USA Swimming proposes rule limiting suits

Here's the legislation (for the 12 & under rule). It will go into effect on May 15, 2009 (or for all meets that begin on or after May 15, 2009): 102.9 SWIMWEAR .1 Design A Swimsuits worn for all 12 & under age group defined competition shall not cover the neck, extend past the shoulder, nor past the knee. B Swimsuits worn for competition must be non-transparent and conform to the current concept of the appropriate. C The Referee shall have authority to bar offenders from the competition until they comply with the rule. So what I am guessing is that any event that is expressly identified as being for (maybe only for?) 12 & unders would be handled this way. Not knowing specifically about the arguments regarding for/against this, there are two things I can potentially see with this: *Fast 12 & unders will simply move up into senior competition to swim with the suits (note that some areas impose restrictions on exactly how such move-ups occur). This may be the case when a kid is trying to break a LSC record or something like that (or maybe a swimmer who is close to LSC Championship cuts, and thinks the suit would get them over the edge). *I would be concerned that, especially at short-staffed meets, that this rule would be glossed over because everyone is busy with everything else going on with the meet, similar to what can happen with the high school jewelry rule. These suits are a bit obvious though, unlike (for example) earrings. The interpretation and implementation of this rule will also be important, as to whether it's read to be very absolute and ironclad (you swim in one and you're DQ'd, no questions asked; you are barred from competition until you fix the suit or get a new suit), or whether it's more of a referee's discretion issue (can the referee simply warn the swimmer not to wear the suit at future meets?). Patrick King

Here's the legislation (for the 12 & under rule). It will go into effect on May 15, 2009 (or for all meets that begin on or after May 15, 2009): 102.9 SWIMWEAR .1 Design A Swimsuits worn for all 12 & under age group defined competition shall not cover the neck, extend past the shoulder, nor past the knee. B Swimsuits worn for competition must be non-transparent and conform to the current concept of the appropriate. C The Referee shall have authority to bar offenders from the competition until they comply with the rule. So what I am guessing is that any event that is expressly identified as being for (maybe only for?) 12 & unders would be handled this way. Not knowing specifically about the arguments regarding for/against this, there are two things I can potentially see with this: *Fast 12 & unders will simply move up into senior competition to swim with the suits (note that some areas impose restrictions on exactly how such move-ups occur). This may be the case when a kid is trying to break a LSC record or something like that (or maybe a swimmer who is close to LSC Championship cuts, and thinks the suit would get them over the edge). *I would be concerned that, especially at short-staffed meets, that this rule would be glossed over because everyone is busy with everything else going on with the meet, similar to what can happen with the high school jewelry rule. These suits are a bit obvious though, unlike (for example) earrings. The interpretation and implementation of this rule will also be important, as to whether it's read to be very absolute and ironclad (you swim in one and you're DQ'd, no questions asked; you are barred from competition until you fix the suit or get a new suit), or whether it's more of a referee's discretion issue (can the referee simply warn the swimmer not to wear the suit at future meets?). Patrick King