People would only have this debate on the FRA Forum! As far as I'm concerned if a company wants to give a runner, who's probably out training in the snow while I'm in bed with man flu, a pair if shoes and some cash for petrol, fair enough.
It's not as if I'm typing on the FRA Forum sponsored by Go Outdoors or running up Kinder sponsored by Nestlé is it?
Quite similar debates going on in the US ultra community.
Sponsorship of the top men and women is common and accepted, Salomon, North Face, Montrail, La Sportiva, New Balance, Inov8, Pearl iZUMi and others are all in the game.
No-one is getting rich, or indeed making all ends meet off this type of support.
Related article with over 200 comments on the perhaps much thornier issue of prize money on iRunFar here:
http://www.irunfar.com/2011/12/the-a...-100-mile.html
There is talk of druf testing in the comments too, so no doubt CL will be along shortly.
The only one who can tell you "You can't" is you. And you don't have to listen.
Can't see a problem with the sponsorship of individual runners or clubs. The problems would start if a "non fell running" sponsor backed an event to the point where they wanted to manipulate the organisation of the event to make it "more sellable" - charging spectators, making it more televisable etc, effectively fell running in a stadium. That is where fell running and commercialism would not mix.
And don't say it could not happen; look at motorcycle trials riding. Back in the sixties no-one involved in trials could have foreseen that one day many of the events would take place in stadia, over man made obstacles!
I was a bit of an oddball until I was abducted by aliens; but I'm perfectly OK now!
Crikey, a few people struggling to understand this thread. And as for the 'sour grapes' comment from Fozzy.. Yes, I was sat there hoping Pete Blands was going to sponsor me and was amazed they plumped for Ian Homes instead.
As I said before, I agree with it being a good thing that hard-working runners are given a bit of money for petrol/free trainers etc, and agree it's good that shops support races (and get their names on race numbers etc), but what I think is a shame is the idea that someone would drop their club kit and run round in generic t-shirt and short combos that are solely worn to advertise a shop. Seems against what I understand of the spirit of fell running.
Clearly not that many agree (not that many), but that can't be helped.
It's not quite as futuristic as it may seem - http://www.indoortrail.de/news.217425.htm Strangely, i think it's a fun idea and would love to have a front row seat to see our top runners battle it out...charging spectators, making it more televisable etc, effectively fell running in a stadium. That is where fell running and commercialism would not mix
What kit do the runners wear who don't belong to clubs? Are they allowed to wear sponsored kit?
I think there's a darn site more running in just any old top - the one that they feel is most suitable for the conditions. I rarely use my BBH vest in fell races, not for any other reason than it's not as practical as some other options that I have. particularly if I have my backpack rather than my bumbag.Originally Posted by L.F.F.
I noted TomCee won Bowland in an Australia vest - could he be sponsored by ROLF
No they're not allowed Dominion. I'm banning it. Sorry.
But having a multitude of archane rules is against the spirit of fellrunning. So you can't!
Sadly, I can imagine sponsorship issues putting an end to the (albeit slow) rise of bare-arsed fell running :closed:
Poacher turned game-keeper
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote