Ha! and me too :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Grouse
Printable View
Ha! and me too :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Grouse
If there was an accurate measure of performance in relation to weight of kit carried, it might deter those think that they gain advantage. For those, who are looking to 'run free' then its the question of safety and common sense versus freedom.
In 1996 at a Lakeland Medium evening race, the sun was out in a cloudless sky. We were told that kit was optional. I tied a windproof around my waist just in case. Near halfway, I snapped a bone in my foot. I struggled to walk back with the assistance of a marshall. By 9.40pm it was very cold and the windproof had done a good job in reducing the effects of the cold. A bumbag full of useful kit would have improved my situation and reduced the anxiety of the organiser. I have never failed to carry that required kit again.
Our duty lies beyond our own selfish competitive needs.
Unfortunately "duty" is sometimes outweighed by "it won't happen to me."Quote:
Originally Posted by alf.t
And "it won't happen to a fellow competitor".Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham Breeze
Inadequate kit also means a runner can't necessarily stop and help another in difficulty - the ultimate selfish attitude?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grouse
Spinach!Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Furness
What do you carry in your bumbag, Grump?Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGrump
What? So if you're not carrying adequate kit you're unable to stop and help and fellow competitor who is also not carrying adequate kit :)Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGrump
and if the non-kit carrying super competitive runner is saving every second, he/she will run straight over the non-kit carrying faller, pretending not to see the other's misfortune, thus alleviating any further burden of....guilt.
In over 30 years of fell running I have witnessed tremendous sacrifices in the assistance of others on the fells and outweigh the rare misdemeanours of the few. I am not ashamed to admit that I have fallen into both categories. In the Holme Moss Champs Race in the 90s, about six of us pulled a heavy rambler out of a waist-deep bog. No words, we just looked at each other and knowingly agreed to do it. We set off in competitive mode immediately. I looked over my shoulder and one of the helpers clubmate Karl Webster (Matlock AC) was upto his knees and a little stuck. Figuring that he was able to dig himself out WE LEFT HIM!!!.
About half an hour later, he was back with a fire in his belly, and we ended up 'dipping' for the line.
They say:-"What goes around comes around " and it does. So carry the kit, help your mates and see the bigger picture.
a grudge usually though at times it's the chip that he s temporarily removed from his shoulder. And yes, i'm typing in cspitals, grump! KkQuote:
Originally Posted by mr brightside
I got disqualified once. :o
Almost everything in my life I have done that has had any value has been risky, impulsive, dangerous, ill advised and occasionally illegal. However if I chose to enter somebody's fell race, pub or home I tend to follow the rules.
Good post Henry, can identify with that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry Porter
Yes, good one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry Porter
zzzzzzzzz.....just want to vent some pent up fell running anger here as since ive been injured and had surgery I feel removed from the daily saga's of the FRA Forum.
Here goes and for those logically orientated I will use a syllogysm
Premise one: The hypothetical competitors we are talking about are adults
Premise two: Adults are responsible for their own wellbeing
Conc: Fell runners are adults and are responsible for there own wellbeing
Now if you're a runner and you use this approach then fine however the big mean legal machine begs to differ and it reins like a Machiavellian goliath over the tiny and much oppressed common race organiser
So another syllogysm this time for the race organisers
Premise one: Race organisers are responsible for the race organisation
Premise two: Competitors are part of the race organisation
Conclusion: Organisers are responsible for competitors
So a clear juxtaposition here...just who is responsible I wonder..................
My feelings on this are
If you are a tit and enjoy running in the fells out of some delusion that it is dangerous and 'cool' then feel free to run with no kit but dont jeopardise a race organiser's head by presenting them with a headache
And race organisers, likewise dont stand for this bollocks
TIME FOR CHANGE
In the immortal words of Rocky Balboa 'If I can change, and you can change, we can all change'
Love you guys, goodnight
Good un TT!!
Love the use of all those big words with 'll' in - Syllogysm, machiavellian and bollocks:D
Tom,Quote:
Originally Posted by TurboTom
You get 11/10 for raising the level of debate on here using a syllogism, but lose a couple of marks for not spelling it correctly: so 9/10. Good effort and
get well soon.
Graham
The issues seem complicated when you read through the thread, but in fact they are quite simple.
When the RO of the race sets it up, he is permitted / insured through the FRA which means the race is held under FRA Rules with deference is some instances to UKA rules.
RULE SIX
All competitors must obey the FRA Rules for Competition and any additional rules drawn up by the race
organisers for each fell race.
That is very clear.
The RO makes an assessment as to whether any additional requirements are needed and then has a responsibility to make sure that it is communicated.
How many of us drive at 35 - 40mph in a 30 area? The rule is there, but constantly broken by many. The Police are not obliged to monitor it 100% just because it is the law, but have random checks. If they didn't the law would not have credibility.
This in my view is the same with Fell Running. The Safety requirements are there for all. The RO will monitor that in the way they see fit but ultimate responsibility rests with the competitor.
When caught, it's a fair cop.
There should be some element of this monitoring at all races that have mandatory kit requirements and there should be some penalty if found to be in breach of the rules.
In the Safety Requirements I think this is also quite clear - again putting personal onus on the competitor.
1 SENIOR EVENTS
The general philosophy behind the following requirements is that the COMPETITOR should take primary
responsibility for his/her own safety on the fells. The organiser has the responsibility of making sure his race
is as safe as it can possibly be by ensuring that the nature of the race and the rules relating to safety have been
drawn up and formally communicated to each individual runner and that the event organisation is geared to
monitor and control the race so that, if an incident occurs, help is directed to the needful party without delay.
I'm not sure if there are training courses for ROs. I have seen some for Road Running, but I am not aware of any for fell running. I do think they would be quite useful as some ROs may say / do things with the best of intentions, but that may be incorrect.
An example raised previously was the conflicting information given out at the PPP this year in terms of the equipment required. The interpretation of what is fully body cover. Does a hood count as headgear for example.
I was told I needed to carry a hat - I said I didn't have one and was then told never mind, it doesn't matter.
The race already mandates full body windproof, compass, whistle, map and emergency food. In my opinion the RO should have left it at that because that was sufficient.
If they start adding extra requirements, sometimes verbally and inconsistently to some competitors and not others as happened on the day, then that is when they are leaving themselves open.
I have also seen instances where under age runners have been allowed to run "but you will not be covered under our insurance". This is something where the RO is perhaps putting himself at risk.
We have coaches courses, nav courses, why not RO courses? After all, many ROs are athletes current or ex, that have just taken up the mantle with little experience as the previous RO has packed in.
The front end are not necessarily more experienced. You yourself Stolly have done 1'000s of miles out in the Dales and wider areas so seem to me an extremely experienced guy who runs around in the middle of the pack usually.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stolly
Many of the VET runners, Wendy Dodds in the ladies, David Scott in the men. They may be at the front of their VET cat but generally in the second half of the field. No one would doubt their experience.
But what of the 19 year old who turns his ankle coming off Whernside in the PPP, with 50mph biting wind like we had this year. Robbie Simpson is 20 in November this year (and before you ask I am not saying he wasn't equipped for the race) and what a talent, but he cannot have the experience of Wendy.
What the front end may well do is buy higher tech stuff that packs smaller, fuel less and so have a smaller pack / bumbag has as already been mentioned.
However, I saw some bumbags on some of the lead runners at Sedbergh Hills that would have needed to be of TARDIS specifications to get the full kit requirements inside.
I agree with the need to carry the specified kit, don't get me wrong. I just don't think carrying a windprroof instead of a waterproof is cheating thats all.
And in some conditions carrying the specified kit isn't enough. For instance carrying just one pair of gloves for the high peak marathon the year before last would have been really dodgy. Or on our fabled blizzard crossing of Bleaklow in a pre- HPM recce a couple of weeks before - based on that 'experience' I'd say that 3 pairs of gloves and sealskin socks are the bare minimum needed for the HPM :)
For the record my spelling was pretty good considering the amount of time I spent in the pub last night.
Surely he loses marks for pretending to be Welsh?Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham Breeze
KK
xx
I do take offence at that you knowQuote:
Originally Posted by Keswick_Krumble
Born in Wales, Dad born in Wales, whole family from Wales :p.
But il let you off for now as I find you amusing
But KK's never seen you running in your pointed hat....:))Quote:
Originally Posted by TurboTom
Woodzy, whoever you are.Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodzy
If you wish to make a complaint identify yourself and follow the procedure set out in Rule Eleven on page 114 of the FRA Calendar.
If you don't but just wish to hide behind anonymity and repeat unsubstantiated tittle-tattle keep off the Forum, preferably after deleting your previous post.
Graham Breeze
FRA Chairman
I can vouch he had a blue bum bag on as i was going full out behind him at the start. There is also a picture with carl with a bumbag on somewhere on the thread.Selwyn had a marshall or two ask everyone and visually check all those going through the gate.My kit was checked as so were many others.
sorry, just what id heard if i new it was true i would make the complaint.
thought id post to see if anyone else new of it, as it is a forum site?
sorry again if ive offended anyone.
yep just checked pics and hes got a bumbag on been given false info, should of checked pics first!
Woodzy,Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodzy
The FRA holds a loose rein on the Forum but I will not tolerate anonymous, hearsay accusations of cheating by one of our top fellrunners and impugning the integrity of one of the most highly regarded race organisers.
If somebody knows something then they are free to speak, if they do not then they should keep quiet or they will not be posting on here again.
GB
I have enjoyed reading the posts from Keswick Krumble, very pleased I have an admirer and copyist even if they are a second rate one. Keep it up KK you will get there one day.
agreed, it was an ill judged post
Welcome back Anti, did you enjoy carparking duty at the Yorkshireman ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Antisocial
Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham Breeze
Fair play to you for intervening, but I'd like to think you would not "tolerate anonymous, hearsay accusations of cheating" directed at any FRA race organiser or fell runner on the forum - not just the well known ones.
Of course, but there is no fun in accusing a back-of-the-field A N Other is there?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dynamo Dan
Fair point. Good to see it's being clamped down on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham Breeze
I didnt post for fun /personal gain its a subject i feel strongly about for the safety of themselves and others, the F.R.A set the rules as do the RO if everyone complyed there wouldnt be a post "dq the cheats" as dynamo dan says lets clampdown on it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham Breeze
(apologies again for the accusing post i was miss informed and shouldnt have posted without fact.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dynamo Dan
Yes i did thank you and so did my dog. Didnt miss not racing though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Furness
Hey, it's me.................NOT!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Antisocial
Still awaiting THE HEATHENS apology if he's courageous enough (he owes me another one afterwards)
xx
KK
It's so wrong to argue with yourself Anti hon......Quote:
Originally Posted by Antisocial
Perhaps you could tell THE HEATHENS that we are not one and the same....see if he'll man up with an apology
Oh he has apologised for tarring me with your brush. You are owed nothing as you have already been allowed to bathe in my reflected glow.Quote:
Originally Posted by Keswick_Krumble
I'd sooner bathe in your faeces honey and that really is saying something. Our friend, the Heathen will not apologise as he has not the stomach for it....he will be too busy worrying about what someone didn't say about someone he knows....Xx KKQuote:
Originally Posted by Antisocial