Arm Protectors
Posted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 1:32 pm
Questions came up in PA about arm protectors - this was sent out from the "higher ups" in the PIAA.
Dan
Several officials have seen or run into pole vaulters wearing protective forearm padding of one sort or another. Although the Rule Book does not address such a device specifically, the PIAA modification regarding bracelets has to date been referenced as a possible solution. As you know bracelets are not permitted under the modification and that includes wristbands/sweatbands, most notably of the terry cloth variety, worn on any part of the arm. The padded devices being worn, however, are not the same.
Having discussed the matter with the PIAA staff, it is our collective opinion to permit the use of the padded devices for the following reasons. First, it is a safety issue for the competitor using it much the same as the vaulting helmet. Second, there does not appear to be a competitive advantage when using such a device. Third, the padded device would not be considered an adornment. And lastly, a uniform variance letter would not have to be sought and presented to the official every time the competitor wore such a device in competition.
Dan
Several officials have seen or run into pole vaulters wearing protective forearm padding of one sort or another. Although the Rule Book does not address such a device specifically, the PIAA modification regarding bracelets has to date been referenced as a possible solution. As you know bracelets are not permitted under the modification and that includes wristbands/sweatbands, most notably of the terry cloth variety, worn on any part of the arm. The padded devices being worn, however, are not the same.
Having discussed the matter with the PIAA staff, it is our collective opinion to permit the use of the padded devices for the following reasons. First, it is a safety issue for the competitor using it much the same as the vaulting helmet. Second, there does not appear to be a competitive advantage when using such a device. Third, the padded device would not be considered an adornment. And lastly, a uniform variance letter would not have to be sought and presented to the official every time the competitor wore such a device in competition.