I'm sure Cougar will respond.
My angle is 'debate away', the race organiser (and sponsor) is still going to want unfolded numbers on the chest. On race day, he's got more pressing things to deal with than runners with a 'l'oreal' attitude.
I'm sure Cougar will respond.
My angle is 'debate away', the race organiser (and sponsor) is still going to want unfolded numbers on the chest. On race day, he's got more pressing things to deal with than runners with a 'l'oreal' attitude.
Hence Pete Bland not recording in the results all the runners at Kentmere a couple of years ago who felt the rules only applied to the other guy.Originally Posted by Brotherton Lad
Or Sam Ayres' similar treatment of all the runners who ran in the Coledale Horseshoe who did not carry kit.
"...as dry as the Atacama desert".
Up and at 'em, Graham. How's the injury by the way?
Nothing personal mr B. As they say in the Army, if the boys aren't whinging about something or other, it's time to find out what's gone seriously wrong.
The standard inquiry being:
'Boots fit? Mail getting through?'
To which the only acceptable reply is 'Yes, sir' (unless, of course, they don't, and then you start looking, because it's not acceptable).
Last edited by Brotherton Lad; 10-09-2010 at 11:27 AM.
In fact Sam was so fed up with the subsequent whining from all the "free spirit and kit-less" fellrunners that she stopped organising the race and it did not appear in the Calendar for several years until someone else put it on.
Clever runners eh?
(I will PM on the other matter)
"...as dry as the Atacama desert".
I think the issue of kit is clearcut, but i have a question about numbers:
If i have to put my cag on during a race and obscure my number do i stop to reattatch the number to my cag (not a good idea to pierce it)
...or leave my number obscured?
The only reason i fold my number and pin it to my tracksters is because of this question.
Luke Appleyard (Wharfedale)- quick on the dissent
This is a dilemma I've not previously considered. I normally put my cag over the top of my number and then pull my cag up at any checkpoints where they need to see my number. But you're right, this means the sponsor's name is obscured for most of the race.
Maybe you should cut the race number in half and stick the sponsor's name to one leg and the number to the other.
I open the zip to display it, double checking my shouting out my number, saying thank you with a cheery wave as I speed away (the last bit is conjecture).
In this scenario the rule for safety takes precedence over the rule about displaying your number. I suppose you could always thank the marshalls and add 'and Peter Bland' as well.
Classic!This is a dilemma I've not previously considered. I normally put my cag over the top of my number and then pull my cag up at any checkpoints where they need to see my number. But you're right, this means the sponsor's name is obscured for most of the race.
Maybe you should cut the race number in half and stick the sponsor's name to one leg and the number to the other.
Or, perhaps we could all use those 'wash-off-able' tattoo's - Pete Bland could hand one out at each race with the number..and we must all stick it too our foreheads.
That way...the dilemma is halved.
Im with Noel, just lift the jacket up as and when.
Also, wear shorts Brighty!- Yeah I know..but I couldnt resist.
Not at all Mr Brightside, I think its vital that we can debate these issues openly and constructively. Without going in to the whole of the original folding numbers saga I made a similar point somewhere in the course of that. Without looking up my earlier posts for the exact words I used I was trying to make the point that I thought it was entirely reasonable and proper and within the spirit of fellrunning to be able to ask a race organiser why they apply a particular rule and discuss it. I think I said there are probably three kinds of runners - those who ignore the rule, those who follow it blindly and those who might not agree with it but ask about it, discuss it but ultimately resepct the race organisers wishes. I raised some of the points others have made on this thread - ie perhaps a folded number on your shorts is better than an unfolded number hidden by a cag or pinned to a vest thats in your bumbag on a hot day. The replies from ROs made it clear that they preferred the numbers unfolded and on vests because quite apart from the sponsorship issue it made it easier for Marshalls to see and record numbers - this obviously is more difficult in bad weather when cags are likely to be worn but the ROs seem to prefer this and my point was that if thats what they ask for then thats what I'll do, even if I don't agree that its always necessarily going to be the best option, but at least we have discussed it. Until then on hot days I often pinned my number to my shorts in case I took my vest off, I thought I was being helpful but now I dont do this any more. So I agree with you and Brotherton Lad, lets by all means debate these things - unfortunately some of the posts on the original thread did give me the impression that some thought we were wrong to question it. Perhaps this reflected the misunderstanding that we were talking about folding numbers rather than the principles involved!
I feel the difficulty (or is it a good thing because it leads to debate?) is still the issue of individual interpretation of well intentioned and sensible rules, so by all means lets debate them and hopefully reach some common understanding because the reality is that there are those whose interpretation of sufficient food, navigational skills, local knowledge or experience is not necessarily the same as the FRA had in mind when they made these rules.
I'm liking this. What would be people's worst and best ideas for who could sponsor races?
A monolemma!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote