Hi daz,
SHR has about 490 members. Our insurance is free - regulations prevent us from selling it on.
Printable View
Hi daz,
SHR has about 490 members. Our insurance is free - regulations prevent us from selling it on.
If FRA were to follow the WFRA/ SHR route, the dream scenario would be for an all-UK alliance of FRA/ WFRA/ SHR, independent of the athletics governing body. We could restore an all-UK calendar and common, pragmatic safety guidelines. Insurance of members for public liability as competitors or race organisers would come in at around £2 - £3 per member per year.
There is no reason why a good working relationship with UKA should not be set up. This would leave fell runners in control of their own sport, co-operating with the athletics governing body, or restraining it where necessary.
It would leave freedom of choice for the elite and the rest of us. It would give us the power to protect the British fell racing format, and to support change where we approved of it. The relationship could be complementary, but we would retain ultimate control of our own destiny.
Everyone wins under this scenario except the professional job creators and hangers-on in the government quangos.
So let's get on with it!
I voted for dissaffiliation but felt a little uncomfortable in not supporting the committee who I believe do a good job and have our interests at heart.
If the descision is take to dissaffiliate then I hope the next logical step will be to re-unite the UK under a single organisation. Do members of the other separate organisations think likewise or have these organisations themselves gone too far down their own paths?
no i was just thinking that was it an easier decision for the scottish and welsh to go there way because there insurance was a lot smaller than the policy the fra would need
It would not prevent some other organisation or another group of individuals taking over control of fell or hill running within England and maintaining an affiliation with UKA.Quote:
Originally Posted by wkb21
It is possible that fell running will become an isolated, minor sport in the English Lake District with no control over the sport.
That is always possible, but experience in Wales has shown that as far as domestic competition is concerned most race organisers are taking the lead by chosing to go with the disaffiliated WFRA rather than Welsh Athletics/UKA which still offers UKA Permits/insurance. Why should it be any different in England?Quote:
Originally Posted by XRunner
As I understand it the situation in Scotland is somewhat different. Whilst SHR offer insurance to race organisers who are members, insurance/Permits are obtained in significant numbers from SHR, Scottish Athletics/UKA and other sources. Nevertheless SHR maintain the main Scottish race Calendar and "peacefully co-exists" with Scottish Athletics/UKA.
So why are the majority of the FRA committee so wary of independance? Whilst the FRA remains affiliated to UKA we are prevented by UKA from forming an all UKA alliance with WFRA and SHR which , in my opinion, would be the best way forward for the domestic UK wide race Calendar.
I am so pleased to have the views of Daz who, to my mind represents the straightforward fell runner who has no vested interests other than a love of the sport.
In Wales we have about 250 members of WFRA. I can honestly say that for the first time in 20 years we have more clarity of purpose and kinship than at any time before. I love my my sport again.
Daz, lets meet up at a race soon. What events do you have planned over the next couple of months? I'd like to race in your neck of the woods.
I am a life member of FRA and would love to be reunited.
I do not believe that UKA are actively preventing the FRA representing all UK fell or hill runners.Quote:
Originally Posted by MargC
Trail running does not have separate Welsh, Scottish or Northern Irish sections.
Up to Oct 2004 the FRA was organising a race Calendar throughout the UK. Race organisers in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland were registering their events with me as FRA Fixtures Secretary and thereby obtaining their UKA insurance through the FRA.Quote:
Originally Posted by XRunner
In Oct 2004 UKA insisted that events should be registered/insured only through the relevant UKA national organisation ie Scottish Athletics, Welsh Athletics and NIMRA outside England. Therefore from 2005 onwards the FRA has only been able to provide registration/UKA insurance for races in England organised by FRA members.
As I understand it Scottish Athletics, Welsh Athletics and NIMRA wish to manage events in their own countries, as indeed they have every right to do. UKA are supporting the requirements of their constituent national organisations.
Therefore if grassroot fellrunners in England, Scotland and Wales would like to see the FRA working with the non-UKA affiliated SHR and WFRA with a common race registration/insurance system, it cannot be achieved whilst the FRA remains affiliated to UKA!
Margaret is correct. This leads to barmy anomalies. The Yetholm Race is organised by an English club on Scottish soil, so they are required by UKA to seek a "permit" from SAL at extra cost (if possible at all), despite their existing affiliation to the English governing body. The same applies to the (Scottish) Isle of Jura Race, organised by Tordmorden Harriers (English). So both clubs insure through SHR (who will insure your race for any venue).Quote:
Originally Posted by MargC
By the way, SHR does not issue "permits". It promotes open access to hill racing. SHR simply insures races for their members, and does not charge "unattached levies" for non-members. We must get rid of this absurd concept of "permits". A governing body cannot "permit" or deny me a race if I do not permit them to govern me!
Traprain Law Race this afternoon - all welcome (except governing bodies) at no extra charge whatever your affiliation or lack of it!
UKA insurance covers organisers and promoters for all events in Great Britain and Northern Ireland including the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man.Quote:
Originally Posted by MargC
I understood that the registration and affiliation issues were imposed on UKA by UK Sport and the UKA implementation of the Foster Report.
If the FRA are affiliated directly to UKA then they should be the organisation for GB and NI.
I suspect that poor representation by the FRA Committee during its discussions with UKA may have resulted in this anomaly.
Why can the Trail Running Association represent all UK events but the FRA only represent English events?
You would not be able to promote a race under the rules of the governing body if you do not want to comply with their rules and regulations.Quote:
Originally Posted by wkb21
A governing body cannot prevent you organising an event but they can make life very difficult for yourself or the participants if you choose to wilfully ignore their rules and regulations.
The current UKA "Rules for Competition" which apply to various athletic disciplines including Fell & Hill Running, Trail Running and Road Running include the following:Quote:
Originally Posted by XRunner
Rule 12
Section (5) "Permission to Promote will be granted by the appropriate Territorial or National Association. The body granting permission may make such procedural arrangements (including delegation to other bodies) for the administration of their powers as they see fit. They shall hereinafter be called the Permitting Authority."
UKA insurance is an adjunct to the race Permit.
For Fell and Hill Running Scottish Athletics, Welsh Athletics and NIMRA have chosen to exercise their own Permitting Authority and not to delegate to the FRA or anyone else. For England, England Athletics have delegated the authority to the FRA.
I cannot comment on the situation that exists for Trail Running.
The only way to untangle this sorry mess is to disaffiliate and start all over again.
But then, would SHR and WFRA want to merge back with a 'freed' FRA?
The FRA could have been the national body rather than a territorial assocation.Quote:
Originally Posted by MargC
I do not know the circumstances surrounding the reorganisation of UK fell running during the last few years and why so many organisations are required for the sport.
It will be interesting to read the comments from others who were more direcly involved in setting up the numerous organisations that now control fell and hill running within the UK.
At present UKA insurance cover does not specify that a race permit is required. However this situation could change without the FRAs knowledge (as happened last year with grading of Officials).
The governing body seems to be doing anything but making life difficult for WFRA and the races which they provide insurance for.Quote:
Originally Posted by XRunner
The current British Championships, organised by the UKA Competition Management Group, contain two races, Llangynhafal Loop and Carneddau, which are WFRA insured. As far as I am aware they do not have UKA Permits!
In fact it may now be difficult to find suitable Welsh races to include in the British Championships which have UKA Permits!
Governing bodies have been trying to make my enjoyment of fell racing unnecessarily complicated for 27 years. They fail because I ignore them. I respect whatever rules a race organiser requires, even if they are those of a governing body, but as a race organiser myself, I choose to have nothing to do with UK Athletics or their subsidiaries. This keeps life a lot simpler. It has never created problems for those who have competed in my races. This is known as the Boswell Paradox in Scotland, second only to Tam Dalyell's West Lothian Question.Quote:
Originally Posted by XRunner
When UKA learn that helping fell runners is more productive than annoying them, they might make better progress. I see no good prospect of them learning. So I look forward to an independent FRA - - .
It is the responsibility of the Committee appointed by the members of the FRA to make better progress in the sport.Quote:
Originally Posted by wkb21
If the current Committee cannot do this job, then it is unlikely that a future independent organisation would do any better.
I disagree. The problems have been to due to the reactive nature of committee response necessary because of unreasonable imposition by an external authority. Remove this, reharmonise the sport and the committee can be pro-active with its own agenda. I see no reason to use this problem to 'committee-bash'.
The sooner we are free from quango generated dictat, overweening PC and rafts of nutty EU legislation the better.
The present situation is that the fell running community within the British Isles has done this itself by fragmenting the sport and allowing numerous small organisations to proliferate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wheeze
Nonsense. The current situation has been created by the actions of UKA.Quote:
Originally Posted by XRunner
Rubbish!Quote:
Originally Posted by david
The fell running community are responsible for managing its own affairs and cannot simply blame another organisation for the fragmentation of the sport.
Quote:
Originally Posted by david
Some good common ground here then ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by XRunner
But in truth there is! and it seems to me that we're all agreed. Fellrunning should, must, and can only be run by Fellrunners. UKA have no place here as they're just not interested except in their own self-promotion. And I suspect that most fellrunners couldn't give a monkey's about our dear UKA.
So the sooner we disaffiliate and follow the lead the Welsh and Scottish fell runners have done (...cos it damn-well works there!) the sooner the better as far as I'm concerned.
Then, and only then, we can maybe have a national federation again. :)
...and NIMRA. Sorry chaps and chapess's.:o
I doubt if that will result in a thriving fell running sport.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stick
As I said earlier, if fell running cannot control and develop the sport while it is part of a larger organisation, then it is even less likely to be able to control the sport as an independent organisation.
Incidently you forgot to add BOFRA to your list of organisations responsible for fell running within the British Isle.
Yep, you're right XR, I did. And I'm a BOFRA member and run the races too :oQuote:
Originally Posted by XRunner
:)
XR - but fell running is thriving - we're seeing bigger fields in most races and a look at the calendar shows there are more races than ever before. Some of the long classics may not have the fields of yesteryears but many other races are getting record fields
I agree, and its great to see fell running thriving despite the problems within the organisation of the sport.Quote:
Originally Posted by Epocian
The editorial in Athletics Weekly may offer a clue:
Will trail running eventually take over from the rather limited scope that fell runners use to define the sport?Quote:
Originally Posted by Athletics Weekly
wheeze no doubt we will meet soonQuote:
Originally Posted by Wheeze
regarding numbers
SHR 490
WFRA 250
FRA , im not sure is it about 6500
unattached - who knows???
coming from a non fell running background i was initially drawn to the sport through doing a local small derbyshire village fell race , paying my 3 quid to the organiser sitting in the back of his car. That was 4 years ago , it took me a few more races and familiar faces to find the FRA , fellrunner mag, forum etc etc.
I hadnt even heard of the WFRA until last year which i was annoyed about because obviously they like the scottish have lots to offer a runner like me.
My point is really that what a crying shame for fell running is that its not all under one roof , for outsiders like myself it takes a long time to find out information and stuff about the sport.being under one banner would be a dream for a person like me
I think it totally goes against our beliefs as fellrunners to have the sport organised by so many different organisations , at all fellraces i line up with runners from all different parts of the country, we set off and unite as one on the fell.
why cant we do it like this off the fell through one organisation
i hope we can
some of my running mates here have heard of the FRA but not the WFRA or SHR , this could be due to just numbers but i think fellrunning is depriving itself by not being united as one
When and how does the result of the ballot get announced?
Johny its out 86% in favour of staying affiliated!! I'm astounded at the majority and it goes to show that this forum is full of the vociferous minority (myself included...minority that is... not as vociferous as many!!)
forgot to add that its ironic that my recently joined road/xc club with 200 members has disaffiliated from UKA!!
Perhaps they had an unbiased ballot!:D
It is a good job BOFRA exist - great races, minimum fuss, low entry fees which are on the day, do all they can for the juniors and must have a pragmatic approach to risk assessments and the implications on insurance.
What a great model to follow.
...no inertia or complacency there then ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Bladerunner
:) See you at Kettlewell Tim!Quote:
Originally Posted by Timo Austino
how did you guess who i am!
my weekly run is already pencilled in - these really are great races, in great places and without an uncorrelated socio-economic mix of people who feel the need to dress up their hidden agendas in big words.
although we're all in the same desert it doesn't feel like we share the same tent!
Pardon my ignorance,
I had never heard of BOFRA until just reading this post. I have just googled it and looked at the website. All the races seem to be quite short distances. I did not see any over 7 miles. Is that always the case with the BOFRA calendar.
Cheers
Jamie
Tim
is that me?
Think I'll send you a pm to tell you exactly how I feel...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timo Austino