AAI event permits

thirtyfoot

Enduro wrote: »

Just to re-iterate and re-emphasise...I'm personally not saying that the athletes taking part in such a race should be suspended (although the rules clearly do), what I'm saying is that any athletes involved in the organisation of such a race should be suspended. A big distinction, I'm sure you'll agree.

It would have to be dealt with on a case by case basis. I would investigate the root cause of the issue. A county board could be populated by a group of chancers or else they may have an issue with the race organisers or club. All these would have to be examined before you would start banning people. Banning people is a very serious step. The club or race organiser may just want to hold a race and have very good and honest motivations and the county board may be playing political shenanigans and acting the eejit. Its not black and white.

dna_leri

meathcountysec wrote: »

Affiliated club - €32.00

Non-affiliated body - €60.00

For events up to 1,000 participants. Not sure over that amount.

Based on above, if it breaks down 50:50 affiliated/non-affiliated, thats about 200 events a year, or less than 4 a week, on average.

Hard to know what % of events this would be - 50% ?

Enduro

Tingle wrote: »

It would have to be dealt with on a case by case basis. I would investigate the root cause of the issue. A county board could be populated by a group of chancers or else they may have an issue with the race organisers or club. All these would have to be examined before you would start banning people. Banning people is a very serious step. The club or race organiser may just want to hold a race and have very good and honest motivations and the county board may be playing political shenanigans and acting the eejit. Its not black and white.

That scenario would be a whole other set of underlying problems, and TBH I've no idea about how likely that is. I agree that banning people is a very serious step. But then organising non-permited races should also be regarded as a very serious step, and doesnt seem to be regarded as such at the moment. Which is why I think drastic measured are required to change that particular mindset.

The one thing that is black and white though is the IAAF rule, which is pretty explicit and draconian. Its a bit Irish of us (we're both saying it to different extents) to try to ignore the rule just because its implications are drastic/hard to enforce.

meathcountysec

meathcountysec wrote: »

The restriction on competing comes from the IAAF Rule 53

RULE 53

Ineligibility for International and Domestic Competitions

1. The following persons shall not take part in competitions, whether held under IAAF rules or the domestic rules of a Member.

Any person:

(iii) who takes part in any athletics meeting which is not sanctioned, recognised or certified by the Member in the country in which the event is held

Can I just reiterate...

Nobody gets suspended by anybody....

By competing in a non-sanctioned, recognoised or certified event you are defacto rendered ineligible to take part in IAAF or AAI competitions. End of.

mrak

meathcountysec wrote: »

The restriction on competing comes from the IAAF Rule 53

RULE 53

Ineligibility for International and Domestic Competitions

1. The following persons shall not take part in competitions, whether held under IAAF rules or the domestic rules of a Member.

Any person:

(iii) who takes part in any athletics meeting which is not sanctioned, recognised or certified by the Member in the country in which the event is held

I don't think its a matter of suspension but more that an athlete would not be eligible to compete in a given competition. They could not then score for their club/county or be awarded a title.

Never heard of it happening but in theory.....

Sorry for coming in so late and probably getting the wrong end of the stick. I hadn't heard of this before. I'm all for permits to prevent clashes, particularly with big aai events like XC, etc.

That said - are we sure that athletics meeting above refers to road races/fun run/etc? Like someone else mentioned with tri's, gaelforce, etc it's hard to know where to draw the line. What about time trials with your friends or clubmates - are these athletics meetings?? Looks more like a rule to be used to smack down upstart organisations than unpermitted road races.

harrymchoudi

Tingle wrote: »

There are many grey areas in all facets of our sport. If we stuck to the rulebook and banned people for every breach of law then we would have no athletes competing as everyone would be serving a suspension and indeed many of our feeder organisations would be annulled and banned themselves as I am sure you could find that due course was not followed in all instances. With respect to your opinion I think you are out of touch with reality of the sport and missing the point of the permit system. Always remember this - THE SPORT IS ABOUT THE ATHLETES. Why ban an athlete when if you get to the root cause of an issue it has very little to do with the athletes and more to do with politics and personality.

Yes T, you are right, the sport is about the athletes, good point. I was coming from the same angle as Enduro, which was- the organisers and not the athletes should be penalised.
It is fair to say though, everyone can make a mistake but knowingly make a mistake and go against rules when better advised should be addressed. What Im trying to say, acting in good faith and messing up is excusable. Suspension or whatever punishment would be up to the governing body.
The real losers if these breeches of rules were common, would be the athletes, for example running a considerable large distance(as in an ultra) and then told your completion time doesn't count or believed for that matter, especially if it was a good time. I can well imagine how personally agrieved I would be if I was ever doubted of my time/performance or if the there was a question of cheating during a non supervised race.
I myself don't compete at the ultra distance, just using that as an example, but Im all in favour of rules to protect all that are involved in this sport and to uphold its integrity.

eltuerto

Can only speak about Dublin but the permit system here is truly appalling. First you are told you cannot apply for permits for 2010 . Next you see races which have permits advertising for events in 2010!! On further investigation it seems that if you are in a "click" well, then sure, no bother, here is a permit !!

The whole system of permits has to be looked at., but AAI are so inept that they are not the body to reform this system. And the sad fact is that very little can be done.

Permits should be used to make sure punters get a good value, well organised event AND that there are no two races in the same area clashing. Take the Addidas race series. Great events, well orgainsied but yet I know that even they get huge hassle from the DUblin Board re race permits.

As far as I know BHAA don't bother with permits (Dublin Board would never approve them anyway, as they are massively prejudiced against them). BHAA do their own thing and organise brilliant events. So permits are not used fairly and are applied in an unfair manner and NO there is little chance of any reform

--amadeus--

harrymchoudi wrote: »

...for example running a considerable large distance(as in an ultra) and then told your completion time doesn't count or believed for that matter, especially if it was a good time. I can well imagine how personally agrieved I would be if I was ever doubted of my time/performance or if the there was a question of cheating during a non supervised race.
I myself don't compete at the ultra distance, just using that as an example, but Im all in favour of rules to protect all that are involved in this sport and to uphold its integrity.

Please stop trying to stir up a closed debate. It comes across as trolling, which I am sure wasn't your intention.

meathcountysec

mrak wrote: »

are we sure that athletics meeting above refers to road races/fun run/etc?

As per IAAF Constitution

Rule 1

Definitions

Athletics

Track and field athletics, road running, race walking and cross country running.

thirtyfoot

eltuerto wrote: »

As far as I know BHAA don't bother with permits (Dublin Board would never approve them anyway, as they are massively prejudiced against them). BHAA do their own thing and organise brilliant events. So permits are not used fairly and are applied in an unfair manner and NO there is little chance of any reform

It would be great if the BHAA could be integrated within the AAI. Firstly people with experience of organising events could be utilised with AAI. Secondly, potential revenue from BHAA races could be pumped back into the mainstream sport and to clubs as currently revenues from BHAA races (if any) remains within a large but very narrow section of our sport as in the competing roadrunners. The BHAA model is unsustainable without the AAI (as there would be a marked reduction in athletes) while the AAI is obviously sustainable without the BHAA. A group within AAI that oversaw the BHAA type model and with that the whole road racing scene and permits etc would be a perfect situation. Unlikely to happen but I'd never say that reform or even changes like I suggest would never happen.

If there was a BHAA style section within AAI it would be the ideal situation.

Condo131

For the record (to put response into perspective):
I am not an AAI official at any level (did have peripheral officer role at CB level) but do have several AAI functions (accredited technical functions)
I have been an AAI club official for over 20 years and I am an RD.
I am an individual member of the BHAA and have been competing in BHAA events for over 25 years.

Tingle wrote: »

It would be great if the BHAA could be integrated within the AAI.

Agreed.
...But
a) It would be great for the AAI
b) Why would the BHAA bother?

Tingle wrote: »

Firstly people with experience of organising events could be utilised with AAI.

Indeed the BHAA events run like clockwork. The area they cover, primarily road races, with some XC, is pretty narrow, but the BHAA model works well.

Tingle wrote: »

Secondly, potential revenue from BHAA races could be pumped back into the mainstream sport and to clubs as currently revenues from BHAA races (if any) remains within a large but very narrow section of our sport as in the competing roadrunners.

Again, Why would the BHAA bother?

Tingle wrote: »

The BHAA model is unsustainable without the AAI (as there would be a marked reduction in athletes) while the AAI is obviously sustainable without the BHAA.

I don't think that follows. The BHAA has been functioning pretty well for over 30 years, with BLE/AAI, at worst turning a blind eye to it.
In contrast the AAI and BLE have been persistently involved in internal turmoil. Personally I think there is so much hassle and politics involved, to the detriment of the sport....and I see little hope for improvemnet in the foreseeable future.
The only way that the BHAA numbers might conceivably be reduced significantly, would be for the AAI to prohibit AAI members from participating in BHAA races. ...That ain't going to happen.

Overall, I'm quite despondent and disillusioned with the way everything seems to be going with the AAI.

Tingle wrote: »

A group within AAI that oversaw the BHAA type model and with that the whole road racing scene and permits etc would be a perfect situation. Unlikely to happen but I'd never say that reform or even changes like I suggest would never happen.

Having (unsuccessfully) put forward motions to Congress in recent years, intended to improve things wrt permits/calendars etc, I feel that there is a massive inertia and resistance to almost ANY change. Pragmatism and logic don't seem to come into it at all .

Tingle wrote: »

If there was a BHAA style section within AAI it would be the ideal situation.

Agreed.

thirtyfoot

Condo131 wrote: »

Agreed.
...But
a) It would be great for the AAI
b) Why would the BHAA bother?


.

For the betterment of the sport as a whole

Condo131 wrote: »

Indeed the BHAA events run like clockwork. The area they cover, primarily road races, with some XC, is pretty narrow, but the BHAA model works well.


Again, Why would the BHAA bother?


.

To bring that expertise to the sport. In my opinion, BHAA people are probably the best equipped people to deliver road races. It would be great if they could be brought into the wider sport.

Condo131 wrote: »

I don't think that follows. The BHAA has been functioning pretty well for over 30 years, with BLE/AAI, at worst turning a blind eye to it.
In contrast the AAI and BLE have been persistently involved in internal turmoil. Personally I think there is so much hassle and politics involved, to the detriment of the sport....and I see little hope for improvemnet in the foreseeable future.
The only way that the BHAA numbers might conceivably be reduced significantly, would be for the AAI to prohibit AAI members from participating in BHAA races. ...That ain't going to happen.

No, my point is if there is no athletics organisation there will be no athletes or at least a vast reduced number of athletes. Its not going to happen but if AAI went away and there was no organised athletics in this country, in 10-20 years there would be no or at least a vastly reduced number of athletes in BHAA. If BHAA stopped existing, it would have no effect on AAI. Thats the point.

BHAA don't do anything to promote athletics at grassroots regarding recruiting kids, promoting clubs, coaching, development, track and field, schools, universities etc etc. Its a 'race organising' organisation and very successfull at it. Thats why it would be great if that could be brought under the umbrella of the AAI and the wider sport. Leaving politics and the issues aside, its the best solution. BHAA people in AAI organising races, issuing permits, regulating and controlling the road running scene, bringing the Business House companies into the sport etc etc without having to worry about all the stuff that the current competition people in AAI have to worry about like juvenile track comps, juvenile cross comps, the huge headache of masters track/cross comps etc etc. Essentially, all the facets of the competitions that AAI run. These could still be done by existing AAI comp people but the BHAA people would solely look after road racing and all facets of it and continue to do what they do now but within the sport so that it can add value to more than the narrow area it currently adds value to.

Condo131

Hi Tingle, I think we're singing from the same hymn-sheet Maybe (very)slightly different keys though.:D

....btw, I CAN'T sing....:D:D:D

locteau

Hi harrymchoudi,

Interesting post and welcome to boards.ie. You seem to have some good knowledge of the sports, it is a pity you only join us recently.;)

The AAI permit is great idea, and I do do think we all should follow the idea of been affiliated, to promote the sports etc....

But we also have to remember that some people are not just about having pb's or setting up records etc.... Some just want to run for fun which is the first thing we should promote in the sports.

Regarding sanctioning athletes, it has been seen in many sports, such as boxing, or ITU vs Ironman Corporation etc... It never really works simply because it does bring friction and political issues.

The reason behind it is very simple, people feel trap when follow too much rules, and run away and seek freedom not claustrophobia. It is up to each individual to know the law and rules and apply them to themselves, but again it is like the guards luckily enough the one I have met or work with do have common sense. Our duties as sports people are not to blame but to help, promote the sports. Blaming and complaining does not make things moving. Constructive critics will.

The AAI promote the sports and by allowing some flexibility, I am sure some events in the future will evolve to the next level and work with them, Instead of sanctioning them and loose a local or charity race. It then benefit them an d us:p

We are not in a dictatorship after all. At the end of the day it is also up to us as runners and clubs to advise them help them in the AAI way instead of taking the easy way of giving out. We all here to learn and improve, aren’t we ?

geld

Tingle,

Like Condo I am a BHAA member and have helped to organised my company's yearly BHAA event. I am not a member of any AAI club at the moment (but hope to join one soon).

I can't see any real benefit to the BHAA to join the AAI. You have quoted some examples of benefits to AAI. Yes if the threat of a ban was carried out many club runners would have hard decision to make but relaistically I cannot see that happen.

I would make the point also that many BHAA members are active members of clubs and the AAI are already benefiting from their experience. I try to support club races as much as possible because as someone said above they provide the best value for money. I regulary see many BHAA members in the thick of things helping out at these races.

Just back from the Hibernian 1 mile. would like to elaborate a bit more but I'm out of time

BTW As far as I am aware IMRA are affiliated to AAI. Again I am not sure if this has made any difference to the IMRA community.

Enduro

BTW As far as I am aware IMRA are affiliated to AAI. Again I am not sure if this has made any difference to the IMRA community.

I presume (Yeah, I know ) it would make quite a difference to IMRA's eligibilty to send runners to compete in international championships, which is a rather major part of IMRA.

thirtyfoot

geld wrote: »

I can't see any real benefit to the BHAA to join the AAI. You have quoted some examples of benefits to AAI. Yes if the threat of a ban was carried out many club runners would have hard decision to make but relaistically I cannot see that happen.

I would make the point also that many BHAA members are active members of clubs and the AAI are already benefiting from their experience. I try to support club races as much as possible because as someone said above they provide the best value for money. I regulary see many BHAA members in the thick of things helping out at these races.

I would agree with much of this but if BHAA members feel that they would wish to continue as is and not adding anything to the sport outside of road runners between the ages of 25-65, then that would be very selfish and I would be disappointed with that.

I'd like to think that if BHAA could be brought into AAI to look after road running (in a manner like I have already pointed out in the thread, re permits, regulation etc) and there was no politics or crap involved, BHAA would jump at it as they would believe it would be the best for the sport.

Also, just to clarify, I'm not sure if this is what you think I was saying but I don't think bannings should ever take place and as meathcountysec has pointed out on the general topic, talk of bans is a little OTT. My point is that the BHAA model alone is unsustainable. It needs the AAI (or organised athletics) as in 20-30 years there would be no athletes.

To clarify I would see BHAA organisers as the perfect people to come into AAI in an official capacity and make the bridge between athletics and the recreation runner and also regulate the road running scene. There may be others who could do it but BHAA to me would be a good candidate.

Stupid_Private

Tingle wrote: »

I'd like to think that if BHAA could be brought into AAI to look after road running (in a manner like I have already pointed out in the thread, re permits, regulation etc) and there was no politics or crap involved, BHAA would jump at it as they would believe it would be the best for the sport.

Why road running? I've seen road running and BHAA mentioned side by side a few times. I certainly don't see them as a road running organisation. Of the 26 races on their calendar* for 2009 only 9 of them are on the road, and two of them races are the Adidas half marathon (not exactly BHAA organised as far as I know) and the Dublin marathon.

*Dublin BHAA

thirtyfoot

Stupid_Private wrote: »

Why road running? I've seen road running and BHAA mentioned side by side a few times. I certainly don't see them as a road running organisation. Of the 26 races on their calendar* for 2009 only 9 of them are on the road, and two of them races are the Adidas half marathon (not exactly BHAA organised as far as I know) and the Dublin marathon.

*Dublin BHAA

Because AAI aren't as good at organising road races as BHAA are. Makes sense to me that the most value they would add to the wider running community would be road races. I'm sure they could also help on cross races. They probably wouldn't add anything from a track perspective because the track races they organise are very simple - maybe a number of mile races at one meet, thats easy to do so they wouldn't know how to organise a meet that had maybe 10 age groups with 10-15 different events across track and field disciplines.

I'll rephrase - they are a Road Running and Cross Country Race Organising Organisation. I don't think you can argue its anything more than that.

plodder

Stupid_Private wrote: »

Why road running? I've seen road running and BHAA mentioned side by side a few times. I certainly don't see them as a road running organisation. Of the 26 races on their calendar* for 2009 only 9 of them are on the road, and two of them races are the Adidas half marathon (not exactly BHAA organised as far as I know) and the Dublin marathon.

*Dublin BHAA

True. BHAA Dublin is effectively a Dublin Running League. They've stretched their original "business" remit pretty far at this stage. Not that I'm complaining as they run a very effective operation. But it is a shame that it isn't integrated more into the rest of the athletics system. I've been running and competing for 5 years now, and have never come across any attempt by AAI/clubs to recruit runners like me into their system. So, it's certainly not the BHAA's fault. But then again, maybe AAI/clubs are primarily interested in bringing on youth talent. So, this would be a distraction for them. If that's the case, then maybe the split is between elite/ and non-elite athletics. Since, I haven't joined a club (yet), I don't really know.

thirtyfoot

plodder wrote: »

True. BHAA Dublin is effectively a Dublin Running League. They've stretched their original "business" remit pretty far at this stage. Not that I'm complaining as they run a very effective operation. But it is a shame that it isn't integrated more into the rest of the athletics system. I've been running and competing for 5 years now, and have never come across any attempt by AAI/clubs to recruit runners like me into their system. So, it's certainly not the BHAA's fault. But then again, maybe AAI/clubs are primarily interested in bringing on youth talent. So, this would be a distraction for them. If that's the case, then maybe the split is between elite/ and non-elite athletics. Since, I haven't joined a club (yet), I don't really know.

Excellent. This is an example where if the BHAA was within AAI then you would be already be a member of a club by default and integrated into the athletics system and who knows finding new talents which you didn't know you had, eg, coaching, recruiting, fundraising, sponsorship, development etc etc. And all these could be benefiting the wider sport. This shows the breakdown. You are an active member of BHAA yet there is no effort by BHAA to get you to join a club (and rightly so as they have no obligation to AAI and clubs and I would argue to the wider sport) or AAI to come and recruit you to a club. If it all becomes one, the breakdown goes away.

mrak

meathcountysec wrote: »

As per IAAF Constitution

Rule 1

Definitions

Athletics

Track and field athletics, road running, race walking and cross country running.

Thanks meathcountsec - that's the definition of athletics but I don't know that it's the definition of athletics meeting as referred to in the IAAF rule? Our club holds regular time trials which don't have a permit of course and members of other clubs often take part. Does you interpret the rule to mean that technically the athletes could be banned since they are running in an unpermitted event? The rule you quoted seems to be so vague as to make me think that debating its repercussions is a waste of time.

meathcountysec

mrak wrote: »

Our club holds regular time trials which don't have a permit of course and members of other clubs often take part. Does you interpret the rule to mean that technically the athletes could be banned since they are running in an unpermitted event? The rule you quoted seems to be so vague as to make me think that debating its repercussions is a waste of time.

Not all athletics events/meetings/whatever require a permit. Events that are confined to club members/other AAI registered athletes within the same county, for instance, do not require one.

I believe the "vagueness" in the Rule is deliberate, as is the case with most legislation, athletics related or otherwise. The interpretation is left to the IAAF/Member who can and will take individual case circumstances into account.

I am always at the disposal of the IAAF if they require some direction in the interpretation of their own rules;)

Hard Worker

Tingle, I'm not sure you fully understand the make up of the BHAA or their constitution. I must have a chat with you some day about it. Most BHAA events have different Race Directors so it would be unfair on the AAI to say that BHAA road races are organised better then AAI ones.
The BHAA do their own thing very well and are happy to cater for inter firm athletics.

YFlyer

Condo131 wrote: »

[I know some people are going to say that if the BHAA don't need a permit, why should anyone else (like the commercial races). The BHAA has been going for some 30 odd years and is excellently regulated, with good standards, has it's own insurance and critically, as a 'rival' organisation, does not run championships or select representative athletes for international duty]

There are Inter-firm international meets.