ATHLETIC RULES

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XXII, Issue 175, 9 July 1932, Page 8 (Supplement)

ATHLETIC RULES

alterations made. PENALTIES FOR FALSE Three motions affecting the association’s rules, notice of which had been given, were considered at a meeting of the Council of the New Zealand Amateur Athletic and Cycling Association this week On the motion of Mr W. F. Ingram; seconded by Mr V. Hugo, approval was given of an alteration to rule 11, to provide for the disqualification of competitors on a second false start, except in the Pentathlon and the Decathlon. Previously, it was provided that a competitor shall be disqualified on a third false start.

In moving the motion, Mr Ingram said he thought it was time the association came into line with other countries and enforced disqualification for a second false start, instead of at a third false start.

The chairman (Mr B. W. McVilly) said he thought it desirable that the association should adopt the international practice. Provision for a scale of penalties for a first false start was made in another motion moved by Mr Ingrain and seconded by Mr Hugo. Several deletions and additions were made to the original proposal, and the motion, as passed, was as follows:— “That the following be added to rule 11 of the handbook: —‘Penalties for false starting in handicap races shall be inflicted by the starter as follows:— In races up to and including 220 yards, the competitor shall be put back one yard for the first attempt; in races over 220 yards and including 440 yards, two yards for the first attempt; in races over 440 yards and including 880 yards, three yards for the first attempt; in races over 880 yards, five yards for the first attempt. In relay races the penalty shall be according to the distance of the race. In the event, of the competitors being recalled by the starter after he has fired the gun a penalty shall not necessarily be inflicted on any competitor unless in the opinion of the starter a competitor or competitors have deliberately broken.’ ” Reinstatements. Another motion, moved by Mr H. J. Austad, and seconded by Mr A. W. 0. Travers, sought to give the council power, where it is satisfied that reinstatement is in the best interests of amateur athletics, to grant reinstatement to an applicant who is past the age of active track and field participation as a competitor, despite the fact that he had knowingly and wilfully forfeited his amateur status. “I am rather afraid that this would land us in trouble,” said Mr McVilly. “We have got definite rules governing the amateur status, and if we adopt this proposal wo shall land ourselves in difficulty with the people overseas. If' we can do it under a dispensation I think that is the best way.” Mr Austad said he was sure the purpose of the motion was quite clear. There were men associated with the sport, who, although past the age of participation as competitors, were willing to give their services for the benefit of the sport. His view was that it was desirable that the sport should have the benefit of these old professionals. Mr McVilly said he thought the council had to look a little further afield than New Zealand and see that the. council was not placed in any false position. The council had to be particular about that, especially at the present juncture. It was pointed out that the dispensation received from the international body, would cover the position. The motion was then withdrawn.