USA Swimming proposes rule limiting suits

Indiana Swimming enacted a rule for their 12 and under swimmers as well. Why can boys can wear jammers down to their knees, but girls can't have suits that extend below the pelvis? I purchased my daughter a kneeskin for States and Zones last summer and was told she couldn't wear the suit effective fall season. There was no warning for parents who purchased these suits for their children. They are expensive and it's unfair to those of us who invested in them. If they are going to enact a rule restricting suits, it should be the same for swimmers everywhere. When you are determining TOP 16, it's unfair to tell kids in some states they can wear them while swimmers in other states can't. Don't the LSC's realize that these kids are being ranked nationally and not just within their LSC? Also, parents should understand that there's no reason to purchase these suits for average swimmers. I thinks it's odd to see B/BB/A swimmers wearing Fast Skins, Tracers,etc. These suits are designed for the serious competitive swimmer who is excelling in State, Zones, and nationally. To restrict these kids from wearing suits that were designed to enhance their performnace just isn't fair. This is a small group of swimmers and these suits are part of their game. Swimming is expensive at this level and this is part of competing at that level. If someone going to Zones can't afford the suit, then maybe they should try raising the money, asking their coach who can probably purchase one at a discount, or asking family members to help out. To restrict these elite age group swimmers is going to far. The LSC's need to stay out of it and adhere to a national policy. Ignoring the issue of whether the USA Swimming rule change is good policy or not, this post actually is a concern for another reason: that the LSC's are striking out on their own and tacking on to the USA Swimming rule change however they see fit. Once again, the new rule (effective May 15): 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. Here, we see that North Texas is extending the limit to age 14, and implementing the rule differently by sex, and as quoted above, that Indiana is also taking a sex-based interpretation as well. But, unless the Rules & Regulations Committee comes out with an interpretation or clarification--and soon--it's going to be a situation where each LSC has its own separate rule. Why is this a problem? It's a problem if you have a suit that's legal in your LSC, and then you go to a meet in another LSC, where the suit is (by LSC rules or interpretations) illegal. I'll wager money that someone is going to have to go out and buy a new suit on site because the information wasn't in the meet announcement. And then what happens at Age Group Sectionals or a Zone meet that is held in a more restrictive LSC (remember, the sanction for these meets is issued by the LSC, and unless an exception is carved out, governed by that LSC's bylaws too)? And that's ignoring issues where some LSC's will interpret the rule to result in an immediate disqualification and some LSC's will interpret the rule to simply require the swimmer to correct the issue before his or her next event. Patrick King

Indiana Swimming enacted a rule for their 12 and under swimmers as well. Why can boys can wear jammers down to their knees, but girls can't have suits that extend below the pelvis? I purchased my daughter a kneeskin for States and Zones last summer and was told she couldn't wear the suit effective fall season. There was no warning for parents who purchased these suits for their children. They are expensive and it's unfair to those of us who invested in them. If they are going to enact a rule restricting suits, it should be the same for swimmers everywhere. When you are determining TOP 16, it's unfair to tell kids in some states they can wear them while swimmers in other states can't. Don't the LSC's realize that these kids are being ranked nationally and not just within their LSC? Also, parents should understand that there's no reason to purchase these suits for average swimmers. I thinks it's odd to see B/BB/A swimmers wearing Fast Skins, Tracers,etc. These suits are designed for the serious competitive swimmer who is excelling in State, Zones, and nationally. To restrict these kids from wearing suits that were designed to enhance their performnace just isn't fair. This is a small group of swimmers and these suits are part of their game. Swimming is expensive at this level and this is part of competing at that level. If someone going to Zones can't afford the suit, then maybe they should try raising the money, asking their coach who can probably purchase one at a discount, or asking family members to help out. To restrict these elite age group swimmers is going to far. The LSC's need to stay out of it and adhere to a national policy. Ignoring the issue of whether the USA Swimming rule change is good policy or not, this post actually is a concern for another reason: that the LSC's are striking out on their own and tacking on to the USA Swimming rule change however they see fit. Once again, the new rule (effective May 15): 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. Here, we see that North Texas is extending the limit to age 14, and implementing the rule differently by sex, and as quoted above, that Indiana is also taking a sex-based interpretation as well. But, unless the Rules & Regulations Committee comes out with an interpretation or clarification--and soon--it's going to be a situation where each LSC has its own separate rule. Why is this a problem? It's a problem if you have a suit that's legal in your LSC, and then you go to a meet in another LSC, where the suit is (by LSC rules or interpretations) illegal. I'll wager money that someone is going to have to go out and buy a new suit on site because the information wasn't in the meet announcement. And then what happens at Age Group Sectionals or a Zone meet that is held in a more restrictive LSC (remember, the sanction for these meets is issued by the LSC, and unless an exception is carved out, governed by that LSC's bylaws too)? And that's ignoring issues where some LSC's will interpret the rule to result in an immediate disqualification and some LSC's will interpret the rule to simply require the swimmer to correct the issue before his or her next event. Patrick King