As long as the YDL is made up of points and leagues it will be of no use it is just another league of no purpose.
It is a younger version of the SAL everyone in it for a point.
Every year my own club tries to support all the leagues stating that the best youngsters will only the YDL and those trying to improve themselves to compete in the other leagues.
But in reality there are never enough athletes to compete in the meetings of the YDL so what happens!! I get emails asking me do I have anyone to fill in an event gap for points which to me sums up YDL athletics today.
Thanks’ for your spreadsheet highlighting what the effect would have on ‘point scoring’ if the proposed standards were to be approved at the AGM. But as this proposal is only due to be piloted at Premier divs next year…..and then reflected upon and reviewed at the following AGM , I doubt if the same worrying high numbers/percentage of athletes gaining no points would be at your levels reported ?
Having said that I do agree with you that it does not really promote or encourage ‘development’ of competitors (who by their nature are usually ‘athletic’ in body shape, strength, and mentality ). It is a team competition. Points do matter. It is important that we recognise determined track athletes, who say, trips over in the steeple , gets up and finishes the race…….and no points if one tenth slower than the standard ?
I do think all the proposed throws standards are a little too high for a pilot year ……..
Sorry mate but you sum up all that is wrong with YDL.
As long as points are involved you will get teams turning out athletes who should not be there it is a development league for higher standard athletes not lower standard athletes.
It is doubtful the YDL would see the season out if lower standard athletes were kept out.
It is all very well someone tripping over the steeple barrier for a point or no point but then ends up with x amount of out due to injury.
If a visitor to a YDL league meeting from another country came to see the set up, to see if it was worth introducing in their own country, after watching the antics of athletes collecting points Im sure the visitor would be thinking ” this is what they call development ” .
There are underlying issues that appear to be unresolvable in the Northern Area (YDLU). I suspect some clubs have their own agenda and it was disappointing that some of those who spoke during the Northern structure debate used incorrect information.
It was a relief that clubs did not vote yes or no to the working party proposals where they concerned other areas.
Unfortunately people from other regions did vote in the Northern discussion. I think there were over 60 votes which even with 2 a club is more than the number of clubs in the Northern region. A lady from the Midlands at the back definitely voted against the proposal – not sure why she felt able to commit the Northern clubs to thousands of pounds of travel related expenses.
In the main people did not vote on proposals from other Areas. I am not really sure why that individual voted although it may have been the person who actually said everyone should vote, a point that annoyed a lot of people. I tried to reach out to the 4 no votes on the Midlands proposal and 1 of them approached me and said that their committee had only seen the proposal in the last few days and didn’t agree with it. It is surprising as we invited all Midland clubs to consultation meetings. The only thing I can think of is that the contact we had just didn’t pass on the information or is no longer involved.
Something has to give to take the Northern Area forward. As a Northern person (based in the Midlands for the last 24 years) it makes me sad that there appears to be such an entrenched position from both sides and much of it driven by self interest rather than a desire to consider the bigger picture.
Thanks MarkE for offering up some of the outcomes of the AGM…….do you know how the clubs voted regarding the trialling/piloting of the minimum standards to achieve points for the Upper age group in the Prem Div ?
The proposal was presented by the working party but Mick B was asked to give an indication of some more modest standards to apply to the proposal. The original minimum standards were clearly far too difficult and Mick was looking at capturing 10% of the performances. There was a lot of resistance and naivety in the room.
The aims were to:
1. Protect untrained athletes from injury and subsequent risk of litigation.
2. Stop the demeaning of events by athletes messing around, when filling in.
3. Improving basic standards.
4. Remove temptation for TM’s to pressgang athletes into unsuitable events.
A lot of people didn’t like it and seem to portray ‘throwing for a point’ etc as some kind of rights of passage, a good old chuckle etc.
Despite the idea being to trial this in Premier only I am not sure we will do it at all.
We have a very conservative sport and it was clear that when Tim presented the proposal on minimum standards, there was little support. An alternative proposal on the lowering the actual standards made it more appealing but ultimately, even though it was to be Premier only it was defeated.
In the Midlands, the concept of 3 rounds followed by an Area Final (bringing together the top 3 teams from each of the parallel Premier Divisions) has backfired on the NE clubs in terms of travel. The YDLL Area Final is in Cardiff and the YDLU Area Final is at Yate so both will require some overnight stays.
It will be fine if we get to the Finals but does have cost implications. The Lowe age team
Would need to travel on the Saturday to compete on the Sunday, so considerable cost for Coach travel and overnight accommodation. The upper age team will have to travel in shifts with the early competitors staying over to enable those competing after 12 noon to leave home at a reasonable time on the morning of the competition.