Re: Letter to the FRA Chairman
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MargC
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 UKA insurance for races in England organised by FRA members.
UKA insurance covers organisers and promoters for all events in Great Britain and Northern Ireland including the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man.
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?
Re: Letter to the FRA Chairman
Quote:
Originally Posted by
wkb21
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!
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.
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.
Re: Letter to the FRA Chairman
Quote:
Originally Posted by
XRunner
UKA insurance covers organisers and promoters for all events in Great Britain and Northern Ireland including the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man.
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?
The current UKA "Rules for Competition" which apply to various athletic disciplines including Fell & Hill Running, Trail Running and Road Running include the following:
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.
Re: Letter to the FRA Chairman
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?
Re: Letter to the FRA Chairman
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MargC
The current UKA "Rules for Competition"
Rule 12
Section (5) "Permission to Promote will be granted by the appropriate Territorial or National Association.
UKA insurance is an adjunct to the race Permit.
The FRA could have been the national body rather than a territorial assocation.
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).
Re: Letter to the FRA Chairman
Quote:
Originally Posted by
XRunner
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.
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 governing body seems to be doing anything but making life difficult for WFRA and the races which they provide insurance for.
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!
Re: Letter to the FRA Chairman
Quote:
Originally Posted by
XRunner
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.
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.
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 - - .
Re: Letter to the FRA Chairman
Quote:
Originally Posted by
wkb21
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.
If the current Committee cannot do this job, then it is unlikely that a future independent organisation would do any better.
Re: Letter to the FRA Chairman
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.
Re: Letter to the FRA Chairman
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Wheeze
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.
