Rather than just coming out with a statement that you assert as fact, it would be good if you could expand and outline how you come to this conclusion Madeleine.Originally Posted by Madeleine
The current RO Pack has expanded extensively. I did a count of how much for my meeting a few weeks ago, but it was accepted then that many pages have been added.
What you have made me do in order to permit with the FRA is actually do things that are not really needed for my venue and were intended for much more severe and exposed events / terrain.
I will do them, I have to. But it will not make my event safer.
Many ROs may be so focussed on meeting the longer list of musts and shoulds that they miss something more relevant to them.
So a previously good RO, and let's face it Fell Running has got lots of them, could be at risk because of the over complex requirements.
They are over complicated, keeping jumping from Competitor to RO.
They are in contradiction in part with some of the Guidelines which hasn't been revised (but I wouldn't be surprised to see a newer version knocked out soon as happened with the Check List)
I would liken it to the debate over drink driving.
The argument goes if the limit is dropped from 2 pints to 1 pint it will make a real impact on the number of deaths and serious injuries caused by drink drivers.
But the people creating the problem are not those drinking in moderation, they are the ones who go out and drink way over the limit. If they do that when the limit is 2 pints, then why would they change if the limit was 1 pint?
Of course the drivers operating within the law, will continue to do so and will follow the new lower limit as that is their nature.
But every now and again, someone will get caught out who's had 1.5 pints, or maybe even stuck to the one, but it took them slightly over.
So the new regime would be most likely to penalise those that had previously been within the law whilst having no effect on those that had always broken it.
Reply With Quote