I posted a similar observation then deleted it when I reflected on the fact that I would not do it unpaid and those that do must have personal motivations to satisfy or they wouldn't do it either.Originally Posted by Richard123
It must be very exciting at the moment.
Last edited by Henry Porter; 16-01-2014 at 04:04 PM.
Bleeding heart, pinko, liberal. (no safety pins)
I've said elsewhere on here that the behaviour of some of the committee is bringing the FRA into disrepute. This whole situation has been appallingly handled and the fact that the committee are volunteers really has no bearing on this.WTF is going with the committee!!??
....it's all downhill from here.
Not really.
I have served for 12 years, and I was Chairman for 3 of them. Members come and go every year. Some make more noise than others when they depart. I have seen at least 25 Members change in my time. But there is massive experience sitting round a FRA Committee table and some of the newer Members are as intelligent, wise, capable and committed to fell running and serving the membership as I have known.
The current Committee is excellent and the current Chair has brought a fresh vision and has steered the FRA through, with the death of Brian Belfield , probably its most challenging period in a generation.
The Committee is made up of 22 people (although they don’t all turn up to every meeting!) and is a testament to democracy. No one person, even me when I was Chairman!, can overrule the good sense of the many wise fellrunners and race organisers who sit round the table.
Criticising the Committee is what fell runners do, it goes with the territory, if you can’t handle it then don’t join the Committee.
But there is not a single assertion that has been made on this Forum or facebook that cannot be truthfully and completely answered by the Committee. But there are only 22 of us and 7500 members and Officers do have other things to do in the interests of the membership and if the Committee starts responding to every point on here it will need to grow to 23 people by employing a full time media officer.
My question to people who wonder what is wrong with the Committee is “how many Officers do you actually know?” and if the answer is “none” I then ask “well do you really believe that people of the stature within fell running of Scoffer or Jon Broxap or Alan Brentnall or Alan Barlow or Brett Weeden, all of whom have served for at least 12 years, have suddenly, collectively gone off their rockers?”
So “It must be very exciting at the moment”?
Not from where we sit and when we walk away, as we all will, some of us wonder who will step forward to take our places if members really believe what they can read on here .
Last edited by Graham Breeze; 16-01-2014 at 05:16 PM.
"...as dry as the Atacama desert".
Graham, Without meaning to stir things up - In experience terms Pete Bland has more than most of you put together. So why is it you never refer to his views, or even defer to them as having far more experience than you do (or ever will) - and more importantly (unlike you) is one of the most relevant race RO, has been through the trauma?
As for belief...belief is irrelevant, the things that are said are indisputably true. Madeleine REFUSED to allow Andys Motion to be voted, the documentation proves that, and that refusal was the essential fact that resulted in the rest. The FRA statement is unsupportable, which is why Andy went, and you compromised his professional integrity by forcing him to associate with it.
If you compromise peoples professional integrity they have to resign, it would be better if you had acted sensibly, stopping him having to.
Excellence is subjective. Excellent at what? The issue of the day is safety, and Andy W is the only one safety qualified who could therefore be considered as excellent in that regard.
Wynn is an excellent race organiser, why do her views not count for anything either?
The objective reality is a false core belief based on inexperience.
FRA has believed that rules are a suitable and sufficient way to manage safety ergo "improving safety" equates to "modifying rules"
Leave alone the fact that they are still not suitable, they never were sufficent
All good RO use a plan to manage safety, as does every safety manager, that tasks specific people, and that is the only document that can ever be suitable and sufficient, indeed the rules are so much chip paper on race day. The plan is what people do.
You have created a silly situation where runners have to read 20 pages of rules as well as runners instructions, and if you had spent any time managing hazardous things you would know that communications confusion and misunderstandings are the source of many accidents. Wholly the wrong approach.
We are busy looking at Wynns plan as we speak. It is good. There is not much I need to add or modify. The problem is you are not telling others how to do the same.
You leave and continue to leave planning as seat of the pants, when then the inquest proves you can no longer do so. It has to be demanded, and the guidelines created by such as Andy ( or me) who knows what has to be in plans.
The core duties you should be stressing are assess, plan, supervise, train , communicate and review.
PS If you do not know what "suitable and sufficient" mean ,read a basic safety book.
You still don't know the meaning of the word "hazard" or "risk" see my explanatinos on the words thread. If you did you would scrap parts of the rules and the guidelines today, and that is mine and andys problem. He cannot support a situation in which people are creating documents containing basic errors - and what you are doing is increasing not reducing the risk both to runners and RO
Last edited by alwaysinjured; 16-01-2014 at 05:39 PM.
How do you know it has been appalling handled? All we get is Always' point of view and now one resignation - doesn't mean it is appalling handled just that some people disagree with others.
Personally as I have said before I would like to thank the committee and support them - and I say this without knowing any of them!
personal experience.How do you know it has been appalling handled?
....it's all downhill from here.
I think Graham you don't appreciate how intimidating you are to some of the Committee. One still incumbent committee member full agrees with Andy W but just didn't have it within themselves to come out and say it.
The intimidating nature can be seen by the posts on the Forum and Facebook. You can see the number of members that pick up on it.
That would only be re-enforced if the did see some of the behind the scenes stuff.
In the interests of the many fellrunners and race organisers like me who haven't previously criticised the FRA, but are wondering what is going on, I suggest some sort of statement might be helpful.
Something along the lines of "We have considered the view expressed by numerous race organisers and members that the current guidelines mean that race organisers may be placed in a difficult legal situation should anything go wrong. However, here are the reasons behind our continued commitment to the guidelines in their current format..."
I don't think you've collectively gone off your rockers. And I know you're all reasonable, sane, experienced, committed people. But I would love to know why you appear not to be addressing these reasonable concerns. Maybe they're not reasonable - please give us an insight.
What's your basis for making such a damning comment?
In the interest of openness in this important discussion, would you care to reveal your true identity?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote