Southern Women's League

[AlanT]

Anyone got any thoughts on the AGM motions?

Reducing or eliminating the U15G events seems to have a lot of support.

[Dennis]

Can you list the AGM motions?

Getting rid of the under 15 events is a brilliant idea. The other area leagues have done so.

Currently we are forced to put our under 15 girls for 6 Southern League matches and 5 YAL matches. 11 league matches in a season is too many.

[AlanT]

There are 14 motions so I don't want type them all as they cam through the post + the league doesn't have a website.

They do include:

- Reducing U15s to just A string.
- Having U15 as non-scoring for league positions / promotions
- Having 2 league structures - 1 for clubs with U15 and 1 without
etc

[Dennis]

Reducing the under 15 to one string isn't really the answer. Having non scoring would be okay but would other clubs turn out athletes to make viable races/field events? Two league structures would be a good idea but clubs often don't go for "complicated" options like this.

[AlanT]

I managed our ladies team this year so have some first hand thoughts from a low division.

Moving On will come up with a new competition structure, so my priority would be to keep everything simple up till then.

Forming two types of team would be the opposite of simple!

Diminishing the value of U15/U17 events to the team will reduce the number and quality of athletes creating a downward spiral of interest.

U15's don't need this competition, though I'm sure competing alongside seniors has some benefits. U17 can compete as seniors anyway.

I end up in favour of removing U15s, but worry that the matches will be a lot less lively and interesting without them, their parents and coaches.

Ideally all this should have been combined with merging the men's and women's leagues IMO.

[Dennis]

The way the sport has gone is that we will end up with joint senior mens and ladies leagues. The Young Athletes League has had joint teams for 3 years and the Junior League will have next summer.

The senior leagues were developed at a time when male and female athletics were almost separate sports. There were many single sex clubs around 30+ years ago and even in clubs that were mixed the male and female sides often did their own thing. Males and females rarely trained together.

All that changed with the "jogging" boom. Athletics was beginning to change by then as well. Road running used to be a male preserve but by the late 1970's when jogging took off the natural thing to do was for women to join in the already organised male events. The same happened with fell running.

It has taken some time for mixed sport to by applied to the other athletics disciplines. Most cross country events gradually became mixed by the mid 1990's.

Track and field is more problematic. There are two issues:
1. In senior leagues there can be up to 10 divisions separating the British League/UK Women's League Div. 1 from the bottom regonal divisions. Going for mixed competition would mean, say, the male side being demoted a few divisions and the female promoted. One would get poorer competition, the other could be out of their depth.
2. Male athletes outnumber female athletes by at least 2 to 1. Many male clubs have at least two senior teams in different divisions of the leagues. When the Northern league went mixed many male "B" teams were dropped leaving athletes without competition.

A mixed senior league with male and female young athletes sections probably wouldn't work as not all the field events could be timetabled.

[AlanT]

Track and field is more problematic ...
1. In senior leagues ... Going for mixed competition would mean, say, the male side being demoted a few divisions and the female promoted. One would get poorer competition, the other could be out of their depth.

I don't believe this is a valid case, because surely it's already the case that within Men's teams there are athletes who compete below their standard (ie get "poorer competition") and others who are "out of their depth".

There must be women's teams which have some top quality athletes and if combined with men's teams would get more appropriate competition.

If there is a case for equalising standards it might be better to have field teams and track teams (both mixed) rather than separate men's and women's leagues.

There is also a strong case that clubs with an imbalance in standards would sort out their weaker areas. I think this happened when U13 SP was introduced to the YAL - over 2 seasons clubs found/developed SP significantly. Mixed leagues might provide a great impetus to getting more women into the sport and valuing more highly those who already compete.

Thoughts?

[Dennis]

I wasn't putting it forward as a "valid case" it is just something clubs will have to bite the bullet on. My second point is perhaps more valid and wasn't properly addressed in the Northern League set up. We have 3 senior mens teams and 1 ladies. What happens to the athletes in our "B" and "C" senior mens sides?

It doesn't mean that we cannot have joint sex senior leagues, it has just been slower in coming than the younger age groups. No doubt if leagues had been set up in the 1990's we would have a different structure than the one set up in the 1960's.

[JohnF]

As another Southern Women's League manager I seem to have the opposite problem to the other posters - I have too many under 15 athletes.

With non-scoring not allowed in the NYAL they can end up only doing one event each, so some won't bother spending the whole day just for a single event.

Switching the SWL to a single U15 string would be equally unpopular. There's a strong social element to the team. Half of them won't turn up if their best friend isn't there.

And finally the sprinters and throwers don't think there are too many events. They don't have the same crowded time table the middle & long distance runners have

Without reform elsewhere (NYAL, SML, NJAL) I'm not sure there's anything sensible the SWL can do in isolation

[Dennis]

We have the same problem with the YAL not allowing non scoring events. Yes, it is a problem of structure, leagues should be able to cope with as many young athletes as want competition. Athletics cannot afford to turn youngsters away.

It would be better if the under 17's from the YAL were included with the National Junior League thus freein up timetable space for the under 13's and under 15's.

There are too many fixture clashes during the summer. The SWL was the day before one YAL this summer and the last SWL was the same weekend as the YAL finals. There were also two clashes with the JAL.

My point is that we shouldn't have the pressure of turning out under 15's for the SWL when they have their own specific competition as part of several age group teams in the YAL.

[frank plunkett]

South Yorkshire district league has the right idea, as many as wants competes the first two in a + b races score for the club, the best two from the throws and jumps score.

so what if it takes a long time

[AlanT]

It would be better if the under 17's from the YAL were included with the National Junior League thus freein up timetable space for the under 13's and under 15's.

That might be OK for clubs that have NJL teams, but not good for the rest of us.

I see some merit instead in omiting U13s from the YAL to free up the timetable for non-s.

[Dennis]

That might be OK for clubs that have NJL teams, but not good for the rest of us.

I see some merit instead in omiting U13s from the YAL to free up the timetable for non-s.

Different permutations are going to suit different clubs. Doubling under 13’s with under 15’s then under 17’s with juniors makes some sort of logical sense. Single age group matches would be a waste of resources.

What is certain is that current young athletes league arrangements are inadequate. It will probably get worse with the current proposals being tabled by the YAL giving girls the same competition opportunities as boys. It may be a nice sentiment but is there the demand?

[longthrow]

let any intrested girl perform alongside the boys.

[alf tupper]

So you're proposing hurdle the same height hurdles, throw the same weight field implements?

Great way to encourage participation!

[Wingit]

So you're proposing hurdle the same height hurdles, throw the same weight field implements?

Great way to encourage participation!

So is banning them from the leagues

Give us the benefit of your wisdom then Alf how do we keep the interest going of 13yr olds without the opportunity of competing?

[AlanT]

under 17’s with juniors makes some sort of logical sense

How?

[Dennis]

Same weight throwing implements and hurdle heights are not being considered, just the same events, e.g. hammer, pole vault, steeplechase, same distances for same age groups (1500m for under 13 girls instead of 1200m).

Under 17's with juniors makes logical sense (to those who have proposed it previously) because it is better to have two age groups in one league so under 13's would go with under 15's then under 17's with juniors.

[longthrow]

dont be daft mr tupper, as alwayus they compete with their own weights and hieghts, its very simpl to work out if you know owt abart t&f

[Wingit]

Under 17's with juniors makes logical sense (to those who have proposed it previously) because it is better to have two age groups in one league so under 13's would go with under 15's then under 17's with juniors.

Thats a better option and then also set standards in the u17/junior throws to cut down on the "one pointers" to accomodate the timetable.

[Max]

We have quite a few U/15s & U/13s (male & female) & not one has expressed any desire to do hammer, pole vault or steeplechase.
Early next year we will be starting taster sessions for multi events & will be able to give more opportunities for this & we hope we will have a few more willing participants.

Regards,

Max.