Quote Originally Posted by boghobbit View Post
I like having dibbers in a race, it makes results more interesting, although being petty I'd like to use my own instead of having to hire one but that would be more awkward for race organisers so no problem there.

However, there seems to be some confusion around the safety aspect of using dibbers, unless the units are linked to some form of radio equipment then they tell the RO nothing about the progress of competitors. You can "interrogate" the boxes to find out who has been through but that would involve linking it physically to a laptop. The system does give you good confirmation of finishers and where they've been but only after they've finished. In their basic form they are no safer than conventional systems of checkpoint marshalling but much better for post race pub chats and split comparisons.

I'm sure Martin Stone could give much more detail about the system.
Totally agree - a scenario to consider..... a runner falls and is injured/unable to continue within sight of a marshall but off the main race route and out of sight of other runners, as is possible with clag down/conditions like Saturday, the marshall can then make the necessary 'call' as to how to assist the injured runner. If this marshall was replaced by the dibber system then surely you have serious problems/delays in attending to the injured runner?

So to me, from a safety angle, marshalls are still required, although obviously marshall safety also has to be considered.