Ballot Paper Arrives

[dominion]

Fatbloke,

I think the biggest issue is not knowing what UKA are going to swipe us with next. The insurance debarcle when they refused the FRA the right to insure celtic races is one example, the issue of graded officials another. At present these issues are resolved, albeit with celtic races not insured by the FRA. As a track / road / cross country / fellrunner for close to 30 years I'd prefer to see fellrunning as part of the wider 'athletics family'. At the present time I'm happy to support that. Will it still be my view in 12 months? Well that's down to how UKA treat us, and whether they have any more nasty surprises in store for us. With the head honcho's at UKA being replaced with a bloke from rugby (The sport, not the town) and a wheeler dealer from somewhere or another, neither of which have a running background (ok Ed Warner has done a couple of road races), I have a horrible suspicion that we'll be having this debate again in the not to distant future.

There are a lot of disenchanted folk in athletics, hence the formation of ARC, although at present it does look like the FRA are doing a far better job of negotiating with UKA than other 'waring factions'.

[Penguin]

[summary and Graham B]"All members of the sub-comittee, who best understand the issues"

And that is just specious nonsense.

The fact that they've spent lots of time on our behalf discussing the issues doesn't mean they understand them better. Or worse, for that matter.

Understanding is not the sole province of committee members...[/quote]

ah but they are the ones on the commitee and we have all been invited over the past 3+ years since this forum has been set up! to either stand for election or vote when the papaer comes through the door.

if they don't understand the information given to them i'm sure they will find out what it means!

[Stick]

The great and the good of the past including Mike Rose and I believe Dave Jones took the FRA into UKA. I have yet to see a sensible reason (I discount old grievances and bias) why we should come out.

Right then, I'm resolved, again, to make this my final final final (serious...I reserve right to apply what passes for humour in my mind ) post on this thread!

I cite in reply to your question Graham items 1 to 10 on pages 12/13 of Spring 2007 Fellrunner. Clearly these reasons are not felt to be sensible by you, and I do, genuinely respect your and anyone elses view to differ. But just cos you don't think these sensible, it doesn't mean they're not to anyone else. And the fact that we're having a blooming vote surely indicates that others think there's a case to be made.

You do need to be careful Graham, someone might accuse you of going "on and on trying to change peoples opinion" (Sorry Iamana...that bit just wound me up a tad last night).

Right, that's it...I'm off "Down-the-pub"!

[daz h]

I presume this is a reference to the greater athletics family (right up to IAAF) and so credibility, access to grants, routes into coaching, "clout", responsibility for organising eg England Internatinal Teams. Many athletics clubs have T&F, XC, Road and Fell members: all part, in the broader sense, of "athletics".

By being part of UKA the voice of fell running must be heard, say in the light of future legislation and it is better to be part of THE recognised body than some odd fringe association.

Some people will claim if the FRA disaffiliates nothing will change but that is not known; "a leap in the dark!" Certainly a few years ago when it was possible that the FRA would withdraw from organising English Teams for the World Trophy etc an alternative group was champing at the bit to take over.

The great and the good of the past including Mike Rose and I believe Dave Jones took the FRA into UKA. I have yet to see a sensible reason (I discount old grievances and bias) why we should come out.

graham sorry if i seem to be a little confused on his matter
can you just give me a brief history on the birth of the FRA to the point where it entered into UKA
what caused it to join forces , what was the main reason ???????, there mus have been one , im even more confused now

[XRunner]

XRunner, how many votes did it take us to become affiliated with NoEAA/BAF or whatever it was?

Sorry Wheeze, I don't have a full set of NoEAA minutes dated back before 1990 so I cannot easily answer your question. I suspect that it was a Committee decision rather than a vote among member Clubs.

Does anybody know when the FRA were first affilaited to NoEAA?

[MargC]

John,

My emboldening but why do you harp on about the past when the FRA Committee has endorsed the Summary Note which refers to "vastly improved liaison and communication" and states that "the problems of the past are now in the past"?
GB

Graham,

I have recently had occasion, as FRA Fixtures Sec., to try to avail myself of this "vastly improved liaison and communication" with UKA.

In the Spring Fellrunner magazine and at the April FRA committee meeting Alan Barlow, Chairman of the UKA Competition Management Group, informed us that he had requested that the following be included in Appendix E, Endurance Event Officials, of the 2008 UKA Rule Book (to address the problems caused by this section in the 2006 Rule Book):

"1.4.3 Fell and Hill Running. This section does not apply to Fell and Hill Officials and the appropriate section of the Fell & Hill PST's Safety Requirements (a UKA document) referred to in rule 405 will be observed in its stead."

As Fixtures Sec. I liaise with all the organisers of UKA Permitted races in England to inform them of the rules they should comply with. At present they agree to comply with the "FRA Safety Rquirements for Fell Races".

I do not have a copy of the "Fell & Hill PST's Safety Requirements". Therefore 4 weeks ago I asked Alan Barlow to obtain and send a copy of the document to me so I could check to see if there were any differences between it and the FRA document.

I am still waiting for it. Surely it should be available off the shelf?

Is this representative of the "vastly improved communication"?

Margaret

[XRunner]

err can the more experienced in these matters please explain to me why disaffiliating would revert us back to being a poor relation fringe sport

Fell running is a fringe sport enjoyed by a minority of athletes in a few locations within England.

If I can indulge in a little criticism then I would say that the FRA have failed to develop the sport through-out the country since its inception.

The Sub-Committee Report does indicate a way forward in the future:

...then some form of association with the Trail Running Association may indeed be beneficial to both parties.

It is only in England that we have chosen to distinguish a difference between trail running and fell running.

[Baldy]

John,

My emboldening but why do you harp on about the past when the FRA Committee has endorsed the Summary Note which refers to "vastly improved liaison and communication" and states that "the problems of the past are now in the past"?

World War 2 is over and I now drive a German car.

GB

German cars have a far better track record than UKA dealings with FRA!
In any case I would recommend Japanese - same war but much better reliability

[Luv Shack]

Ballot Paper Arrives????
Not here so far....... I'm getting quite jealous of you lot...
Maybe the sheep have snaffled mine... they were smirking when I got home this eve..

[Baldy]

...and as you will have noted from the Summary Note "All members of the sub-comittee, who best understand the issues........"
Point made?

Graham,
Its time you stopped harping on about this - it isnt actually true!

As I posted previously:

Understanding of issues - despite the claim that the sub-committee best understand the issues I feel that such an understanding is not restricted to them alone eg Dave Jones for one with 19 years service on the committee in major roles interacting with UKA and its predecessors has a very comprehensive overview of the situation which should not be dismissed lightly even by those who may not share his views on disaffilliation. In addition Ross Powell and Sheila Lloyd, both members of the FRA committee, have experience of confronting the same issues in Wales and decided to leave the UKA fold and establish an independant Welsh FRA (WFRA).