UK Athletics want to adopt the same ‘even number’ system as the rest of the world for young athletes but are being met with widespread opposition
Plans to introduce new age groups for young athletes are being met with fierce opposition from traditionalists.
UK Athletics and the home country federations want to replace the current “odd number” age groups (under-13, under-15, under-17) with the “even number” system that most of the rest of the world uses.
This would mean:
Years 5 and 6 (ages 9-11) would fall into the under-12 category.
Years 7 and 8 (11-13) would be under-14.
Years 9 and 10 (13-15) would be under-16.
Years 11 and 12 (15-17) would be under-18.
Year 13 and university students (17+) would be under-20.
There have been at least three attempts in recent years to bring the change in and the latest consultation process included three webinars in September with a final decision due to be made by the UKA board in December.
The governing bodies argue the changes will help minimise teenage drop-out rates because the current system sees top year under-17 and under-20 athletes juggling athletics competitions with GCSEs and A-levels – or National exams and Highers in Scotland. This is, they say, a “perfect storm” of pressure.
They point to a 2018 survey that found “time constraints from studying” was the leading reason for athletes aged 15-22 stopping athletics. What’s more, World Athletics has told UK Athletics that Britain is one of only three countries in the world that has “uneven” age groups, although AW has struggled to find evidence of any other countries that still use uneven age groups.
On your marks (Andy Cox)
“The clash with academic commitments, creating massive pressure on young people, the lack of alignment with other countries, sports and talent pathways and the negative mental effect caused by large amounts of pressure and other aspects such as the Relative Age Effect could cause the athlete to decrease or case participation in athletics,” say the governing bodies.
“An athlete shouldn’t have to choose between academic or athletics success.”
But those opposed insist new age groups will not improve drop-out rates and will cause confusion when it comes to throws implements and hurdles races, not to mention long-established age-group records.
What’s more, schools bodies have refused to change anyway, which has left clubs wondering why they have to change when the schools system will remain the same.
“A tiny elite tail is trying to wag a very big athletic body,” says Level 4 combined events and high jump coach Dennis Johnson from Bedford. “The proposals are unnecessary,” he adds, “it is my experience that very few athletes drop out due to exam pressure. Those who are committed to athletics continue, those who are not committed drop out.”
Joy Eze wins the England U20 60m (Mark Shearman)
Dave Paver, from West Yorkshire, is also against the proposals but says: “We are not ‘opposed to change’ – happy to look at anything, competition, etc. This is just a very bad idea. We have looked carefully at the claims on retention and don’t see them as valid.”
Larry Garnham, a Level III coach from Cornwall, describes the drop-out rate theory behind the proposals as “poppycock” and adds: “These age changes were once before tried under the guise that time of falling in line with our European counterparts. With stern resistance from those that work at grass roots and understand the sport, it was firmly rejected.
“Now, the powers to be have seen that the majority of those sensible folks back in those days are now retiring in their droves, they have decided to reintroduce ideology that was completely wrong then as it is now and unfortunately all the same arguments apply.”
Northern Athletics – the main track and field competition provider in the North of England – is especially critical and has written to all its member clubs to say that UKA’s consultation process was sprung on them with the webinars being “lectures followed by a few approved questions and answers”.
AW attended one of the webinars and would not describe them as harshly as that, although you can judge for yourself by viewing one of them here. Across the webinars, a quick end-of-session poll also showed that 93 people were in favour of the proposals with 45 against and 54 undecided.
Corey Beechall (England Athletics)
The nature of the webinars aside, Northern Athletics add: “The proposals will cause considerable chaos. There is scant evidence it will benefit our athletes nor our clubs and officials.
“The proposal would result in a complete overhaul of age groupings within our sport … and the burden of dealing with it will fall on clubs, leagues, counties and areas.
“Those providing the great majority of competition in the UK are volunteers already hard pressed in the aftermath of the COVID pandemic. The last few years have also resulted in a reduction in experienced administrators and officials. This proposal could not have come at a worse time for the sport.”
You can read the full Northern Athletics letter here.
With the consultation due to end on October 31, UKA insist they try to put the athlete at the centre of all decisions they make and do not want to make life difficult for clubs and volunteers. The governing bodies also feel they need to act in order to reduce teenage drop-out rates.
READ MORE: Reducing drop-out rates in athletics
As one official from England Athletics told AW: “More clubs continue to withdraw from the Youth Development League every year because they cannot fill teams. If we continue to do nothing, it will just get worse.”
The full list of reasons behind UKA’s proposals can be found here.
» A version of this article first appeared in the Dip Finish column of the October issue of AW magazine, which you can buy here