RRCA POSITION PAPER ON UNFAIR ASSISTANCE

Issue: An RRCA club had to deal with a formal protest when a runner protested that the winner of a club race had received unfair assistance from her husband during the race. The race director (correctly) ruled in the dispute, but media attention subsequently involved the local USATF club and the RRCA.

RRCA BACKGROUND: The RRCA operates with Guidelines rather than Rules. The RRCA, in its first twenty years of promoting running in the United States, had to battle the AAU (the predecessor of USATF ) which had rules restricting the rights of women and children to enter a road race, no matter what the nature of the event, and in many cases sought to enforce a rule requiring that every person in any race buy an AAU card. The RRCA successfully battled these restrictions on athletes' rights, including giving guidance in the wording of the Amateur Sports Act of 1978. Having won these battles, the RRCA continues a policy of encouraging rather than restricting running and running events, with guidance but without unnecessary interference To that end, the RRCA supports efforts that enable running to flourish and which resolve differences in a manner which utilize a practical application of common sense and fairness. USATF rules of competition are certainly welcome in appropriate situations, but the RRCA recognizes the rights of clubs and event directors in deciding how to conduct their events and under what rules to operate.

RRCA'S DISCUSSION POINTS on the UNFAIR ASSISTANCE ISSUE

Key Points:

Road races do not automatically fall under the jurisdiction of RRCA, USATF or any running organization;
The race director has the discretion to decide a contested outcome (in low-key events);
Common sense application of fairness should be the guiding value;
RRCA takes this issue seriously and will study it, clarify it for the clubs, offer guidance;
Input to RRCA is welcome;
If a runner appeals a ruling by a club, the club's officers decide it (not the RRCA).

Expansion of Key Points:

The vast majority of RRCA road races are low key, whether or not the event is under USATF rules or RRCA guidelines. This example issue was a low-key 25k club event, under the RRCA's sanction and insurance (no prize money). RRCA clubs often use USATF rules for competitive events but are under no general obligation to do so. This race was operating under the RRCA's guidelines. RRCA's guidelines do not specifically speak to the issue of "unfair assistance."
The race director ruled according to his own interpretation - which is what he had a right to do, even according to the USATF rules ("may" be disqualified by the referee). In this case it was a low-key race and therefore there wasn't a referee - the race director was also the referee. (This USATF rule is purposely written in permissive terms).
Common sense fairness is what is expected in all RRCA races that are conducted under the RRCA guidelines - especially low-key events, which is what this was. In complex cases, etc, there can always be differing views of right and wrong. Because of these differing views, even the USATF assistance rule grants the referee discretion in this regard.
RRCA took the issue raised seriously and is studying it, will ascertain where clarification might be needed, and then offer additional guidelines on this issue and others for clubs to follow so that clubs will have guidance to assist them - even in low-key races. The RRCA does not make rules, but operates with guidelines that the clubs can take as their rules. We have found that this works well for the RRCA and its member clubs. (The RRCA has a differing philosophy from USATF regarding rules and guidelines, akin to the differing philosophies of political parties).
If a runner appeals a ruling, it should go to the club's board - this is not the RRCA's nor USATF's business or jurisdiction. The local club board should be the body discussing the appeal. That's the way the administrative process should work.
The race was a low-key event operating under the guidelines stated by the RRCA - but, in the final analysis of jurisdiction, it was the race director's right to decide the fairness issue, similar to a controversial call in a football or basketball game. Controversial calls happen and that's part of all sports, and they survive.

If the local USATF chapter tries to bring punitive measures against an RRCA club over an issue such as this, the RRCA club has the right to appeal to the national USATF through its administrative grievance process.
The RRCA welcomes suggestions and input from all sides: clubs, runners, and USATF. The RRCA executive board will take an extensive long-term look at this issue and others from a national perspective.

###