New safety rules

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wheeze

The less rules the better. If we can have a smart way to improve safety without impinging on the simplicity and comparative freedom of fell racing, then that gets my vote. Not done a park run but am familiar with the idea. Does it work? Can you scan the code with barcode reader in a mobile phone? And then send the data to race hq?? If so it would be neat way of tracking runners on a long race. Then perhaps we would allow topless runners with felt tip numbers on the back of hands for v short races. Nice and simpe!

---

You want 3G mobile phone masts on top of every hilltop now???

Nah.....4g is better!

I put a link to the new rules on our club site. No one has commented. I'd like to think they all agree, although I reckon as per usual most of 'em can't be bothered reading it.

I've read it, and passed it round via the committes email too for their thoughts.
Personally I agree with 99% of it from a runner and organiser point of view and the other 1% isnt worth argueing about as its being put in place by people who have a lot more experience than me. Its sad to have to see wo many rules being adopted in a simple sport but I think its the way of the world and only to be expected, lets face it even within our small club we know people who try to get away with inferior kit because they always have, and people turn up to a 10km fell race thinking "Well i've ran 10km on the road once so surely it wont be much different" these are the people who could eventually cost us our simple sport if we dont think for them.
Murph.

I like the idea of everyone having SI dibbers...you buy it once and that's it. no need for numbers, vests or no vests. it's your responsibility to take it, no dibber, no race. ROs could decide whether or not to hire them out. maybe if more people used them they'd come down in price a little.

Personally I'm a fan of less rules...that's the joy of fell running and indeed many local fell races when there's some chaos with results etc. I do however see that some rules are helpful from a safety point of view. someone mentioned runners being hand-counted into the start area...well this happened at a race I recently went to. I saw 3 different people counting all runners and at least 2 of them got different numbers; they did nothing to try and rectify this, simply just let the RO get on with starting the race. so that system is problematic if not carried out strictly.

vest or no vest. should be left to individual to choose. personally I can't see how running without a club vest vs wearing one can make such a significant amount of difference to whether the runner will dehydrate/overheat or not. As a woman I get no opportunity to run bare chested so this is a moot point for me.

numbers. surely we can use common sense and pin it anywhere that's clearly visible and sensible given current conditions - if putting waterproof/windproof over vest means its not visible then surely number on shorts is preferable.

In European mountain racing,... over far more serious terrain.. there are generally far less rules.. much more runner responsibility.

Re the vests.. it only really matters in team events.. on the roads its more strictly enforced..

At a race in Mallorca, a trail race, I got a right lecture at the end for not wearing a top...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IainR

In European mountain racing,... over far more serious terrain.. there are generally far less rules.. much more runner responsibility.

---

I was thinking I might have to give up entering fell races because I don't like rules, now however I think leaving the country might be a better option.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bigfella

I was thinking I might have to give up entering fell races because I don't like rules, now however I think leaving the country might be a better option.

---

I seriously doubt that there are fewer rules abroad - most of our fell races wouldn't be allowed over there because the terrain's too rough or because you'd need to navigate a bit!! And as for having to have a doctor's note (can be expensive!!) before they'll even let you start ... I think you'd be better staying here!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IainR

In European mountain racing,... over far more serious terrain.. there are generally far less rules.. much more runner responsibility

---

I think the ethos of the FRA and, say, the ISF, is pretty close.

As to fewer rules, try these:

http://www.skyrunning.com/images/sto...rules-2012.pdf

And there may be race-specific rules on top of that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rudolph Hooker

I seriously doubt that there are fewer rules abroad - most of our fell races wouldn't be allowed over there because the terrain's too rough or because you'd need to navigate a bit!! And as for having to have a doctor's note (can be expensive!!) before they'll even let you start ... I think you'd be better staying here!

---

You're having a laugh.. miles rougher routes than the UK's... incomparable.

Next come out with the cliche foreigners can't descend...

True there are rules in certain countries and the MC's are a pain in the arse..

Morgan.. it depends on the country but kit requirements are far less.. generally..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IainR

Next come out with the cliche foreigners can't descend...

---

Let's not forget they lack grit, are work-shy and try to straighten our bananas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cyclops

I like the idea of everyone having SI dibbers...you buy it once and that's it. no need for numbers, vests or no vests. it's your responsibility to take it, no dibber, no race. ROs could decide whether or not to hire them out. maybe if more people used them they'd come down in price a little.

---

This has been the approach for orienteering clubs for a while now. Most own their own dibbers. I have my own.

Most O-clubs also have a number of dibbers they hire out at events for an extra £1-2.

Except for when you go down sarf and have to use EMIT, which I reliably told is a pain in the arse. Most orienteers I know prefer SI.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IainR

Morgan.. it depends on the country but kit requirements are far less.. generally..

---

Is this not a factor because UK weather is inherently less predictable than that on the continent though? If weather is set fair is it not likely to stay that way and if the weather is bad they cancel the race or move to bad weather alternatives? Unlike the UK, where it can be very changeable in the uplands in a very short space of time.

I ask because I do not know the answer to this and it's an interesting point. I find it surprising that European mountain races don't have to stipulate similar kit requirements...

Not really.. hence all the deaths at the Zugspitze recently.. when 5-6 runners were killed.

i find it surprising.

Is this a reflection of the European legal system and their attitude to health and safety vs Britains nanny state where we try to legislate away hazards of any description.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IainR

Not really.. hence all the deaths at the Zugspitze recently.. when 5-6 runners were killed.

---

2 not 5-6. They weren't lost meaning off-path, but hard to find in the snow.
2008 http://www.thelocal.de/sport/20080714-13051.html

In Spain that seemed to be the system, but again we needed MC's..

But it was just run.. I was amazed a run up a 10,000ft mountain.. from barely 2000ft.. no equipment required..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LissaJous

2 not 5-6. They weren't lost meaning off-path, but hard to find in the snow.
2008 http://www.thelocal.de/sport/20080714-13051.html

---

I thought it was less.. a Bavarian told me it was 5-6 this weekend..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IainR

I thought it was less.. a Bavarian told me it was 5-6 this weekend..

---

And the 2 deaths were 5 years ago.

Do you really hold a PhD based on factual research?

Deedums... 5 years is pretty recent....

Aye I do.... science is about the ability to bullshit and lie....

I've got to say it all looks eminently sensible to me. It looks like there isn't much change for me as a participant - the biggest burden is on the RO. All the rules expect me to do is turn up and do what it's been expected that I should do for the last however many years. If that is the case than it doesn't matter to me if they have to express that in 2 million rules. What they are trying to do is write rules that stop smart are numpties from turning up with the sleeves of their cagoules cut off because "it doesn't mention sleeves in the rules."

I like the tone it is written in. It comes down to "Use your common sense. If you can't do that, follow these rules."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fozzy

Hence why SI is the more reliable option.

---

I've known the SI dibber boxes fail on occasion - we were doing the Malham Trailquest and one failed to beep at me. I noted the number then as luck would have it the one at the very next checkpoint also failed to beep and log my arrival time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IainR

I thought it was less.. a Bavarian told me it was 5-6 this weekend..

---

Be careful what you believe from Bavarians. Also, they can't descend proper hills like us Brits. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fozzy

From what I can see, these are simply the current "rules" updated and clarified to provide sensible cover for ROs and runners alike. They aren't designed to impinge on anyone's personal freedom on the fells as far as I can see.

---

Then you haven't read them properly or never read the last revision. There are new bits, many of them, most of them placing responsibility on the organiser. If you're talking as a runner you're living the life o' riley, if you're talking as an organiser you may want to reassess the amount of risk you are at or may be putting yourself in. I can't see that organisers have an increased amount of 'cover' either, quite the opposite, with existing rules elaborated and new ones added how can anybody simultaneously experience more 'cover' with an increase in responsibility?

I don't see that much difference.. guidance and the waterproofs sort of clarified.. but all in all, despite the amount of comments its generated.. not that much has changed has it?

Admittedly I'm not an RO so looking from a selfish runners perspective..

I do appreciate the work and expertise etc of the committee and anyone looking at what they have proposed will find little to contest.
However when breaches of rules or safety guidelines occur, the only reason to amend the rules or safety guidelines is if they were inappropriate or confusing in the first place.
I would say they were fine.
But (a minority of) athletes disregarded them and (a minority of) ROs felt they could turn a blind eye to them, or perhaps were ignorant of them.
Will these changes stop that?
I doubt it.
Which is why I would have favoured more enforcement of the existing rules against athletes and ROs that breached them.
And before people jump on that, I would suggest enforcement in the first instance should be by way of education eg if an RO is found to have some shortcomings, insist they work as a co RO elsewhere or put on some training courses for ROs.

At the recent Snowdon race the rules stated to pin your number to the front of your vest no numbers on shorts and no folded numbers, so begrudgingly in the very hot weather that's what I did, only to find many ran vest less with numbers on shorts and folded! I suspect no one was DQ'd. rules will always be broken by an minority if not enforced fact.

I would suggest that most race organisers only have Fra accreditation for the insurance. No need to have a race in the calendar to swell the numbers these days. Some of the new ' rules ' may dissuade organisers from having Fra accreditation and seek alternative insurance arrangements. As a race organiser for more than 45 years and someone who has stood at the end of a finish funnel probably more times than anyone else live some of this seems like tinkering for the sake of it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Woodzy

At the recent Snowdon race the rules stated to pin your number to the front of your vest no numbers on shorts and no folded numbers, so begrudgingly in the very hot weather that's what I did, only to find many ran vest less with numbers on shorts and folded! I suspect no one was DQ'd. rules will always be broken by an minority if not enforced fact.

---

Yep, the rule was stressed very clearly. I was originally planning to go bare chested but then begrudgingly wore my vest after reading the rules. Aren't I good? But I suppose it's exactly that sort of thing which turns us all into chancers at kit checks etc.

Forget using the Park Run system of barcodes. It's a nightmare. The readers don't work if there's too much light, you sometimes have to read the barcode 20 or more times before it beeps.

Plus one of our local runs lost their entire set of results one week. I don't know how or why, but foolproof it aint.

I'd be very worried if technology was enforced on races. No matter what the cost we'd lost a lot of races, especially the small local ones.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stolly

The not allowing folding of numbers and insisting that they are pinned to your vest is just petty dabbling. Insisting on runners wearing a top is overkill to, although given our weather most runners do most of the time anyway. Yes it could a little bit easier to see a number pinned to your chest..... unless you've lost a safety pin, put on your waterproof or fallen face first in a bog..... but, really, whats the problem with pinning it to your shorts? Yep, you're right there is not a single problem :)

---

I have to disagree with most of this after today's experience as part of the 2 man summit team atop Blisco for the Championship race, logging, and trying to log, around 300 runners. And I had the benefit of a number caller.

Numbers pinned on shorts are significantly more difficult to read. Folded numbers on shorts are very difficult to read.

Several numbers pinned to shorts were half obscured by vests.

The easiest numbers to read were those pinned, without folding, to vests. Not a little bit easier, a lot easier.

Taking numbers at the summit today was not about giving a time and position at the summit; it was about safety, to check that all runners who started made it to the summit and turned to begin their descent.

When I returned to base, I spent some time with the logged summit numbers checking if number 205 had passed through the summit or not. He hadn't. The accuracy of the numbers I recorded at the summit was important.

Incident of the day? A lady runner who got too hot and discarded her vest with a spectator and continued in a crop top. Her number was on her vest.

It's about safety and these particular additions seems logical and sensible to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MorganW

I have to disagree with most of this after today's experience as part of the 2 man summit team atop Blisco for the Championship race, logging, and trying to log, around 300 runners. And I had the benefit of a number caller.

Numbers pinned on shorts are significantly more difficult to read. Folded numbers on shorts are very difficult to read.

Several numbers pinned to shorts were half obscured by vests.

The easiest numbers to read were those pinned, without folding, to vests. Not a little bit easier, a lot easier.

Taking numbers at the summit today was not about giving a time and position at the summit; it was about safety, to check that all runners who started made it to the summit and turned to begin their descent.

When I returned to base, I spent some time with the logged summit numbers checking if number 205 had passed through the summit or not. He hadn't. The accuracy of the numbers I recorded at the summit was important.

Incident of the day? A lady runner who got too hot and discarded her vest with a spectator and continued in a crop top. Her number was on her vest.

It's about safety and these particular additions seems logical and sensible to me.

---

Dibber, solved that problem.
Then folks can run vest free.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MorganW

Numbers pinned on shorts are significantly more difficult to read. Folded numbers on shorts are very difficult to read.

---

That's interesting MorganW. It's good to hear how these things work in practice - rather than thinking it through in-front of a keyboard. Before reading this, I wouldn't have thought it would make a difference. I mean, the numbers themselves are the same size - what difference can it make?

Strikes me the committee are backing each other the the rest are kicked into touch.
Come on FRA listen to your members please.

You didn't seem to have any difficulty reading my number pinned to my shorts as you shouted it out well in advance of reaching yourself. to hot for a vest today :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MorganW

I have to disagree with most of this after today's experience as part of the 2 man summit team atop Blisco for the Championship race, logging, and trying to log, around 300 runners. And I had the benefit of a number caller.

Numbers pinned on shorts are significantly more difficult to read. Folded numbers on shorts are very difficult to read.

Several numbers pinned to shorts were half obscured by vests.

The easiest numbers to read were those pinned, without folding, to vests. Not a little bit easier, a lot easier.

Taking numbers at the summit today was not about giving a time and position at the summit; it was about safety, to check that all runners who started made it to the summit and turned to begin their descent.

When I returned to base, I spent some time with the logged summit numbers checking if number 205 had passed through the summit or not. He hadn't. The accuracy of the numbers I recorded at the summit was important.

Incident of the day? A lady runner who got too hot and discarded her vest with a spectator and continued in a crop top. Her number was on her vest.

It's about safety and these particular additions seems logical and sensible to me.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by noel

Before reading this, I wouldn't have thought it would make a difference. I mean, the numbers themselves are the same size - what difference can it make?

---

Noel, Jonathan Broxap was spotting and calling and I was writing furiously.

I am guessing that the next to no white background from a folded number gives definition problems for the eye, made worse if the shorts are dark coloured.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stagger

Strikes me the committee are backing each other the the rest are kicked into touch.
Come on FRA listen to your members please.

---

I'm a member too Stagger, so I'll be making my own views known after yesterday through the appropriate channel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MorganW

I have to disagree with most of this after today's experience as part of the 2 man summit team atop Blisco for the Championship race, logging, and trying to log, around 300 runners. And I had the benefit of a number caller.

Numbers pinned on shorts are significantly more difficult to read. Folded numbers on shorts are very difficult to read.

Several numbers pinned to shorts were half obscured by vests.

The easiest numbers to read were those pinned, without folding, to vests. Not a little bit easier, a lot easier.

Taking numbers at the summit today was not about giving a time and position at the summit; it was about safety, to check that all runners who started made it to the summit and turned to begin their descent.

When I returned to base, I spent some time with the logged summit numbers checking if number 205 had passed through the summit or not. He hadn't. The accuracy of the numbers I recorded at the summit was important.

Incident of the day? A lady runner who got too hot and discarded her vest with a spectator and continued in a crop top. Her number was on her vest.

It's about safety and these particular additions seems logical and sensible to me.

---

So if the lady runner (or gent) had put her number on her shorts there wouldn't have been an issue as you only missed logging one number and they never reached your cp.
Rule 1, I am responsible for my own safety.
Rule 2, CORRECT KIT MUST be carried when specified by RO. That's near enough all the rules you need!

Why were you trying to read numbers if you had a number caller?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MorganW

I have to disagree with most of this after today's experience as part of the 2 man summit team atop Blisco for the Championship race, logging, and trying to log, around 300 runners. And I had the benefit of a number caller.

Numbers pinned on shorts are significantly more difficult to read. Folded numbers on shorts are very difficult to read.

Several numbers pinned to shorts were half obscured by vests.

The easiest numbers to read were those pinned, without folding, to vests. Not a little bit easier, a lot easier.

Taking numbers at the summit today was not about giving a time and position at the summit; it was about safety, to check that all runners who started made it to the summit and turned to begin their descent.

When I returned to base, I spent some time with the logged summit numbers checking if number 205 had passed through the summit or not. He hadn't. The accuracy of the numbers I recorded at the summit was important.

Incident of the day? A lady runner who got too hot and discarded her vest with a spectator and continued in a crop top. Her number was on her vest.

It's about safety and these particular additions seems logical and sensible to me.

---

From time to time I produce race results on behalf of RO. I have learned to expect problems with the recording and transcribing of race numbers through the finish at every race; mostly 'duplicate' or unissued numbers due to misreading. These can only be resolved at the end of the race, when the list of outstanding finishers is produced, and can take some time. This detracts from identifying a runner, who is genuinely missing. In some circumstances it might significantly reduce the medical golden hour that can determine the outcome for that runner.

Technology is only reliable when it is working. Please don't respond with 'system A hasn't failed in X years and Y events', because all you are telling me is it hasn't failed - YET. Such systems may well eradicate the above problems, when working, but what if they fail and all data is corrupted or lost? All of these systems require a robust manual contingency plan, not to produce instant results, but so that everyone can be accounted for.

In this thread and others, there are many assertions that 'I am responsible for my own safety'; I would add 'and indirectly the safety of other runners'. So for example, making sure that race numbers are displayed in a consistent manner could make the crucial difference for someone else. Carrying kit and having navigational skills might help get a fellow runner out of a difficult situation. Surely any technique or action, no matter how small or apparently pedantic, that contributes to (your) safety has to be welcomed.