Relative age effects (RAEs) are common in youth sports that group athletes by age. These effects often lead to a disproportionate number of athletes born near the start of the selection cut-off date progressing through talent pathways, while those born later in the year are underrepresented. To address this issue and ensure fairer opportunities for all players, England Squash introduced a ‘birthday-banding’ approach. In this system, athletes train and compete with peers born in the same birth month range, moving up to the next group on their birthday. This method aims to reduce the bias associated with RAEs and better support long-term player development.
In collaboration with England Squash, our first study examined the impact of the birthday-banding system on birth quarter distributions across three mixed-gender groups within the England Squash Talent Pathway: (a) ASPIRE athletes (n = 250), (b) Development and Potential athletes (n = 52), and (c) Senior Team and Academy athletes (n = 26). Using chi-square analysis and odds ratios, we compared the distribution of athletes’ birth dates across quartiles with national norms. The results showed no significant differences in birth quarter distributions across all three groups. In contrast to the majority of studies on RAEs in sport, this research found no evidence of relative age bias within the England Squash Talent Pathway. These findings suggest that the birthday-banding strategy may be an effective tool for reducing RAEs and creating a more level playing field in youth sport.
While these early outcomes show promise in balancing selection opportunities, little research has explored how coaches—the key implementers of this approach—perceive its impact. To address this, our second study conducted semi-structured interviews with fifteen England Squash Talent Pathway coaches to gain insights into the perceived benefits and limitations of birthday-banding. Using thematic analysis, three key themes were found: (a) considering organisational structures (i.e., coaches reflected on how birthday-banding influenced selection processes, competition formats, and performance outcomes), building the right environment (i.e., the approach encouraged more flexible and fluid grouping of athletes, supporting a developmental culture that prioritises long-term growth over short-term results), and supporting individual athlete development (i.e., coaches highlighted benefits in promoting holistic development, accommodating differences in physical and skill progression, and allowing athletes to experience both older and younger peer competition across a 12-month span).
Overall, coaches spoke positively about the birthday-banding approach, emphasising its role in creating fairer opportunities for athletes who may otherwise be disadvantaged by their birth date or rate of maturation. The increased variety in competition levels was also seen as beneficial for athlete learning and adaptability. However, some concerns and challenges were raised, particularly around implementation logistics and consistency across programmes. These insights are now informing ongoing refinements to better support both players and coaches across the England Squash Talent Pathway. An important next step is to gain a broader understanding of talent development processes in squash, an area currently underrepresented in the literature. Advancing this knowledge will help inform policy and enhance practice within the England Squash Talent Pathway.