Lancashire Schools Selectors

[Guest]

I read with interest Andy Parker’s article on the Harriers Website regarding selection for English Schools Track and Field Championships. I can only echo his sentiments.

Our Counties selection policy, is as Andy says, draconian. It beggars belief that athletes who missed the qualifying standards by the smallest of margins will be sat watching the Championships at home, whilst the County takes up only 60% of its allocation. County Champions, who in their final year of potential qualification, having put years of effort in, miss the guideline standard by half a second, only to see other Counties take their athletes whose PB’s are seconds slower. Athletes good enough to medal at previous championships and deemed good enough to represent and win for their Country earlier in the season, suffer a slight dip in form, do not hit the standard on the given day and are subsequently not even given the option to compete in the Championships.

In the middle distance events, we are one of a very small minority of Counties who insist on running heats and finals on the same day, lessening our athlete’s chances of again hitting the guideline standard in the final. Most Counties have tougher criteria to qualify for their County School’s day or run it as a time trial on the day. One or two seconds outside the guideline is no bad effort, having had to run a heat a couple of hours earlier, especially for 13 or 14 year old girls, who may not have the strength to recover as quickly.

Surely it is up to people on the committee to give the Counties most talented athletes the opportunity to compete on such a fantastic stage, an opportunity that may spur them on to bigger and better things in the future.

Sadly the process appears to be no different in the Schools Cross Country, where in the bottom age groups at least, the selection is first 8 past the line on the given day. Athletes who have consistently finished in top 5 positions during the season in League matches, who have been unable to run on the day or have been forced to run whilst ill in a vein attempt to gain a top 8 spot, see their places in the County team taken by Athletes who have never beaten them previously or will do again.

If the selection committee base their teams on which ever system requires the least effort, then it is time those selectors made way for others prepared to spend a little more time in assisting the development of the talented athletes of this County.

I feel it is up to the coaches and committees of our ‘s and other clubs in the County to lobby the Lancashire selectors and force them to adopt the more modern selection policy’s that other Counties have adopted for years.

[greater manchester schools]

to start may i just say ... preston harriers isnt what it used to be... no passion... pride and pure grit and determination.
what ever happend to the motto PROUD PRESTON?
moving on... the lancashire schools team selection is a scandal... underhand... shnide and a shambles
thanks... may peace be with you all

[Peter]

greater said:

to start may i just say ... preston harriers isnt what it used to be... no passion... pride and pure grit and determination.
what ever happend to the motto PROUD PRESTON?
moving on... the lancashire schools team selection is a scandal... underhand... shnide and a shambles
thanks... may peace be with you all

Shnide and underhand, describe nicely a person who feels the need to come on another clubs messageboard and have a go at it, without having the courage to actually disclose who they are.
Though I guess most people have a good idea.

Perhaps we can now get back on topic.

The points raised by both Andy Parker and in the original post are very valid and I am aware that we are not the only club who is dissappointed in the selection process.

Is this something that we can act on, in an attempt to alter the selection policy or are we to take it on the chin and seemingly not act in the best interests of the young athletes of the County.

Perhaps if one of the Lancashire Selectors visits the messageboard they can put forward an alternative view on the subject and explain the policies they employ.

[Rob The Kenyan]

Down at the Track this week I have heard various comments about the Selection for Lancashire Schools. Personally I think an opportunity has been missed to give invaluable experience, at a superb venue against good opposition. Also the leaving out of Athletes who have a proven record at English Schools and have served the County well in the past.

On another point how dare anybody come on this message board, be very detrimental about our club without the courage to leave their name. It strikes me as not an honest comment, perhaps a pea-green with envy comment. Preston Harriers is a club os good standing in this County.

[petehancock]

For the record, the original comment was mine, forwarded to the website by Andy Parker.
I sent a similar letter to AW, who have put it on their website for comment. It will be interesting to see what response they get.
Find out at:
www.athletics-weekly.com/newsarticle.php?id=323

Pete H

[aidan]

Pete I agree wholeheartedly with everything you’ve said. I can’t speak for the other athletes who have been “rejected” by Lancs Schools AA, but I am absolutely gutted for Amy who threw 28.93m at Lancs Schools Champs - just 7cm short of the English Schools entry standard (she is still 12 by the way). She is developing very quickly with her Javelin and now throwing around 30m on a regular basis in training – who knows what she might have achieved in Birmingham given the chance! There is no doubt in my mind that she will be there next year, but this year could have been valuable experience for her. As the ES website makes absolutely crystal clear in the FAQs the entry standard is only a guide to counties - it is not a hard and fast rule.

[Jane]

I must be the odd one out in this debate but I feel that the standards for English Schools should be achieved by all athletes seeking selection. Why have standards and then not enforce them? I can see Aidan's point re the standards being advisory but it does also state in the Track and Field Championships rules that 'All competitors entered for the Championships should have attained the necessary Entry Standard for their event as published in the E.S.A.A. Handbook'. Surely if these rules aren't enforced this will eventually lead to the downgrading of the competition as seems to have happened to both the County Champs and the NoEAA Champs. They have turned into Open meetings because of the lack of entry standards. The English Schools is the prestige competition for the younger athletes and one which should carry on with the great credibility it has enjoyed over the years. What makes it great is that it gives the young athletes such a sense of achievement when they reach the standard and hopefully attain selection (because reaching the standard doesn’t mean automatic selection). If the athletes carry on in the sport and progress to a higher level they should be used to knowing that they have to attain a certain mark in order to be considered for selection.

Having said all that I do think that maybe the Lancashire selectors should open up the qualifying meetings to cover the Young Athletes, Junior and Northern League.

I think the ESAA should enforce the standards but if they don’t is Lancashire right in being ‘the odd one out?’ Do any other counties enforce the standards as rigorously as we do? Where do you set limits of change? Maybe achieving the standard or 99% of the standard would be a compromise. I don’t know the answer to this but I’m sure someone does. I just think it would be a shame to see a decline in the standards of such a great competition

[aidan]

The following is a quote directly from ESAA's web site "ESAA Entry Standards are set for the guidance of team selectors so that they can judge which of their 90 County Champions may be more eligible for team selection. Entry Standards are advisory - they are targets which should be met, not triggers for automatic selection. "

I would add that there were only 5 of the 16 athletes that achieved the ESAA standard for Junior Girls Javelin in the ESAA championhips in 2006. If the results were replicated this year Amy would have had a real chance of a medal! And more to the point since it is supposed to be a team event she would have potentially gained valuable points for the team.

Also - have a look at how many championship best performances in NoEAA outdoor champs have been achieved in period 2004-2007 is the competition really being downgraded? Yes there are certain events at county champs that aren't really contested e.g. boys hurdles - in contrast the girls hurdles was a good county standard - and there is very good competition in other events.

[rick]

The Lancashire School's T&F selection procedure doesn't appear to have changed since I competed in 1968-70.

As far as X-C selection goes, I'd say the "first past the post" at the selection race is the least unfair. At least everyone knows where they stand.

[aidan]

In answer to the question "Do any other counties enforce the standards as rigorously as we do?" The answer is no they don't - For example the girl who came 16th in ES Junior Girls Javelin in 2006 was a bottom age U15 athlete with a best throw in 2006 of 25.68m. According to Power of 10 her best throw this year is below the ES standard. She has been selected by her county again this year and I accept she may have achieved the standard at the county schools (her county's results are not yet published). She is clearly improving and perhaps she benefitted from being selected last year even though she appears to have been over 3m short of the ES standard.

[Richard Blackburn Harriers]

Nothing to hide and like the topic.

z6.invisionfree.com/gbap/index.php?showtopic=5067&st=0

I started a debate myself on the GP:AP forum. I can vouch for the fact that the standards set by Lancs have not changed as my wife had to run a solo 1500 in the 70's and failed, hand-timed on a gravel track by .2 secs despite winning by more than 100m.

I think this needs to be addressed by the ESAA. It is clear that counties work to different criteria and if there are to be qualifying standards, make them mandatory so it is the same for all and not this current postcode lottery - but I also like the idea of allowing the standards to be met at other official meetings whether it be NATYAL, or other league / BMC etc. I have seen in recent years Adam Mitchell (I think) and Matt Wood / Paul Bradshaw from my club, all attempt solo 800m efforts to miss by fractions. These are quality athletes that should have gone.
There is discretion there - it would be nice to see it used.

I would actually remove this from the hands of the County Schools Committee and have it done through the County AA's. I think in Lancs we are not too badly served by our Schools committee - many are club members and some are on the Lancs AA anyway. But it is clear for me that athletics is better run through the governing body and communication from our County Schools to Clubs is lousy and whenever I have heard of an athlete or club asking for clarification from the committee it has been dificult to get a response. It would be much better if linked in through the County AA's.

The XC may have selected the 1st 8 - but the selectors have discretion to chose some slots. Only the 1st 5 or 6 are automatic. In the races throughout the season in both the Junior age groups, there was only 3 or 4 clear favourites to go, the rest were regularly beating each other. It is also difficult as the Schools XC mixes the age groups - it is the first race of the season where Year 9 race Year 8 - so you have no previous form from that season to compare many of the athletes.

Can't agree with Jane on the standards at Championship events. Maybe since the boundary changes, the depth and standard has been affected, but Lancs AA T&F Champs are very well attended and offer an excellent level of competition.
Indeed it could be that the ESAA is substandard this year. Lancs have 2 nailed on certs in Ostrava - Alison Leonard and Sophie Hitchon - surely there are also others from other counties - so is this becoming a 2nd class event anyway?

A good debate - what forum's should be used for.

[Jane]

This debate is gathering momentum as it goes! I think the selection process has to be looked at across the board. Yes the javelin thrower Aidan mentioned hasn’t thrown the qualifying distance but is 1 cm short.

Everyone knows someone that has narrowly missed the selection target A few years ago my son missed by one tenth over the 100metres. He worked extremely hard for the next years Lancashire Schools and dipped under by three tenths. That year 3 senior boys went inside the standard and one was left disappointed not to be selected, but this can’t be about individuals rather the entire selection process.

It would appear from the ESAA website that Lancashire are not the only county not to take their full allocation of athletes albeit they are taking at lot less than they are allowed. I agree with Richard from Blackburn Harriers that the ESAA should address this issue but I stand by my opinion that County/Northern standards are slipping particularly in the older age groups. The ESAA selection process should be an even playing field. And yes, there will be a number of athletes who would normally compete that have been selected for the World Youth Champs. He mentioned the 2 from Lancashire but also Ashlee Nelson, Asha Philip, Jenny Taker and Ashley Helsby to mention a few more. The standard of competition will therefore be lower in some disciplines in the Inter and Senior age groups. Maybe the ESAA could ‘bend’ on their competition dates when there is a clash with an International meeting for the same age groups.

The question still to be answered is if the ESAA don’t address these anomalies and Lancashire is persuaded to change their policy how do they then select the athletes? Where do you draw the line? I think it could be pretty difficult to agree on a policy that is fair to every discipline without having the embarrassment factor particularly for track athletes who go head to head and every difference is very noticeable. I’m sure there will be a number of ideas.

[petercrook]

Firstly Jane, I agree that the qualifying standard should be opened up to allow the standard to be reached in Young Athletes League and Junior League, as most other counties do.

Let us be quite honest, in some disciplines, the competition at Lancashire Schools and the County Champs is not always likely to be the strongest, meaning Athletes are often not pushed to reach the Standard. Indeed due to Liverpool Harriers and SWAC sending athletes to the Mid Lancs League, even Mid Lancs is at times more competitive. Perhaps the standard could also be allowed in this, it may also help to increase what appear ever dwindling numbers.

The County Championships are often very early in the season, when ahtletes have had little competition and very few have actually peaked, leaving at present one or possibly two competitions to achieve the standard. Poor weather conditions also can be a major factor, when achieving the standard is limited to a maximum of three competitions.

As mentioned previously we appear the only County who insists on running heats and a final on the same day in the schools and County Champs, which severley hampers middle distance runners, who are often asked to run a fast heat to qualify for the final and then run a standard in the final itself. A number of athletes this year were within a couple of seconds of the standard in the final, would they have made it had they not run a heat a few hours earlier, who knows, but their chances would certainly have been increased. Perhaps the qualifying standard is made tougher to actually run in Lancashire Schools thus alleviating the need to run a heat.

Richard, as far as Cross Coutry is concerned, in this years Mid Lancs League, I think I am right in saying the under 13 girls ran the same distance as the under 15 girls in three meetings prior to Lancashire Schools. This being the case a simple check was available. Your quite right the first five home are generally guaranteed and the remaining three are left open for wild cards. However certainly in the younger age groups we seem to adopt a first 8 home policy, even to an extent were second and third reserves were named as reserves, ahead of athletes who had beaten them consistently by up to two minutes in previous matches, but who were unable to compete on the day, due to illness or injury.

Nobody wants the standard of Lancashire Athletes to drop at English Schools Championships, but the selectors must be more flexible in their selection policies.

[Jeremy harries]

In the early 1980s the same thing happened. As a coach to an athlete who missed selection by a small margin - Richard Higgins - I went to the Lancashire Schools AGM and protested. I was invited to the committee meeting following and a couple of years later became Schools Team manager. We did change the approach for many athletes and I am sorry to see that it has reverted to the old method. I would like to see the criteria by which the current team is selected. We did select and tried hard to fill the allocation although I am sure there were many who would have criticised as well.

Cross Country selection is different. If it was not the first eight then Helen Clitheroe would not have been selected for her first ever English Schools at Chesterfield. She finished either 7th or 8th at Hutton, Tiffany Moorcroft was either 7th. or 8th as well, The girl who had beaten them all season in league races - Claire Entwistle from Rossendale - was ill, did not compete and at selection I had to fight for both Helen and Tiffany to be included. From the back of the pen Helen finished in the 40s. the rest is history as they say but being a team manager is never easy unless you have criteria and a bit of luck as well.

[Richard Blackburn Harriers]

It seems there is a lot of common ground - in that we all feel it would be good to send more athletes - even if we did not fill our allocation - so long as a fair way could be found that would not lower standards significantly.

So why do we not just open up the opportunities to get the standards that are set. Keep to the standards that are in place - but allow events that are recognised for the Power of 10 such as NATYAL, Mid Lancs etc to count. I do not know how many extra would have gone - but a few athletes then could have gone out in the week or two following the Lancs Schools in ana attempt to meet the required standard.

Assuming we would be for this - the question is then how do we lobby the Committee to ask them to consider such a move? I have no contact other than through building the course for the Schools XC at Witton - I only know a couple of people on the committee (although I probably know more but I am just not aware who they are) - and unlike the Lancs AA - where we get reports back to our club committee - I am not aware of feedback from anywhere on Schools committee activity.
So some sort of official club link in to the Schools committee would be helpful.

Pete - we are in danger of drifting to another topic!! - I think I can see where you are going with the Junior Girls / U13/U15 XC thing. But for the girl (I assume) you feel should be selected - who did not run the Lancs Schools - I can find ample evidence to suggest that there were U13's ahead of her (ED?) by looking at times where the U13/15 ran the same route which just emphasises the difficulty particulary in picking the XC teams where the age groups overlap.
I thnk the first 3 picked themselves - and then there were perhaps 10 - 12 running for 5 slots - who were all quite closely matched and could have finished in a different order on another day. Unfortunately the "sicky" would probably only have helped one of those 1st 3 as they seem only to be used for athletes who would have clearly made the team.

Another issue here is that 2 years ago we were asked to take the saucer out of the Lancs Schools course to make the nature of the course flatter and quicker (in prep for Mansfield). The schools committee felt that this would give a better balanced squad for ESAA courses which are usually flat and quick.
Anyone who knows Leeds Temple Newsham will know it is one of the toughest courses in the North - and maybe this decision needs reversing.
But as mentioned above - how do we lobby for this.