Table Tennis England and DBS: The 'Supervision Exemption' Closes on September 1, 2026

In a table tennis hall on the outskirts of Manchester I once visited in the summer of 2026, one detail stayed with me: a young coach sitting at the edge of a table, his back turned to a group of teenagers warming up, and no one noticing. In the club's records, he was filed under 'supervised work.' People believed that as long as another adult was within sight, everything was safe. On September 1, 2026, that belief was formally removed by law.

Table Tennis England has announced an online webinar hosted by its Designated Safeguarding Officer, Kyhl Daly. The webinar runs from 6 to 7 p.m. on Tuesday, September 29, and is aimed at Club Welfare Officers, members of club or league committees, and volunteers who regularly work with children.

The session covers changes to DBS requirements — the United Kingdom's criminal record check system — and what they mean for safeguarding children in table tennis. From September 1, 2026, the Crime and Policing Act 2026 removed the 'supervision exemption' from the legal definition of Regulated Activity. Previously, some volunteers and coaches working with children under supervision did not need a DBS check. That no longer applies. Supervised roles are now treated the same as unsupervised ones.

I have spent nearly three decades in press rooms across sports, from athletics tracks to badminton courts, and I have learned one thing: legal changes that look dry on paper often hide the real story of an industry. English table tennis is entering a phase where every club, every league, every committee must re-read every line of its own procedures. Not because a scandal broke, but because a loophole has just been closed.

When I rewatched recordings of youth tournaments I once commentated, I recognised the signature sound of a junior table tennis hall in Japan: the steady bounce of balls, footsteps, a coach calling out reminders. Threaded through it were silences — the silences of adults standing at the edge of the court, unnamed, unchecked. Tactical hearing taught me that an empty court is never empty; only the echo changes hands. In the case of DBS, that echo is a question: how many adults are standing within a child's line of sight without ever having been checked?

Core analysis: Regulated Activity and a door just closed

DBS stands for Disclosure and Barring Service, the body responsible for criminal record checks and barring decisions in England and Wales. In sport, a DBS check is one of the first lines of defence against people with a history of harming children reaching positions of responsibility. To understand this change fully, it helps to distinguish the levels of check. A Basic check reveals only unspent convictions. A Standard check adds information about barred lists relating to children and vulnerable adults. An Enhanced check goes deeper into local police data. In table tennis, those working with children usually fall into the Enhanced category, and that requirement now extends to supervised roles too.

Before September 1, 2026, the concept of 'Regulated Activity' allowed an escape route. If work with children took place under the regular supervision of someone who already held a DBS, that person did not have to be checked. It was a door left ajar. On paper, it made sense. In practice, it depended on a fragile definition of 'supervision.' Who supervises? For how long? Does being physically present in the room count as supervising? Those questions never had a single agreed answer.

With the Crime and Policing Act 2026, that door closes. Supervised and unsupervised are now treated alike. If a volunteer regularly works with children in table tennis — whether or not a head coach is standing beside them — they fall into the category requiring the corresponding DBS.

For Table Tennis England, this is a systemic change. Every club is a knot in the net. Thousands of volunteers, hundreds of local leagues, countless after-school sessions sit within its reach. Committees must review their personnel lists, identify who regularly works with children, and ensure the right checks are completed on time. A seemingly small task, yet for clubs with only a handful of volunteers it can be a genuine burden.

Technically, the webinar is designed for non-lawyers. The target audience is Club Welfare Officers, club and league committee members, and volunteers who regularly work with children. They will hear about the regulatory change and how it affects them and the volunteers they coordinate. The session also sets out Table Tennis England's DBS processes and stresses the role of DBS checks in protecting children in the sport.

The DBS process is not mere paperwork. In a sport where the contact distance between adults and children is so thin — a session can take place in a closed room, a tournament trip can last days — each check is a layer of brick. And the law has just decided that layer cannot be missing from any position, including one that only 'stands and watches.'

Contrarian angle: a tick-box does not build a culture

I have read too many notices like this to believe the law alone protects anyone. People call me sceptical; I am only sorting the pieces others glanced past. The change under the Crime and Policing Act 2026 is a step in the right direction, but it is only as strong as the seriousness clubs bring to it.

The first blind spot: DBS often becomes a tick-box. A club proves it has records, and that is that. A certificate does not create a culture. The dangerous person is not the one missing paperwork; the dangerous person is the one with enough paperwork that no one looks any closer.

The second blind spot: a legal change does not automatically fill a knowledge gap. Not every committee member understands what 'Regulated Activity' means, or what the removal of the 'supervision exemption' implies. A one-hour webinar is a starting point, not an end point. After it, each club needs someone responsible for auditing the entire list, and a process for handling grey areas.

The third blind spot, which I want to state most clearly: safeguarding children is not an administrative file but a daily habit. How an adult stands at the edge of a court, how they call a child by name, how they handle a private conversation — none of that appears on any DBS form. A coach can pass every check and still harm a child through indifference. And conversely, a volunteer with a full DBS may be the only person in the room to notice something is wrong.

From my experience watching matches and youth sports events, I have noticed a paradox: organisations that invest heavily in process are often the most complacent. They trust paperwork to do the work for them. Meanwhile, small, under-resourced clubs sometimes stay alert precisely because they are forced to know everyone in the room.

Across years of watching sports federations in Japan respond to new rules, I have seen two approaches. The first is minimal compliance: doing just enough to avoid a fine. The second is restructuring: using the new rule as a chance to rebuild public trust. Those that choose the second always go further, even if it costs more at first. English table tennis now stands at that fork.

Conclusion

The September 29 webinar with Kyhl Daly will not solve everything. It hands the table tennis community a new filter for reviewing its own ranks. For a sport with thousands of small clubs and thin volunteer resources, a new filter is an important start. Age 64 is not a touchline; it is a corner flag from which I see the whole field. And from there, I see something worth thinking about: a table may be only a metre and a half wide, but an adult's responsibility to a child has no boundary at all.

Since September 1, 2026, the word 'supervision' has no place in the legal definition of responsibility. In reality, that responsibility never needed a word to define it. The press room taught me that not every answer deserves to be heard — but the question 'have we done enough?' always deserves to be repeated, every season, every session, every time a child walks into the room.