NFHS Rule 8-1-3b Cross-Country Course Layout

VFL

Member
No ground obstructions which might cause tripping, turned ankles, etc.

· To clarify, this is not a ‘new’ rule, however the interpretation & enforcement of the rule may not have been as clear in the past.
In speaking with BJ Duckworth (OHSAA State Rules Interpreter & Director of Officiating Development) regarding the interpretation of the rule & what the official’s role should be in allowing these obstructions, as well as additional feedback from Julie Cochran (NFHS Director of Sports)…we each agreed that Rule 8-1-3b should be interpreted as such:

A ‘ground obstruction’ could be any type of physical structure or barrier (hay bales, fencing, large logs or rocks, etc.) that are placed on the racecourse and meant to be navigated over (not around). This also includes any surface being run on that could knowingly cause a tripping hazard….such as ‘water’. Understanding that the term ‘water’ is somewhat vague when applying it to a cross country course, please see the following for additional clarity:

Why even call it cross country? Make every course flat and fast and call it fall track! The meets that I've been to the kids LOVE running through creeks, hay bales, etc.
 
 
According to the rules they will have to change it. Liberty Center and Mason were the first two courses that came to mind when I saw the email. I knew obstructions were not allowed and wondered how Mason got away with it, but I didn’t realize crossing natural water was not allowed.
 
The Liberty Center course at Leaders Farms does not use the creek crossings for Districts, only for the two meets that they host during the regular season. They have built two bridges specifically for the District races that they host there. This ruling in my opinion is absolutely terrible! Creek crossings have been a part of our sport since the 1950's. I have a photo of my dad crossing a creek when he was in high school running cross country. We had it in the 1980's when I competed in high school and college. I raced on Eaton's course at Fort St. Clair, and I loved trampling through the water. Why? Because it's cross country! If you're so worried about tripping, why are night meets allowed? I personally love night meets, as it brings much needed attention to our sport. Why? because it's FUN! However, there is a lot more danger tripping in a night meet when the surface is not completely lit up, than crossing a creek. When I was first told of this so called rule, I thought that the person telling me this was joking. You allow athletes to bang heads and break bones on Friday nights, but low in behold, let's be careful with tripping in water. For the record, personally, I love watching kids play football on Friday nights, but it is a dangerous and violent sport.
By the way, I have plenty of footage of all of the races at Leaders Farms, not one single runner tripped, and there are two water crossings! What a joke! I feel sorry for the kids next year if this nonsense continues!
 
Last edited:
Most fun meet I ran was at Perry. Guys I ran with in college would talk about it. Many creek crossings. It Snowed 2 of the years I ran. I ran in snow all 4 years. 6 inches at the District meet. Very simple sport. Start ... Finish. Everyone runs the same course in the same conditions. No need for too many rules and regulations.
 
BJ is in a difficult position, as he is saying officials have to enforce the rule as it is written. He's asking officials for consistency in enforcing a rule that maybe is not popular. Will be interesting if push comes to shove, particularly at the Mason course, if Mason refuses to do away with both the hay bales and the creek crossing. I would hate to be the referee there next year if that happens.
 
BJ is in a difficult position, as he is saying officials have to enforce the rule as it is written. He's asking officials for consistency in enforcing a rule that maybe is not popular. Will be interesting if push comes to shove, particularly at the Mason course, if Mason refuses to do away with both the hay bales and the creek crossing. I would hate to be the referee there next year if that happens.
He’s in a difficult position because they ignored the rule for decades, even in their own tournament races. It’s a bad look for them to now start hassling others for following their lead.
 
The "rule" is not a rule as far as I understand. It is an interpretation of the rule regarding hazards. The hay bales, I think that is easy to interpret as a hazard that is avoidable. The creeks? There have been creeks at cross country courses all over the U.S. for decades. Not sure why they decide that now is the time to ban them.
 
This is not a rule and it will NEVER be enforced.

First and foremost I have never in 40 years of this sport seen an official view the entire XC course. They are assigned to either check-in, starter, or finish area. The host school and meet manager should make the course as usual.

They could care less about the other 2.9 miles of the course in any regular season meet besides District, regional, or state.

Carry on your business. This is faux-news.
 
My reading of this is colored by having done actuarial work. Given the specific references in the email we received, I interpret this as "Our insurance provider will not cover catastrophic injuries that result from such obstacles, so schools need to realize they will be on the hook for that."
 
My reading of this is colored by having done actuarial work. Given the specific references in the email we received, I interpret this as "Our insurance provider will not cover catastrophic injuries that result from such obstacles, so schools need to realize they will be on the hook for that."
So, Football is covered, but a kid that gets injured by a hay bail is not? Pole Vault Covered. Creek is not? Running into the goal post covered? Running into the linesmen or the down markers is covered? How about a kid running into a tree or stepping on a tree root?

I'm not trying to be smart about this. I've never been involved with anything except a kid getting hit with a Disc. Just off that something like getting hit in the head with a Disc or Field Hockey stick would be covered, but something like a hay bail is not. There are Hurdles on the track.

AD has never gone over insurance items with our coaching staff for track and field. What things might or might not be covered for other sports?
 
It's not that these things couldn't be covered but actuaries have to determine risk factors for every sport and that determines the insurance premiums. It sounds like current premiums are based on known risks. Football has a set of known risks that are different than cross-country. I would bet that the insurance premiums are different for the two sports as well. Could you get your school's insurance carrier to write a policy to cover your risk related to having a course that runs through a creek or over hay bales? Sure, I doubt it would make a significant increase in cost.

However, the OHSAA liability insurance that covers every event they sanction probably doesn't have that factored in. It would be an unnecessary expense for them to have a policy written to cover the risks related to hay bales, creek crossings, etc. when most courses don't have such risks.
 
As madman said, this is about the OHSAA catastrophic injury insurance, not individual school insurance. One of the fundamental things about such insurance is that when there are expressed rules, those rules must be followed. I would actually be surprised if anyone had ever done a risk assessment of adding hay bales or a creek crossing to a cross country course. But, it is actually a pretty normal to assess actual practice versus stated rules and procedures. I have been involved in obtaining insurance for robotics competitions a number of times over the past couple of decades. The insurance providers tend to ask "Are you following the standards and procedures that FIRST (the sponsoring organization) has for competitions?" So I would guess that someone read that rule and thought about XC courses with features like creek crossings and hay bales and decided that if someone were injured traversing such an obstacle that the OHSAA insurance would not provide coverage.
 
As madman said, this is about the OHSAA catastrophic injury insurance, not individual school insurance. One of the fundamental things about such insurance is that when there are expressed rules, those rules must be followed. I would actually be surprised if anyone had ever done a risk assessment of adding hay bales or a creek crossing to a cross country course. But, it is actually a pretty normal to assess actual practice versus stated rules and procedures. I have been involved in obtaining insurance for robotics competitions a number of times over the past couple of decades. The insurance providers tend to ask "Are you following the standards and procedures that FIRST (the sponsoring organization) has for competitions?" So I would guess that someone read that rule and thought about XC courses with features like creek crossings and hay bales and decided that if someone were injured traversing such an obstacle that the OHSAA insurance would not provide coverage.
A few years ago when I kept a basketball scorebook, we played a game in a collegiate gymnasium that did not have markings for a HS 3 pt. line (NCAA 3 pt. line had been moved back at the time). Because the court's markings did not conform to NFHS rules, we were told the OHSAA's catastrophic insurance would not be in effect for that game. Said gymnasium used to host a girls district tournament, but I believe the college no longer hosted it after the 3 pt. line moved.

It sounds trivial, but it's very similar to this situation with XC course features. There's a reason JV/open races at district meets were eliminated, too.
 
So first. a funny thing. My autocorrect corrects bales to bails. I had to over ride it. Guess if got used to me contacting my Bail bondsman. Can't tell you all the gibberish my phone changes in texts.

I deal with insurance matters for clients of mine that own commercial foodservice operations. They cannot have non commercial equipment or their insurance will not cover. Restaurant burns down, you better hope the adjusters don't find a residential microwave in the rubble.

So, the lesson here is less rules for a sport that really only needs a few rules is better.
 
Top