PoleVaultPower.com

The rule is if you, your pole, or at anypoint something crosses the ZERO line, it its a scratch, otherwise you get another shot. Legaly you can land on the side mats and they were letting you do that at NC states this year, but at a lot of the meets this year there was a judge that didnt know the rules and was just like, if you touch anything then its a scratch. But technicaly by the rule i think if you bend your pole a lot and do not make it in and the front of ur bend "(" crosses the box and a lot of times touches the mat then it is a scratch but i never saw that called, only stated.

Im pretty sure you saw me crash a few times at the Elon meet this year and have to argue the rule with the judge...

THAT IS SO HELPFUL! Thank you! Because it really confused me.

My coach ran the regional meet, and if I remember, he was told that it was against the rules to land on the side mats. I think he said that that was unsafe.

I ALMOST went to the Elon invitational...but I'm not good enough to qualify so I would have just watched. But I didn't go bc I think it interfered with something...but I forget what it was interfered.

NFHS Updates
by gfilosa on Wed Jul 09, 2008 10:34 am

News Release from the MPSSAA (MD) Website
http://www.mpssaa.org/springsports/boys ... ase_id=175

Track and Field Rule Changes

7/2/2008

Beginning next track and field season, pole vaulters once again will be charged with a foul if their feet leave the ground in an attempt to clear the crossbar but are unsuccessful. However, an exception was adopted to permit the vaulter to leave the ground and return when stopping an approach.

Rule 7-5-29 was one of seven rules revised by National Federation of State High School Associations (NFHS) Track and Field and Cross Country Rules Committee at its annual meeting June 8-10 in Indianapolis. The changes were subsequently approved by the NFHS Board of Directors.

In a revision last year, vaulters were allowed to leave the ground and not have a foul charged to them provided they did not break the plane of the crossbar. This rule was revised to clarify the original intent of the committee.

The exception added to the rule provides it is not considered a foul if the competitor aborts the approach and, in stopping, plants the pole and momentum causes his/her feet to leave the ground.

""The change in 7-5-29 last year by the committee was not intended to allow a vaulter to abort a vault but rather to have the opportunity to stop and abort the approach,"" said Becky Oakes, NFHS assistant director and liaison to the Track and Field Rules Committee. ""This change clearly reflects the original intent of the committee to abort only the approach and have the opportunity to restart the approach.""




A note was added to Rule 7-5-3 clarifying that visible etchings appearing on poles shall not meet the requirement of the manufacturer's pole rating appearing on the pole in a contrasting color.

Rules 7-4-11 and 7-5-18 were revised to delete the option for the event judge to place a cloth marker on the crossbar for sighting purposes during the pole vault and high jump.

""The current crossbars are of a bright, contrasting color and no longer present a sighting problem for competitors,"" Oakes said, ""and, therefore, the use of the cloth is no longer needed for competition.""




The committee also identified six points of emphasis for next season: 1) electronic devices, 2) observed violation reporting procedures, 3) starter's pistols, 4) equipment failure, 5) pole vault and 6) visible undergarments.

Track and field is the third-most popular sport among boys and the second-most popular sport among girls at the high school level with 544,180 boys and 444,181 girls participating during the 2006-07 season, according to the High School Athletics Participation Survey conducted by the NFHS. It also ranks second in school sponsorship for both boys and girls.
2009 Track and Field Rules Changes




7-4-11, 7-5-18 Deletes the option for the event judge to place a cloth marker on the crossbar for sighting purposes.

Rationale: The current crossbars are of a bright contrasting color which no longer present a sighting problem for competitors and therefore the use of the cloth is no longer in use for competition.

7-5-3 Note new Visible etchings which appear on poles shall not meet the requirement of the manufacturer's pole rating appearing on the pole in a contrasting color.

Rationale: Most poles have an etching on the pole which is a code to the manufacturer. This code most frequently does not correspond to the proper weight rating for the pole. The rating appearing as the mark in contrasting color is established by the manufacturer is clearly visible and serves only this purpose. The requirement is for purposes of risk minimization and should be adhered to strictly.

7-5-29 Clarifies the original intent to permit a competitor in the pole vault to abort the approach and in stopping plant the pole and momentum causes his/her feet to leave the ground without being considered a foul. It is a foul if a vaulter leaves the ground in an attempt and fails to clear the crossbar.

Rationale: The change in 7-5-29 last year by the committee was not intended to allow a vaulter to abort a vault but rather to have the opportunity to stop and abort the approach. However, the language was not clear and as written allowed a vaulter to abort a vault. This change clearly reflects the original intent of the committee to abort only the approach and have the opportunity to restart the approach. This exception is appropriate for the high school vaulter.

I need to correct something that VaulPurple said.

He wrote: "The rule is if you, your pole, or at anypoint something crosses the ZERO line, it its a scratch, otherwise you get another shot."

Close but not quite accurate. Let me clarify.

It is not a foul if either you or your pole crosses the zero line WITHOUT touching either the ground, standards, bar, pit, or anything else past the zero line. For example, if you run into the box and keep your pole held high without touching any physical object past the zero line, it is not a foul. You still may get back to the end of the runway and initiate another attempt if you still can within the 90 second time limit. But it is a foul if either you or your pole both passes the zero line AND touches any physical object past the zero line.

That much of the rule has not changed. That was even the rule last year. VaultPurple was actually correct about the bending pole. The NFHS last year issued an opinion on their website expressly stating that if the bending pole touched the pit past the vertical plane of the zero line, that was a foul. I NEVER saw anyone call that last year. I think the officials had not read that clarification.

The rule as I have explained it regarding breaking the zero plane AND touching the ground, pit, standards, bar, etc. beyond the vertical zero plane is still in force under the new version of the NFHS rules as well.

If you know anything about football rules, consider this. The zero line is sort of like the goal line but not quite. In pole vaulting, the zero line creates an invisible plane extending upwards. It's not a foul to merely break that plane. But it is a foul to both break it AND touch any physical object past that plane. Of course the football analogy isn't ideal, since in football if any part of the ball breaks the plane while legally in possession of an offensive player, it is a touchdown or extra point (on a 2-pt. conversion). The football player does not have to touch anything physical past the vertical plane in order to score; merely penetrating that airspace past the vertical plane is sufficient.

The new rule (which has been discussed on this site) simply will again require officials to make a judgment call about whether the vaulter has left the ground "in an attempt." That's okay as far as I'm concerned. I think that there is a marked difference between that which constitutes "an attempt" versus that which constitutes "an aborted attempt." That's my interpretation at any rate. In the absence of further clarification from the NFHS, think that it's a reasonable interpretation. But I digress. What's new?

Hey, BTW, what schools do you North Carolinians go to? I graduated from N.B. Broughton in 1975 and UNC-CH in 1979. I coached pole vaulters at Broughton from 1982-84 before moving to CT.

I graduated from Southern Lee (a new high school that broke off of Lee County Senior High). Its about 40min from Broughton. But now I am at ECU.

Thanks. That explains the "purple" I suppose.

My brother & sister-in-law graduated from ECU in 1974. He got a great education there. Back when I graduated from high school in 1975, ECU didn't have pole vaulting. I honestly would have considered going there if they had. I think it was the coach at the time who just thought that it was too expensive to bother with it. My life today would have turned out very differently.

Go Pirates!

Yeah ECU just added mens pole vault this year after coach carson retired last year (he was the coach back in 75 too). Its a great school and they are really good to the track program (I think largely because it started getting recognition when Merritt won gold)... we have an indoor pole vault run way, but still looking for an indoor building to put it in to practice this winter, and we breaking ground on a new track spring of 09.

and yeah it does explain vaultpurple.... i had accualy made a vaultgold first but somehow it didnt get activated or i lost the password or something.