You missed one.Originally Posted by IainR
Association of Running Clubs
(Trail / Fell specific rules)
You missed one.
Association of Running Clubs
(Trail / Fell specific rules)
This is all too intangible for me. Perhaps you could help me. If this organisation were an animal it would be...
What about all the events that aren't affiliated to running associations at all? As far as I can see ultra events like say the Fellsman, Lakes in a Day and the Lakeland 50 and 100 get their own liability insurance and aren't run under running club rules at all? (A good thing I say).
I guess the advantage EHR offer is perhaps a possibility of slightly more tighter organiser insurance cover. That said surely, until they get bigger anyway, I'd guess that the insurance might cost a few bob more in the process?
Last edited by Stolly; 29-06-2015 at 03:20 PM.
I've tried not to get involved here as I don't think it's right to come on the FRA Forum on this topic, but I do try and want to clear one or two things up - not for CBA (Cheshire BogHoppers Assoc.) Noel, but for one or two others.
1. EHR isn't about anti-FRA or working against the FRA, but there is a distinct wish for EHR to be an independent body ie to be able to act in what it sees as the best interests of Fell and Hill event organisers in England.
It's quite conceivable that an RO may chose to have a race with the FRA and a race with EHR. EHR is just a system of event registration that gives insurance cover and event support and I don't see it as a them and us.
2. At the risk of offending BOFRA, which would be the last thing I would want to do, it operates more like a league or championship series. Sure it has it's own internal rules, but some races are FRA, others aren't so even within BOFRA some differences apply.
3. EHR isn't about international so the 1st 3 on Iain's list are red herrings.
4. I've never heard of WMRA (Wales) or UKSR - neither come up on google searches so they must be a little below the radar - as I suppose EHR is at the moment
5. you make the point about the 6 races and 6 different rules and here is the point. Until recently, the FRA Rules and Safety Regs have been adopted up to UKA and devolved down through the UKA structure and adopted by most, if not all.
That is no longer the case with WFRA and SHR who look after most of the non English races going a different way.
That may actually get worse before it gets better as UKA now have a proposal to adopt the IAAF Rulebook for ALL DISCIPLINES.
I'm not sure if it will go through but it might.
EHR has a lot in common with WFRA and SHR so far from seeing a divergence, EHR hopes that a close dialogue with WFRA and SHR will bring about a change of tack convergence of rules and regs.
Possibly setting up an English branch of SHR or WFRA may have been a way of doing this, but whilst there is a lot in common, there are also subtle differences that perhaps are best maintained.
It's certainly not about control of the sport. I hope the runners and ROs will control the sport and if EHR can help them with that, perfect.
Richard Taylor
"William Tell could take an apple off your head. Taylor could take out a processed pea."
Sid Waddell
http://skyrunninguk.com/membership/
Sky Running UK.
I think the WMRA (Wales) has now died a death, they were basically the mountain running arm of welsh athletics.
We'll see, I just thin one body for essentially the same sport is preferable.
EHR? It seems like something that's been done with good intentions. But I can't help thinking... If it ain't broke...
I'm extremely grateful to all the people who put effort in to run the fra, and I think they do a great job. Personally I trust them to make decisions in fell runnings best interests if it ever got too difficult with uka or whatever else. I agree that the fewer governing/registering bodies the better.
Could've provided another chapter for feet in the clouds all this lot... Not one I would've enjoyed though.
I'm aware of this, but I saw it as a professional event company.
Richard Taylor
"William Tell could take an apple off your head. Taylor could take out a processed pea."
Sid Waddell
Perfectly reasonable, WP. I think it's a logical step to develop a body which aligns itself with SHR/WFRA and leans away from UKA, the corporate style of UKA is at odds with the old fashioned value system of fell racing. Both the FRA and EHR will have benefits to offer individuals who become involved at whatever level, the provision of the choice is a positive step forward.I've tried not to get involved here as I don't think it's right to come on the FRA Forum on this topic, but I do try and want to clear one or two things up - not for CBA (Cheshire BogHoppers Assoc.) Noel, but for one or two others.
1. EHR isn't about anti-FRA or working against the FRA, but there is a distinct wish for EHR to be an independent body ie to be able to act in what it sees as the best interests of Fell and Hill event organisers in England.
It's quite conceivable that an RO may chose to have a race with the FRA and a race with EHR. EHR is just a system of event registration that gives insurance cover and event support and I don't see it as a them and us.
2. At the risk of offending BOFRA, which would be the last thing I would want to do, it operates more like a league or championship series. Sure it has it's own internal rules, but some races are FRA, others aren't so even within BOFRA some differences apply.
3. EHR isn't about international so the 1st 3 on Iain's list are red herrings.
4. I've never heard of WMRA (Wales) or UKSR - neither come up on google searches so they must be a little below the radar - as I suppose EHR is at the moment
5. you make the point about the 6 races and 6 different rules and here is the point. Until recently, the FRA Rules and Safety Regs have been adopted up to UKA and devolved down through the UKA structure and adopted by most, if not all.
That is no longer the case with WFRA and SHR who look after most of the non English races going a different way.
That may actually get worse before it gets better as UKA now have a proposal to adopt the IAAF Rulebook for ALL DISCIPLINES.
I'm not sure if it will go through but it might.
EHR has a lot in common with WFRA and SHR so far from seeing a divergence, EHR hopes that a close dialogue with WFRA and SHR will bring about a change of tack convergence of rules and regs.
Possibly setting up an English branch of SHR or WFRA may have been a way of doing this, but whilst there is a lot in common, there are also subtle differences that perhaps are best maintained.
It's certainly not about control of the sport. I hope the runners and ROs will control the sport and if EHR can help them with that, perfect.
Luke Appleyard (Wharfedale)- quick on the dissent
"...with the old fashioned value system of fell racing".
Mmmh. Well I've been fell running for around 30 years so when, mr b, do you think that era was?
Warning: Bear Trap!
Mr B.
"...as dry as the Atacama desert".
Witton neither the ITRA nor the Sky running are about internationals.. just trying to be the overseeing bodies for a sport.
Look at Solomons toys out the pram response to not being able to compete in the world championships as team solomon..
You may not think it is but small bodies get corrupted. The EHR is 3/4 people? Any constitution? Democratic election? Why should they dictate what is fell running.
I've been quite critical of the FRA but I just don't think we need to set up a new sporting body every time there is a disagreement, which has been the response over the last 5 decades or so.. even ISF have fallen out with the WMRA, and now Solomon have fallen out with the IAU and ITRA...
And now on a national level we are seeing this.. because of a fall out in who should write safety rules.. it really doesn't set a great example to juniors in the sport.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote