revised size of pegs for PV crossbar

[1.97hjsteve]

Can someone tell me in a little bit more detail the exact length of the "old" pegs" vs. the new ones, and has this actually been implemented very much ? Sounds like a great deal for the PV Standards manufacturers.

[gh]

Re: revised size of pegs for PV crossbar

new IAAF/USATF/NCAA (don't know about high school) rule that went into effect for this year shortened the pegs from 75mm to 55mm (roughly 3 inches to 2 1/8 inches.

The falloff in standard of performance at the international level during the indoor season was profound (men only---women are still in an exponential growth phase of improvement, so you can't judge current years with the past).

Stupidest rule to come down the pike in many a year. They've taken one of the few monstroulsy-popular events in the sport and managed to reduce it to a long sequence of misses at lower heights. Way to pack those stands with fans, folks! Barf.

gh
(garry hill/editor, T&FN)

[1.97hjsteve]

Re: revised size of pegs for PV crossbar

thanks, Gary. And if the purpose of the rule was to further discourage "Volzing", it's just a cop out to lessen the responsibility of officials to
rule a foul for Volzing. If the bar always falls off, no judgement call needed, but also NO EVENT ! Keep working to get this one rescinded, please.

[WK]

Re: revised size of pegs for PV crossbar

Also, the rule proves to substantially delay vault competitions, because (especially if there is some wind) the bar comes falling down on its own much more often. The officials then have to put it back on (which has become more difficult itself) etc. etc.
Many top pole vaulters have protested the rule with the IAAF, but got turned down. Is there another way to reverse this moronic rule change?

[gh]

Re: revised size of pegs for PV crossbar

I think a little more "civil disobedience" on the part of the vaulters is called for.

Recall two years ago when the IAAF--in another misguided move--experimented with allowing only two attempts per height. At the Hengelo GP the vaulters (there was a pic in August 2001 T&FN) staged a brief sitdown strike in the pit. That got the IAAF's attention.

I think they ought to do the same at a major meet this year. With the mPV being part of the Golden League series, they've got a pretty good vehicle in which to do so in front of a large TV audience.

I wouldn't want them to screw up the meet, but they should plop long enough that the cameras take notice. (And if they don't, do it again at the next meet for 5 minutes longer.)

gh

[1.97hjsteve]

Re: revised size of pegs for PV crossbar

how did it ever get done in the first place? Bad committee work by the IAAF ?

[WK]

Re: revised size of pegs for PV crossbar

If my sources are right, there already have been some thoughts about a 'sit-down strike' similar to the one in Hengelo (I was there and I must say, the message came across very clearly. Also, once the spectators got what it was about, they were 100% supportive).

Concerning the question how this all came about: I believe the rule was proposed somewhere in 2001 and voted on in the Edmonton IAAF congress. I guess a lot of people did not really know what they were voting about.

Also, I have heard similar criticism from a number of different events
- throws: changing the sector without a very apparent reason
- hammer: changing the specification of the handle, that became to smalle for large men (and a lot of hammer throwers are - of course - big men). I believe the introduction of the latter rule has been postponed?


arguments

[bubba]

Re: revised size of pegs for PV crossbar

Meet directors can make some noise too. If it ruins a great spectator events and hurts scheduling/meet flow it seems meet directors would be wise to support the protest or raise one of their own.