NCAA Crossbar rule change 2013-2014

[Vaultref]

I would think Gill would want to contact the NCAA to at least verify their AGX ends are still NCAA legal.

I might ask Mr Pod., maybe later as the indoor season progresses..
Rarely see this AGX bar in use out here in the east.
Have come across them maybe four times.. At the University of Illinos (what a surprise ) , at the ECAC outdoors in Princeton and out at the 2012 trials. I'm not sure where the fourth was, but I do remember talking with this Gill rep (a girl, whom I believe was one of the designers of this end) about building in a narrow white line the length of the flat surface to assist the bar raisers when they are putting up a bar in bright, overhead sun. This isn't by any chance you Pvjunkie??

As far as the two AGX ends I have, the flat side is maybe right at the center cross section of the Xbar. I'm not trying to split hairs here, but it was close. Maybe this older design was improved since I was handed this pair to change that a few mm.

[rainbowgirl28]

Haha PVJunkie is definitely not a girl

[PVJunkie]

We do work with the NCAA on rule changes. In fact one of the current members is my former college coach.

The reason for my confidence is - 1) Our tolerance on that mold does not place the flat surface directly on the center line and 2) I had a conversation with the committee about this change and I know for a fact that they are not attempting to make the AGX illegal. They are trying to bring their rules more in line with the USATF/IAAF.

I am not the young lady you spoke to. I am a much older, less attractive man. If you have officiated at the U of Illinois then we have met. I have been the volunteer vault coach for the Illini for the past 12 years (9 years with the womens team).

I hate seeing speculation about rules on websites. It causes a lot of confusion. Please call Gill Athletics and ask to speak to Bryan (PVJunkie) if you would like to go further in depth with this, however the NCAA wrote the rule so only they can provide the interpretation.

If you wish to target the wording of the rules, here are the most commonly ignored sentences in the world - (IAAF) The end pieces shall be hard and smooth. They shall not be of, or covered with rubber or any other material which has the effect of increasing the friction between them and the supports. (USATF) These end pieces shall be hard and smooth.(NCAA) The ends of the crossbar shall be smooth and shall not be covered with rubber or any other material that has the effect of increasing the friction between the surface of the crossbar and the supports.

With those requirements in mind, what end would you consider legal?

[botakatobi]

On an entirely historical note, this design of bar end was used over 100 years ago at the Olympic Games. I have not seen it used again until Gill came out with their version.

[rainbowgirl28]

On an entirely historical note, this design of bar end was used over 100 years ago at the Olympic Games. I have not seen it used again until Gill came out with their version.

You were at the Olympics 100 years ago?

[botakatobi]

I'm the oldest pole catcher around!

[Cooleo111]

I hate seeing speculation about rules on websites. It causes a lot of confusion.

I'm sorry you feel that way. My reason for asking the question at the beginning of this thread was to clarify the issue, not to muddy the waters.

I had a conversation with the committee about this change and I know for a fact that they are not attempting to make the AGX illegal. They are trying to bring their rules more in line with the USATF/IAAF.

I do not know what the intentions of the NCAA are, but I like remain optimistic that such a rule (or any rule, for that matter) was not created with malice. However, I know for a fact that this rule has been interpreted by at least one institution as making your crossbars illegal! Though they have ordered and used many of the crossbars for meets in the past, they will no longer be doing so simply because of the new rule (as far as I know).
I hope no one takes this personally. I am just explaining what I have witnessed, and am trying to sort out whether or not the school's interpretation and resulting decision is accurate or not.

[Vaultref]

ahha.. I do belive I know you.. I was there in 2008 for the Big10 with JeffW.
As soon as I look up the number, I'll place a call.
If I recall, you had to be else where on day two ( think to watch you daughter jump), when the crew moved the pads using a fork lift. Ugly!

[Vaultref]

Haha PVJunkie is definitely not a girl

sucks .. that girl was very pretty! just like you Becca.. hehehe

[PVJunkie]

Cooleo111

I mean no disrespect but the correct way to clarify any rules issue it to contact the the organization who wrote the rule first. The only interpretation that matters in this case is the NCAA's. Posting on a public forum first does indeed cause confusion. Dozens of opinions get thrown out and since most of them are wrong there will be some that never get the correct answer.

So you now know the interpretation is wrong. Who provided the school with this interpretation and will anything be done to correct it? If you would like to share the name of the school with me (you could PM it) I would be happy to contact them and correct the issue. I would hate for them to think they have crossbars that they cannot use and feel the need to purchase new ones.

The AGX bar is legal at every level. The 2013 AGX bar has been improved and will outperform every bar on the market (the improvement is why I referenced the 2013 catalog).

[botakatobi]

See you in Albuquerque with the anti gravity bars again!

[Decamouse]

First - when bar design (company in europe had been making also) was first used at Gill the two lead designers where girls (Pam and Ashley) - so very possible you talked to one - especially since Ashley was a PV and at one time held the U of Illinois record. It is legal according to IAAF - is it possible that wording gets fubar in rules books - would not be the first time. If you see me officiating would now be in Wisconsin - although U of I outdoors could get some smoking tail winds -