DANISH ATHLETIC FEDERATION

 

 

OVERVIEW OF THE OUTCOME OF

THE DANISH PROPOSALS FOR THE IAAF 2003 CONGRESS

ACCEPTED means that a proposal has been accepted, either on beforehand by the Council, or has been included in a proposal from the Council, or has been accepted by Congress.

 

PROPOSALS TO AMEND IAAF CONSTITUTIONAL RULES

Amendments in bold and underlined

Rule 1 - Majority
A special majority is two-thirds of the votes of those voting at a congress, such two-thirds to represent at least one half of all Members of the IAAF.

Comments
Delete the word present. This was the wording accepted by the last Congress on the proposal of the Danish Federation, and anyway it must be either “the votes of those voting at a congress” or “the votes of those present at a congress”. To combine these two does not give any legal or linguistic meaning. 

Rule 2
---The rules and regulations of an elected national governing body must be in conformity with, and not more extensive than IAAF Rules and Regulations.---

Comments
Delete
“eligibility”. The “rules and regulations” are about far more than that. Actually they are the very foundation of IAAF and its Members. Furthermore, IAAF´s eligibility rules concerns only individual athletes. “More extensive” should cover the actual meaning better than “wider”.

Rule 7.10
Nominations can be made only by
a Member from a country or territory where the candidate is a citizen, but may be seconded---.

Comments
The phrase: “Members to which the candidate belongs” has no legal meaning, and even if it had, how can a candidate “belong to” more members. The proposed equals what is required of a Congress Delegate.

Rule 8.1
All Committees, with the exception of the Medical Committee
, the members of which are appointed by the Council, shall be elected---.

Comments
“The Committee who are” is a monstrosity.

Rule 8.6
No Committee member may take part in any meetings of the Committee, unless the subscription
for the current year has been paid by the Member from the country where the committee member is a citizen.

Comments
The phrase: “the Member he belongs to” has no legal meaning.

Rule 8.7 (a)
Should the vacancy be for an Area Group Representative,
the IAAF General Secretary shall ask the Area Association to nominate a representative within three months, to hold office until the next election.

Comments
The present text does not state who shall carry out the ballot, nor does it state who shall/can participate in it. The proposed wording is equal to the one in Rule 8.4 concerning the nomination of a representative for a committee by an Area Group.

Rule 8.7 (b)
Should the vacancy be for an individual elected member, then
the candidate with the highest number of votes, among those not elected for that committee at the latest election, shall be appointed by the Council to hold office until the next Congress.

Comments
Polling means “the activity of voting”, and “the next highest polling candidature from that Election Congress” does not make sense anyway.

 Rule 10.2 (b)
---Urgent proposals for alterations to the technical rules may, however, be
forwarded at any time, for the consideration of the Council as under Rule 5.6 (c), and must anyway be decided on by the next Congress, be it odd or even numbered. This also applies to urgent proposals forwarded later than six months before the next Congress.

Comments

The present text simply does not make sense, and it is not possible to deduct what is actually meant by it, and on one hand proposals must be “discussed” and on the other hand they must be “confirmed”.

 Rule 10.2 (e)

---a fixed date for when the amendment shall take effect must be stated.

Comments
The present text is about surgery on the amendment.

Rule 11

---Decisions in matters concerning Division II – IAAF Constitutional Rules – shall become operative only if approved by Congress.

 Comments
“Legislation” means “law” in a broad sense, and it is not clear which parts of IAAF Rules and Regulations are included, and which are not. The word is not used elsewhere in the Handbook

Rule 12.4
No athlete shall be eligible for international competition unless
the athlete:
( i) is a member of a club affiliated to a Member; or

Comments

The former text related to the next line (ii) is: “unless that athlete is has otherwise---“ and something to the same effect in relation to (iv).

Rule 12.5
---without the written approval of the
Member for which he is eligible to compete, and no Member shall allow---.

Comments
The phrase: “the IAAF  Member to which he belongs” has no legal meaning.

Rule 12.8
All negotiations for the participation of an athlete,
in athletic events in a foreign country, shall be carried out through the Members concerned, or---.

Comments
Linguistic clarification and correction.

Rule 12.12 (e)

In any continuous 365 day period, an athlete may not spend more than a total of 90 days in the territory of a foreign country where the Member is suspended.

Comment
According to the present text, all athletes will have to leave their own country, if the Member of that country is suspended. Also it is the Member, and not the country, which can be suspended.

Rule 13.3 (a)

---The IAAF shall not authorise any Continental, Regional or Area Championship, without having first obtained an unconditional undertaking, that the necessary permission---.

Comments
It should be easy to obtain an “unqualified” undertaking – but not worth very much.

Rule 21.8
---shall be in accordance with the rules of CAS,
in force at any time, provided always that---

Comments
“from time to time” means: occasionally but not regularly or very often.

Rule 54.3
If an athlete wishes to contest such a finding of ineligibility, he may appeal to CAS as under Rule 21.3 (vi).

Comments
As stated in 21.3 this concerns appeals.

  

PROPOSALS TO AMEND IAAF TECHNICAL RULES

The proposals all constitutes necessary clarifications/corrections (underlined and in bold).

Rule 113
Delete the last sentence.

Comments

The sex test has long been abolished within the IAAF, nor does there exist any guidelines as to how to carry it out.

Rule 118
---It may, however, reconsider decisions if new and possibly conclusive evidence is presented, and change the former decision, provided a new decision is practically applicable.

Comments
Only after having  reconsidered is it possible to establish whether the new evidence is conclusive, and whether it is practically applicable and consequently whether the decision can/shall be changed. Only to reconsider is not enough.

Rule 128 – Note
Change the two times “should” in the text to “shall”.

Comments
In the text there are two “should” and one “shall”. “The starter
shall so place himself---“ but if he cannot, he shall not after all, because then “the starting apparatus should be placed there---“. So, if anything, it should/shall be the other way around.

Rule 141
The following age groups shall apply to IAAF Competitions:

Add
Men and women
:        
Any athlete at the age of 20 years, or over,  on 31st   December in the year of the competition.

Comments
Somewhat strange that these two age groups do not “apply to IAAF Competitions”.

Rule 143.5
The sole and/or heel may have grooves, ridges, indentations or protuberances, provided these features are constructed of the same, or similar, material as the basic sole itself.

 In the high jump the sole shall have a maximum thickness of 13 mm, and the heel shall have a maximum thickness of 19 mm. In the long jump the sole and heel shall have a maximum thickness of 13 mm. In all other events---.

Comments
Clarifications.

Rule 143.6

Add

Note:
The thickness of the sole and heel shall be measured as the distance between the inside top side and the outside under side, including the abovementioned features and including any kind or form of loose inner sole.

Comments
The Rule is without any actual meaning unless this is specified.

Rule 144.3
To
indicate the direction and strength of the wind, a wind sock shall be positioned near the take-off area in all jumping events. In the discus and javelin events it shall be placed just outside the landing sector, approximately halfway between the centre of the throwing circle, respectively the centre of the throwing arc, and the estimated area where the longest throw will be landing.

Comments
There is no “take-off area” for discus and javelin throwing.
(The use of a wind sock positioned many meters below the flying implements is anyway rather dubious).

Rule 145
Add new point 2
Any results, achieved before the incident took place, shall stand.

Comments
This is not clarified in the Rules.

Rule 148
Add Note

Concerning acceptance of records, see Rule 260.10 (a).

Comments

Fibreglass tapes may be used at competitions under Rule 12.1 (d), (e), (f), (g), and (h), but for record purposes only steel tapes are accepted.

Rule 162.9
---The separate arced starting line shall be positioned in such a way---.

Comments
The line shall not be “marked” it is the marking.

Rule 163.11
Delete
: Component

Comments
The word has no meaning in this relation.

Rule 165.17 – Note

---If there is no change in the finishing positions between the two frames, the Chief Photo Finish Judge shall---

Comments
The present text is wrongly stating the complete opposite.

Rule 168.1
Distances. The following are the standard distances:

Men, juniors, youth, boys: 110 m, 400 m
Women,
juniors, youth, girls: 100 m, 400 m

To be included also in the headlines above the charts, and Rule 168.3 to be changed accordingly.

Comments
Apparently some age groups are missing here.

Rule 170.14
---a better grip of the baton.
In relation to the take-over zone, it is only the position of the baton which is decisive, and not the position of the bodies of the competitors. Passing of the baton---.

Comments
It is not only “
within” the take-over zone the position of the baton is decisive. “body” does not go together with “competitors”. (Council has already decided to delete “limbs”).

Rule 170.15
Before receiving, during the exchange of, and after handing over, the baton, the competitors shall stay in their lanes/maintain their position in relation to other competitors, in order to avoid obstructing them.
Should any competitor wilfully---.

(Delete: “Rule 163.3 and 4 shall not apply to these athletes”)

Comments
The only “zone” related to relay races is the take-over zone, and it gives no meaning that “the competitors shall keep in their zones”. “Course” is also not normally an expression used in connection with running on the track, so it is uncertain what is meant.

There seems to be no reason why 163.3 and 4 should not apply (and who are “these athletes” anyway). If not applied, the competitors do not need to keep within their lanes, and cannot be disqualified for not doing that, but may, on the other hand, be disqualified if forced outside their lanes.

Rule 180.17
---
The following times in minutes should not normally be exceeded:

NUMBER OF ATHLETES LEFT IN THE COMPETITION  

HJ

PV

 OTHER 

 

 

 

 

4 OR MORE ATHLETES LEFT

1.0

1.0

    1.0

Consecutive trials

2.0

3.0

    2.0

 

 

 

 

2-3 ATHLETES LEFT

1.5

2.0

    1.0

Consecutive trials

2.0

3.0

    2.0

 

 

 

 

1 ATHLETE LEFT

3.0

5.0

    2.0

Consecutive trials

3.0

5.0

    2.0

 

 

 

 

  The complete text, following the above, to be deleted.

Comments
This has become one of the most complicated rules, in spite of the fact that it is not compulsory and only has to be complied with “normally”, and, as can be seen from the chart below, even IAAF cannot see through the wording of the present text, which includes some contradictory elements.

 Chart of present rules:

INDIVIDUAL

HJ

PV

 O 

COMBINED EVENTS

HJ

PV

 O

 

2-3 ATHLETES LEFT

1.5

2.0

1.0

 

1.5

2.0

1.0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Consecutive trials

2.0

3.0

2.0

 

2.0

3.0

2.0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MORE THAN 1 LEFT

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

a)

Consecutive trials

2.0

3.0

2.0

 

2.0

3.0

2.0

b)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1 ATHLETE LEFT

3.0

5.0

2.0

 

1.5

2.0

1.0

c)

= consecutive trials

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

a)      More than 1 athlete left, obviously also includes 2-3 athletes left
b)      When more than 1 athlete is left in combined events, according to the text in 180.17, there is  more time for an athlete´s consecutive trials b), than when only 1 athlete is left c).

Note: A clock which shows the remaining time allowed shall be visible to the competitors. In addition, an official shall raise, and keep raised, a yellow flag, or otherwise indicate the final 15 seconds of the time allowed.

Comments

Linguistic clarifications

Rule 183.6
---it
shall have a minimum width of 1.22 m and a maximum width of 1.25 m. The runway shall be marked by white lines 5 cm in width.

Comments
There must be no doubt that nothing but the above shall be accepted, hence “shall” instead of “should”.

Rule 184.2
The minimum length of the runway shall be 40 m. It
shall have a minimum width of 1.22 m and a maximum width of 1.25 m. The runway shall be marked with white lines 5 cm in width.

Comments
There must be no doubt that nothing but the above shall be accepted, hence “shall” instead of “should”.

Rule 185.1 (c)
---
he touches the ground between the take-off line and the landing area in the act of jumping; or---

Comments

In Note 3 is stated "It is not a foul if a competitor walks back through the landing area after having left the landing area in a correct way". In doing so, however, he violates the above Rule.

In a), b), d) and f) it is also specified, equally in which relation these rules are to be applied.

Rule 185.1 (f)
---when leaving the landing area, his first contact with the ground outside the pit is closer to the
take-off line than the nearest break made in the sand. (The last part of the point to be deleted).

Comments

The deleted text is at best confusing. In e) is simply stated “nearest break”, but in f) various explanations are added, and “initial break” is being introduced, and “any break made --- which is completely inside the pit”. It should be obvious that there can never be a break in the sand which is not completely inside the pit.

No matter for what reason, or in what way, a competitor makes a break in the sand, closest to the take-off line, before leaving the pit, that break is the one to measure from.

Rule 185.8. Diagrams 1 and 2
The take-off line should be displayed.

Throughout Rule 185 "pit" and "landing area" are being used to describe the same thing,  and only one designation should be used – proposal: landing pit.

Rule 187.12 a) – Note:
---Thus for every 1 m from the centre of the circle, the distance across
shall be increased by 60 cm.

Comments

On a number of occasions I have tried to call the attention of the IAAF to the fact that the text in this note is rubbish, and already as far back as in 1997 I wrote to IAAF about it, – and yet it still is unchanged, in the old as well as in the new note. So in all these years we should have had a landing sector with a distance across of 68.4 cm, and in the future a distance across of 60.0 cm – at least safety should benefit from this.

Rule 187.17
---shall be completely behind the white lines, drawn outside the circle.
“running, theoretically, through the centre of the circle” to be deleted

 Comments
First of all It is not defined correctly, and secondly, other specifications, such as length and width, are also not included here.

Rule 213.1
Add:
The measurement shall be taken 30 cm outwards from the kerb or, where no kerb exists, 20 cm from the line marking the inside of the track.

Comments
Same as in Rule 160.1

Rule 213.4
Delete the word “vertical”.

Comments
Vertical cannot be smooth – it is straight up or down.

Rule 213.6
---The cones or flags shall be placed on the white line so that the edge of the base of the cone or flag pole coincides with the edge of the white line closest to the track. The cones or flags shall---

Comments
Same wording as in Rule 160.1

Rule 214.12
For all other races the lane order shall be drawn by lot in accordance with Rules 166.4 and 166.8.

Comments
162.9 & 11 are not correct.

Rule 230.2 (a)
The appointed judges of Race Walking shall elect a Chief Judge, if one has not been appointed previously. The rest of the paragraph to be transferred to Rule 230.4 – Warning and Disqualification.

Comments
Obviously this is what the text is about.

Rule 230.3
---They cannot be given a second caution by one and the  same judge---.

Comments
“Entitled to” is something quite different. “the same judge” – which judge?

Rule 230.5, 240.6 and 250.7
---The command and procedure for races longer than 400 m shall be used (Rule 162.3).

Comments
“standard commands for distance events” is without any specific meaning, and are not defined elsewhere in the Rules. 400 m is also a distance.

Rule 240  Note
---the official time shall be the time elapsed between the firing of the starting gun and the athlete reaching the finish line. However, the time elapsed between an athlete crossing the starting line and the finish line can be made known to him, but will not be considered---
(delete: “if an athlete crosses the start line after the start gun”)

Comments
“the time elapsed between the start gun and the athlete reaching the finish line” does not make  sense. All athletes in the race “crosses the start line after (the firing of) the starting gun”, otherwise they are making a false start..

PROPOSALS TO AMEND IAAF ANTI-DOPING RULES

Rule 55.2 (iii)
An athlete admits having used, or taken advantage of, or having attempted to do so, a prohibited substance or a prohibited technique. (See also Rule 56).

Comments
In Rule 60.1 (iii) is included: “or having attempted”, so, obviously, it should also be included here..

Rule 56
Doping related
Offences

1.
An athlete who fails, or refuses, to submit to doping control, or fails, or refuses, to provide a blood sample, after having been requested to do so---

3.
Any person assisting, or inciting, others, or attempting to do so, or admitting having assisted or incited others to use a prohibited substance---

4.
A
ny person trading, trafficking, distributing or selling any prohibited substance, or attempting to do so, otherwise than in the normal course---

Comments
“Ancillary” means “in addition to, but not as important”. In Rule 60.1 (iii) is included: “or having attempted”, and in (v) is included “the failure or refusal of an athlete to provide a blood sample”, and obviously should also be included in the above.

Rule 57.5
If
an athlete declines to provide a sample, or otherwise---.
(“where” to be exchanged for “if” elsewhere in Rule 57 as appropriate)

Comments
It does not matter “where”, this is not about geography.

---indicates unwillingness to submit to doping control, on the basis that he has retired, such athlete will not be eligible to resume competition, until a period of two years has passed after the incident, and he has complied with the terms of Rule 57.6 concerning ineligibility for two years or more.

Comments
Rule 57.5  deals with an athlete who is evading an out-of-competition test, by stating that he has retired completely from competition, that is, has finished his career as an athlete. The Rule does not state clearly – if at all – which demands, or sanctions, must be met by the athlete, if he, at some point, wishes to resume his career

In Rule 60 “Sanctions” no sanction is specified concerning the above situation. This means, that what is otherwise punished fully as a doping offence, namely denying to take a test, and resulting in two years suspension, is reduced  – at the most -  to undergo three tests over a period of eight months , if only the athlete states that he has retired --- before he starts competing again. This will be a major loophole for an athlete who has been caught on the wrong foot.

Rule 59.4 – last section
If the Member reinstates an athlete, and the Commission appointed by the Council---

(Delete: “after having held a hearing”).

Comments
The key issue is whether a Member reinstates, and thereby fails to impose sanctions, with or without a hearing having been held. The present Rule can only be applied if a hearing has been held.

Rule 59.5
If
a Member has, under Rule 21.1, delegated, or has been obliged to delegate, the conduct of its hearing, or any subsequent hearings of any kind, to any body, committee or tribunal---

Comments
Hearings conducted by others may be imposed on Members, for instance by National Sports Federations or other national or international bodies, or by the laws of the country of the Member, and as a consequence there may be more than one “hearing” related to one doping case.

Rule 60.1
For the purpose of these Rules
the following sanctions shall be imposed. (The rest of the paragraph to be deleted)

Comments

The text is more or less, but, as can be seen under the proposal for Rule 55 and 56 above, not completely, the same in 60.1 as in 55 and 56, and obviously there should be only one text about the same issue, in order to avoid such discrepancies, and to make the Rules less difficult to work with.

Rule 60.2 (a)
for an offence under Rule
55.2 (i) or 55.2 (iii) involving the substances---or for any of the other offences listed in Rule 55.2 and 56:

Rule 60.2 (b)
for an offence under Rule
55.2 (i) or 55.2 (iii) involving the substances---

Rule 60.2 (c)
for an offence under Rule
56.4 involving any of the substances---

Rule 60.6
If an athlete has committed a doping offence under Rule
55.2 (iii), then any result obtained---

Comments
Changes in consequence of the above corrections.

Furthermore, for your information, and without having actually proof read the Handbook:

At least another 50 minor errors need to be corrected editorially.

 October 2003
Georg Facius

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Recommended

but withdrawn In favour of EAA proposal

 

 

NOT
ACCEPTED

 

 

 

NOT ACCEPTED

 

 

 ACCEPTED

 

 

 

NOT
ACCEPTED

  

ACCEPTED

 

 

 

 


ACCEPTED

 

 

  

ACCEPTED

 

 

 

 

 

  

ACCEPTED

 

 

 

ACCEPTED

 

 

    

ACCEPTED

 

 

 

 
ACCEPTED

 

 
 

ACCEPTED

 

 

  

ACCEPTED

 

 

   

 ACCEPTED

 

 

 

 
ACCEPTED

 

 
ACCEPTED

 

 

 

 

      

NOT
ACCEPTED

    

NOT
ACCEPTED

 

 

 

ACCEPTED

 

 

 

ACCEPTED
In principle

 

 

  

Withdrawn

 

 

 

  

FOR NEXT
CONGRESS

 

 

 

  

FOR NEXT
CONGRESS

 

 

 

 

 NOT
ACCEPTED

 

 
ACCEPTED

 

 

 

 



ACCEPTED

 

 

ACCEPTED

  

 

Withdrawn

 

 

 

ACCEPTED

 

 

 

 

  

Withdrawn

 

 

 

 

Withdrawn

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ACCEPTED

with one

Amendment

as a proposal

from DEN,

FIN + TC

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Withdrawn

 

 

 

ACCEPTED

 

 

   

 ACCEPTED

 

 

 

 
Withdrawn

 

 

 

 

 

 
Withdrawn

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

ACCEPTED

   
ACCEPTED



ACCEPTED

 

 

 

 


NOT
ACCEPTED
- however, it
was acknow-
ledged that the
text is not correct

  

Withdrawn

 

 
   

ACCEPTED

 

  

ACCEPTED

 

 

 

Included in
June 2002
edition

 


FOR NEXT
CONGRESS

 

 

 FOR NEXT
CONGRESS

 

 


ACCEPTED

 

 

 
ACCEPTED

 

 

 

 

 

 

ACCEPTED

 

 

 

 

ACCEPTED

 

 ACCEPTED

 

 ACCEPTED

 

 

 
 

ACCEPTED

 

  

ACCEPTED

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
   

ACCEPTED

 

 

 

 
 

ACCEPTED

 

 

 

   
 

NOT
ACCEPTED

 

 

 

  

ACCEPTED
   
ACCEPTED

   
ACCEPTED

 
ACCEPTED