New safety rules

[MargC]

This race does not have a permit or insurance from the FRA.
Otherwise everyone would soon be required to carry waterproofs & hat & gloves. But not water (unless the RO specified).

According to the Snowdon race website the race is run under UK Athletics rules. I would therefore assume that the race Permit/License has been obtained from Welsh Athletics. Assuming this is the case, it will be covered by UKA insurance as are FRA Permitted races.

The UKA Fell & Hillrunning Rules (see http://www.britishathletics.org.uk/competitions/rules/) are almost identical to the current FRA Rules for Competition on which they are based. However there is a difference in the categorisation of races. In addition to Cats A, B and C there is also a Category for "International Races" . As well as international races, selection races for international races organised by national associations fall into this category.

If the Snowdon race is in this category it would be up to the organiser to specify the kit carrying requirements, they would not be compulsory even for a race that would otherwise have been AM.

When I was the FRA Fixtures Secretary, Permits provided for selection races for England Mountain Running teams were deemed to be in this category. I understand that the selectors were trying to run the trials under as near the same conditions (no compulsory kit?) as the international races themselves if possible - depending on the weather etc.

[Mr1470]

And several years ago I went to Borrowdale.
It was 20 degrees down in Rosthwiate, warm on the tops, lovely day.
At the top of Dale Head I was in 15th position in the race.
And then, before I could get off the summit plateau, I stopped, literally.
Flat battery, done, knackered.
It took me 1 hour and 44 minutes to make the 2 mile descent to the finish.
I stopped and sat or lay down numerous times
Below the mines I lay amongst the bracken with my waterproof top and trousers and hat and gloves all on, shivering uncontrollably in the sunshine.

eventually I recovered some strength and energy and when I did reach the finish I was fine.

Don't think that things can't go dangerously wrong, even on the finest of days.
Should you run out of energy you will be unable to keep warm.

This.

Fellrunning would have been a simple sport if it had continued to be populated by people who knew the fells, knew what they were doing on the fells and knew the dangers out there.

Fellrunning has become a relatively mainstream sport, attracting runners who haven't spent time in the mountains previously, don't have the skills or knowledge to survive in them and don't realise how quickly things can turn.

Hence the need to some basic rules. The proposals all seem sensible to me. Personally, I'd make everyone carry a survival sack on A long races in the big hills....you never know when you might need it.

And, as andy k says, what one minute can seem like a lovely warm day when you're running, can soon seem likely a freezing cold one when you don't feel well and you have to walk slowly back.

I've seen plenty of examples of runners heading into big areas of hills with shorts, a vest and very little else with them. You can argue about these proposals all you like, you can pick them apart and find fault....why not just go with them and accept the need, even if it's not your need?

[MorganW]

This.

Fellrunning would have been a simple sport if it had continued to be populated by people who knew the fells, knew what they were doing on the fells and knew the dangers out there.

Fellrunning has become a relatively mainstream sport, attracting runners who haven't spent time in the mountains previously, don't have the skills or knowledge to survive in them and don't realise how quickly things can turn.

Hence the need to some basic rules. The proposals all seem sensible to me. Personally, I'd make everyone carry a survival sack on A long races in the big hills....you never know when you might need it.

And, as andy k says, what one minute can seem like a lovely warm day when you're running, can soon seem likely a freezing cold one when you don't feel well and you have to walk slowly back.

I've seen plenty of examples of runners heading into big areas of hills with shorts, a vest and very little else with them. You can argue about these proposals all you like, you can pick them apart and find fault....why not just go with them and accept the need, even if it's not your need?

Richard

You make good points. Thanks for that.

You've spotted the protection of the weakest issue, if I can use such language in the rough, tough world of fell racing.

I recall Geoff Roes from the US grumbling about having to carry waterproof trousers in the UTMB. He had never ever worn them apparently in all his running and racing career.

In the CCC that year, I wore them for more than 10 hours of a 19 hour run plus every other stitch of compulsory kit I was asked to carry.

I see nothing wrong with setting a standard that acknowledges that it is the least experienced competitors who need the most protection.

[blencathrafrommykitchen]

I'm interested to know what the rationale lies behind the safety rules. Is the idea to protect the runner from their own stupidity/personal preference, or to protect the race organiser from litigation (or a harrowing experience in a coroner's court) if something goes wrong.

It seems to me that one of the most important parts of the ethos of our sport is the fact that we take responsibility for our own well-being.

If I organised a race, someone had an accident, and they or their family subsequently sued me because I done something stupid I could possibly understand it.

But if they sued me because eg I hadn't enforced kit requirements rigorously, or (in what seems to be the place I fear we will end up in) had failed to check that the person had attended an accredited FRA navigation course in the previous 3 years, or all my marshalls hadn't attended an accredited FRA marshalling course I would be ever so slightly pi**ed off.

I guess that if someone sued in that situation I would expect the person to be permanently ostracised by the rest of the fell-running community. We seem to be heading for a situation where the only events that take place will be the ones that are professionally organised by event companies who have the resource to keep their heads above the rising tide of good practice. That, for me, would mean the end of our sport.

[Woodzy]

loads of water given out on the mountain but I still carried some no kit though!

Narr.
Waterproof yes, but to what hydrostatic head?
Breathability no.
No top less running, Loveshack does it all the time.

If it goes too far I see a lot of fellrunners becoming just that. But not racers any more.

And with all this going on I watched the Snowden race on TV last night and hardly anyone carried a bag with water in on a very hot day. (A lot of daft folk out there and the last 3 minutes proved it by the number being sponged down.)

[dominion]

Expected to you to comment on the National committees...

Can't see what WA have to do with Fell running.... think we all know the WFRA are far more present in welsh fell running...

If you want to organise a race in Wales under the same auspice of FRA - aka UKA, then it would fall under the remit of Welsh Athletics, WFRA are independent of any NGB. Most Welsh races stick with WFRA, but it's not the FRA's remit to acknowledge that.

It still naffs me off that the Trail Running Association can permit races UK wide when the FRA can't.

I'm somewhat puzzled by the position of BOFRA at the moment.....

[dominion]

I'm interested to know what the rationale lies behind the safety rules. Is the idea to protect the runner from their own stupidity

Perhaps we should just quit there....

[LissaJous]

@MargC: thanks, I didn't realise the UKA rules would be the same as FRA, but yes I knew about the International race category. Maybe we should all organise International races..

@WP: As long as all of the personalised numbers are associated with a regular number it should still be OK (?)

If you want to organise a race in Wales under the same auspice of FRA - aka UKA, then it would fall under the remit of Welsh Athletics, WFRA are independent of any NGB. Most Welsh races stick with WFRA, but it's not the FRA's remit to acknowledge that.

So Welsh fell races could do well out of this (one-size-fits-all and possibly disproportionate response to the circumstances that have arisen due to a culture of not shortening or cancelling races in bad weather)?

I'm somewhat puzzled by the position of BOFRA at the moment.....

Maybe this helps, maybe not! http://bofra.co.uk/FAQ.php

• BOFRA committee members officiate at all championship races and assist at others.
• Everyone must register on the day, to ensure that every runner is safe and accounted for.
• Every competitor must wear shoes and equipment which are appropriate for the race in which they are competing.
• In some cases it will be necessary for runners to carry full body cover depending upon the weather conditions. All competitors must follow the race orgainsers direction.

[stumpy]

I agree with minimum requirements and the the need to cater for the lowest common denominator in races, but one thing that does concern me here is the element of personal safety that is removed from the individual by the insistence on water proofs over windproofs regardless. In many situations it is much safer to be WEARING a comfortable windproof than CARRYING a waterproof!

[TheGrump]

@MargC: thanks, I didn't realise the UKA rules would be the same as FRA,.........

The FRA Constitution states: "Rules means the Rules for Competition of UKA".