The Three Worlds of Sport — And Why Rules Must Fit the Purpose

The Three Worlds of Sport — And Why Rules Must Fit the Purpose
By Stuart Dempster

Recently at the Regional Championships, I found myself reflecting on something I’ve experienced many times as both a coach and an athlete: not all sporting environments are the same — and our rules need to reflect that.

The mission of Little Athletics Australia is clear:

“To develop children of all abilities by promoting positive attitudes and a healthy lifestyle through family and community involvement in athletic activities. Standard track and field events are modified for distances and the equipment used is scaled down to suit children. The emphasis, particularly in the younger age groups, is on fun and participation.”

That statement captures something fundamental — sport operates in different worlds.

The Three Worlds in Sport

From my experience, there are three distinct environments:

1️⃣ Participation

This is the open-door world.

Think Parkruns, fun runs, Little Athletics, and junior football competitions where contact, ball size, and field dimensions are modified to suit age and stage.

The goal here is simple: inclusion, enjoyment, and movement.

Rules in this world should be:

Simple

Flexible

Participation-enhancing

Complex technical enforcement works against the purpose.

2️⃣ Development

This is the learning world.

High schools and clubs provide more structure. Coaches teach skills, technique, and strategy. Performance matters — but growth matters more.

Rules here should be:

Structured

Clear

Supportive of learning

Competition becomes an educational tool. Mistakes are part of development.

3️⃣ National–Elite

This is the high-performance world.

Winning matters. Margins are small. Technical enforcement is essential — reaction-time technology in starting blocks, strict false start rules, precise adjudication.

Rules here are:

Strict

Specific

Supported by technology

Athletes in this space are physically and psychologically prepared for uncompromising standards.

When Rules Don’t Match the Environment

At the Regional Championships — clearly a development-level event — there was growing frustration at the frequency of sprint recalls and the number of red cards and disqualifications.

The one-break-and-you’re-out false start rule is entirely appropriate in elite competition. But is it aligned with young developing athletes who are still learning block skills?

Starting blocks are now compulsory. But do all clubs have the coaching resources to teach block set-up, stability, and start mechanics consistently?

We also saw athletes eliminated for being “unsteady.” That is technically different from breaking — where the feet leave the blocks. Add championship nerves into the equation, and the environment becomes even more challenging for young athletes.

The result for some was not learning — but dismay.

This is not about criticising officials or organisers. Officials apply the rules they are given, and they do so professionally. The question is not enforcement.

The question is fit-for-purpose rule design.

If this championship sits within the development world, then the rule framework should reflect developmental principles:

Consider a one-warning rule up to U16

Apply the no-warning for U16+

Clearly distinguish between breaking and instability for younger athletes

Use competition as an extension of coaching, not simply a filter

Competitions at this stage should deepen love for the sport, reinforce learning, and build confidence.

What the Research Says

The evidence supports age-appropriate rule modification.

Brown, Phillips & Encel (2017) studied modified rules in junior Australian football and found:

Increased player involvement

Greater enjoyment

Improved perceived competence

Stronger psychosocial outcomes linked to sustained participation
By Stuart Dempster

When competition is scaled to developmental stage, engagement increases.

The principle is clear:

Modified competition enhances participation. Strict elite replication reduces it.

If our aim is to grow athletes — not simply eliminate them — then our rule structures must reflect the world we are operating in.

The three worlds of sport are not hierarchical.

They are developmental.

And when rules match purpose, everybody wins.

References

Australian Institute of Sport (2026). Modified Sports Evidence Summary. Clearinghouse for Sport.

Brown, H., Phillips, P., & Encel, K. (2017). The impact of modified rules on involvement and psychosocial influences on AFL junior football players. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport.

Little Athletics Australia – Mission Statement (AIS citation, 2026).