Danbert - it can be argued that the Clubs do get Council funding anyway. The tracks lose money so we would be on dodgy ground to complain about the Council supporting Park Run.
That is not my beef.

My beef is that UKA/EA are the umbrella organisations for athletics. They take money from Clubs in affiliation fees and permitting and then are using some of that money to give cover to Park Run.

Joe and Richard Head:
Similar to my above point, I do not have an issue with Park Run - but I have made the point before that they have to be affecting numbers. I had this debate on here last year and also on 8lane.
There were runners I know going down to Heaton Park last year that would normally have been running the local XC race or road race previously. Due to Park Run they were at races less.
Danbert is perhaps a very good example of this.

Now that would be all fine and dandy if Park Run was standing on it's own 2 feet ie. not receiving financial support from the clubs by the back door.

The claim is made that it is bringing new people to athletics, that it is good for the sport. I would perhaps be able to accept that if Park Run had a policy of leafleting all the runners with details of all the local clubs within a 10 mile radius (for example)

Unfortunately the UKA/EA are in the pockets of the big sponsors, the NGO Funders and the large organisations such as FLM / Great Run.

What next - will they be assisting the Ramblers Association because it might attract people in to race walking :/