PoleVaultPower.com

Man the pole vault scene in the Missouri area seems really slow on this forum - Am I the only one to notice this trend ? Come on pole vaulters step up and get this web site going, do it for our founder "Becca"

Yay for Missouri!

I smilin Becca !!! - How is that youngster of yours doing - about ready to "bounce" on some pole vault mats like mom used to do ?? - lol

1yeldud1 wrote:I smilin Becca !!! - How is that youngster of yours doing - about ready to "bounce" on some pole vault mats like mom used to do ?? - lol

I have two now! Eddie is almost 3. We moved to a small island with no pole vault, so I have about 10 years to fundraise for a pit

1yeldud1-

An issue came up this weekend at Class 2 District 1. A coach argued that athletes' who have entered the competition after passing 3 heights and getting the 2min warmup then could pass another 3 heights receive another 2 min warmup. I've known it to be that once an athlete has entered the competition with the warmup time that they did not receive another warmup time slot. Am I wrong or ????? The field ref was called and the athletes' were allowed a 2nd warmup. Is this something new?

Rule 7-5 ART.16 ...A pole vault competitor(s) who has passed three consecutive heights and has not entered the competition should be permitted two minutes of warm-up jumps per the number of competitors entering at that height without the crossbar in place. The competitor(s) shall enter the competition at that height. Such warm-up must be taken at a height change. Quoted directly from page 60 of the 2014 NFHS Track and Field Rules Book. The key words are and has not entered the competition. This to me means once they make a vault they have now entered the competition and are no longer entitled to a second warm-up.

I concur, but a lot of the officials don't know anything about vaulting. This weekend, no poles were checked at a District meet because no one knew who was responsible to do it, so they didn't.

I also think the "video viewing rule" is seriously being misinterpreted as many coach's are video taping next to the runway while their athlete is running. I wish the folks writing these rules had some idea of purpose, intent, and process. And apparently the coaching box is also no longer in use as folks just do whatever they want . . .especially if the host is the home school.

vaultdad wrote:I concur, but a lot of the officials don't know anything about vaulting. This weekend, no poles were checked at a District meet because no one knew who was responsible to do it, so they didn't.

I also think the "video viewing rule" is seriously being misinterpreted as many coach's are video taping next to the runway while their athlete is running. I wish the folks writing these rules had some idea of purpose, intent, and process. And apparently the coaching box is also no longer in use as folks just do whatever they want . . .especially if the host is the home school.

The best California prep long jumper was DQ'd yesterday for a violation of this rule.

"According to meet manager Van Latham, Jackson exited the infield and crossed the track and viewed video footage of himself, violating National Federation 4-6, Article 5-g. "It was obvious," said Latham. "Several coaches — at least six of them — immediately noticed it and said they wanted to file protests."

The rule, also enforced by the CIF-Southern Section, was amended for the 2013-2014 season to permit such viewing only if it takes place in an unrestricted area/coaches box. Unless such an area is stipulated, then there is no unrestricted zone and it is otherwise a disqualification (the case in this situation)."