New safety rules

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stolly

Er... a death in a fell race where the RO unfortunately didn't realise the runner was missing for a while might be a big part of it!

---

Compounded by newly imposed rules,even more impossible to comply with, and lack of support if not hostility from UKA to the real world problems faced by an RO, from whence we rely on insurance to come if ever called on. We hope but that has yet to be proven, considering the weasel words now proposed. Who would want to be an RO?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alwaysinjured

I am not arguing anything wheeze: .

---

Ermm.............http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Witton Park

That's where I'm coming from with respect to the FRA Paperwork.

I'd be quite happy to bear the responsibility to set out an overview of a race of mine and indeed I have done so.
eg. For my race at Witton

The races start on the Show Field in Witton Park and are based around a clockwise loop of approx 3.5km which climbs to the Summit of Billinge Woods before descending back down to Witton Park.

Underfoot is mixed terrain, mainly dirt trails, but with some grass and gravel. Athletes will encounter steps, tree roots and some drainage gutters on the route as well as some short, steep sections of climb and twisty fast descents.
Due to the nature of the venue these races are suitable for athletes with an endurance background who may be inexperienced or new to fell running. The route is fully off-road with significant climb, but enclosed in a small area, fully marked and extensively marshalled.

However the terrain should not be underestimated. The amount of ascent in all the races is at the higher end of the B Category and the race is certainly a test of speed, agility and endurance.

So if I publish that as a PDF link on the FRA Events page and also a link on the relevant website, as well as posting it on the day, that informs all athletes what to expect.
No one can come and say "it's steep", or "I fell down the steps" and claim that the RO had failed them.

I'd much rather take responsibility myself in this way, than have pre-ordained directives that I feel an obligation to follow and maybe have no or little relevance to me.

My race and Wynn's are poles apart, and we also have different backgrounds. So surely our unity should carry some weight?

---

Far better approach. Say what a race is, not "one size fits all" undertakings about what it must not be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wheeze

Ermm.............http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y

---

Brilliant. I look forward to meeting sometime in the flesh.
I knew (well guessed strongly) before I even clicked the link that it must be a MP sketch.:D

Brilliant LJ. Can we have an up-to-date episode? So much has happened since the end of September.
On a serious note, perhaps you and Wheeze should get together in a hazard free spot in deepest darkest Wales and start sketching this year's FRA Xmas pantomime.
There is such a wealth of material in this thread, and so much yet to come. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LissaJous

A quick recap, no bias whatsoever of course :lie:
[Fellrunner] It's perfectly fair that kit standards change over the years, I just hope that the committee communicates one or two things very clearly, especially about one item of kit that seems likely to cause a lot of confusion.
[Mountain Marathoner] (authoritative) Don't be silly, we're all experienced mountain marathoners who have known for years precisely which item of kit meets different kinds of standards, and everyone will know about it through the æther, so there is no need for any clarification, and in any case who would be so idiotic as to even think about wading through a stream without taped seams on their leggings?
[Fellrunner] (ascerbic) Look, some of us actually choose to stay at home when the weather's bad, but now thanks to this run-in-any-weather mentality I have to go and fork out on an expensive new kit item when the Inov8 Mistlite was the perfect kit item for the job, but will no longer be allowed even on a fine summer's day. And people won't be aware of this, as you would see if you looked at another thread here, or Googled it, instead of simply assuming that everyone has the same knowledge as you.
[Industry Expert] (sorry WP I don't mean it harshly) You know you can get these cheap waterproofs that meet the requirement.
[Mountain Marathoner] (nonplussed) Huh?
[Fellrunner] (nonplussed) Huh?
[Industry Expert] They're cheap and meet all the requirements.
[Mountain Marathoner] Well, apart from being a useful kit item that you could actually run in.
[Fellrunner] Exactly, I mean what is the point in being made to switch from the adequately waterproof Mistlites, which I've quite happily worn for cycling in torrential rain once or twice, for something that's going to make me overheat. It's a backwards step.
[Mountain Marathoner] Anyway, we all know what to do, we can run in lighter water resistant kit, and carry proper waterpoofs for emergencies.
[Fellrunner] (furtive) It's stupid. I'm not carrying two sets. Do you think I can patch mine up with sellotape until I can afford a proper set?
[Industry Expert] Of course you can't!
[Fellrunner] (sarcastic) You mean at the races, the officials will instantly know the difference thanks to the new kit-checker qualification course?
[Mountain Marathoner] (dismissive) You do what you think is OK for you.
[Fellrunner] (annoyed) you really don't understand what I'm saying, I am not disagreeing with the new rules, just saying the FRA needs to take steps to tell people one or two things. Especially about the Mistlite 130, however 'wrong' people were who thought they were waterproof, and on this whole Pertex Shield business ~ when I can afford it, I can go and replace those Mitslite 130s with something offering less weather protection that just happens to have taped seams! It's a bit confusing!

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wheeze

The best, most comprehensive, most sensible comment of the ENTIRE thread!!

My faith is restored. Am planning to become an RO again next year. That statement will on a GIGANTIC banner over the start line!!!

---

Thanks Wheeze, I'm glad someone got it!:)

WP: It certainly was not meant as a wisecrack, I am sincere and chose my words carefully.
Why take 6,000 words over what can be said in a half a dozen?

I accept what you say FG.
I think what this thread shows though is the hugely different perspective that we all have when we go on to the fells.
There are different interests at play, not just FRA, athlete and RO, but UKA have a hand in this now. The Emergency services also need to be considered - they have quite an influence over the road races now in certain parts of the country.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alwaysinjured

The one thing Grump and I are in complete agreement about, it needs professional advice.

---

The major difference being that it took me one sentence of 25 words in a single post to say it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fellgazelle

Thanks Wheeze, I'm glad someone got it!:)

WP: It certainly was not meant as a wisecrack, I am sincere and chose my words carefully.
Why take 6,000 words over what can be said in a half a dozen?

---

Because it can't... I would love yours and wheezes views to be the system, but look at what has happened/is happening.. fell running is changing, there is more threat to RO's from runners and insurance, and the way modern life is. As said the FRA went limited for a reason...

I've got to say I have sympathy for the FRA because they have to marry together too extremes.. the simplicity of the sport (or what it was) and what and how modern life is.. and how accessible races are. Its like smokers getting banned from restuarants, runners have brought on changes themselves by turning up not equipped, with no idea, putting huge responsibilities onto RO's.

I was always of the naive view that we could just say 'I'm responsible for myself, I understand the risks'.. but having marshalled, watched races and not just ran I don't think we can just be so blasse about it.

Th recent death has made fell running look at itself, so changes here aren't necessarily connected to the death and don't need to be put in that context, just an outcome of an honest look at how it can be made safer for all. I don't think thats a bad thing. I do think separating rules for RO's and runners and whats a guideline and what's a stipulation will help.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheGrump

The major difference being that it took me one sentence of 25 words in a single post to say it.

---

And it clearly still has not been heeded by you or others in any meaningful way
See comments on word " unnecessary" which cannot be critiqued in 25 words.

Grump. Your history of posting from early days demonstrates beyond reasonable doubt that if not part of the committee you are intimately linked with it, yet you hide. Why? Your own contribution has been intended to spread more heat than light. Making rude and facetious comments from a veil of anonymity is not helpful.