website:

https://www.usatf.org/

2019 USATF Bylaws and Operating Procedures:

https://www.usatf.org/governance/bylaws-regulations

2020 USATF Competition Rules:

https://www.usatf.org/governance/rule-books