I suppose we could but, as I said, that was not the point of the resurrection at all. Rather, it was to ensure that the management of the sport in Wales took it's lead from FRA directly and not from an imposed quango. So yes, we adopt the FRA documents in full. Our committee has been discussing the new rules for a while now ahead of the public consultation just so we have our opportunity to feedback direct to Graham et al.
I just wasn't clear where the WFRA stood on that. As our mountains are higher, shouldn't the FRA follow our lead?
Maybe we could have a UKFRA, after all they all seem to be seeking consistency :w00t:
WARNING!!!!!! CAN OF WORMS ALERT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:w00t: Of course
Well, that's very true. As you know the trick of great leadership is to support from below rather than to pull from above!!Originally Posted by LissaJous
I just wasn't clear where the WFRA stood on that. As our mountains are higher, shouldn't the FRA follow our lead?
Which neatly illustrates that it is not necessarily the action itself, but the potential serious consequences of that action that should concern us.
Telling the idiot, "Please don't do it again" does little to help the legitimate entrant left on the hill.
Some folk would be happy with a YFRA just for Yorkshire!
The UKA "family" I referred to consists of UKA, EA/FRA(for fell running), WA and NIMRA. All of these Permit races which are covered by UK Athletics insurance.
About 8 years ago a large proportion of the fellrunning community in Wales became disenchanted with UKA/WA managing their sport. As a result the Welsh Fell Running Association (WFRA) was established and now the majority of fell/mountain races in Wales are registered and insured with the WFRA and not with WA. The WFRA operates completely independently of UKA/WA and has its own insurance. The WFRA are indeed free to set their own rules but have chosen to model them on the FRA ones.
Similarly in Scotland there are two bodies, SA(part of the UKA "family") and Scottish Hill Runners (independant of UKA) who offer insurance for fell/hill races. However in Scotland I think most race organisers still obtain their Permits/insurance from SA/UKA.
Whats the issue with running without a vest on? I take it its just the fact that they don't want numbers pinned to shorts and or folded, well being a RO ive never had a problem with reading numbers pinned to shorts folded or not or is it just to keep the sponsors happy! it tends to only be a small percentage that do it myself being one if its hot and I don't want to wear a vest or if its wet and I don't want to keep un zipping my waterproof top and getting colder and wetter! all other times its on my chest un folded on a white vest so it doesn't stand out any better.
If the sponsors logo was folder over that would make the number easier to read wouldn't it?
Posting Permissions
