New safety rules

[Khamsin]

I do think the FRA have too much of a UK centric view.

That is very reassuring since the FRA governs the sport in England unlike, say, Zimbabwe or wherever you currently offer your opinions from.

[bigfella]

And the risk of prosecution for manslaughter if someone dies and the family pursuing you for your every penny because you had no race insurance.

But that's the point, there is no one responsible, its just a group of individuals doing what they love, just happening to convene at a common place and taking part in some friendly competition, isn't that what this sport is really about.

[Rudolph Hooker]

But that's the point, there is no one responsible, its just a group of individuals doing what they love, just happening to convene at a common place and taking part in some friendly competition, isn't that what this sport is really about.

Absolutely correct, and, as IainR says, it's up to the runners to build proper experience so that we can all be responsible for our own safety. In some ways we can't afford not to, and the fact that many do is the reason why the sport is has such a good record.

However (and unfortunately), Khamasin's point is also valid because, if something does go wrong, and legal people are involved, these outsiders see this responsibility as being solely down to the race organiser. The FRA has tried many times to persuade the powers that be otherwise, but they see a race as a service which is provided for a fee - not a race put on by mates for mates.

It's a dilemma we have to live with, and it's part of the reason for the rules review.

[So Wood]

You have a fair point Bigfella.

It appears all the bother is about AM & AL races but no one challenges the competitor doing BG's Paddy, Ramsey or Joss runs.

The long challenges appear's to be up to the people doing it but when the FRA stamp their rules on it, that's when it becomes problematic.

Back to basics is the way forward.

[IainR]

That is very reassuring since the FRA governs the sport in England unlike, say, Zimbabwe or wherever you currently offer your opinions from.

It doesn't though.. thats the problem.. we have the peoples federation of fell running, the peoples republic of fell running.. life of Brian.. we have everything because everyone wants to have their own ball...

[Wheeze]

Absolutely correct, and, as IainR says, it's up to the runners to build proper experience so that we can all be responsible for our own safety. In some ways we can't afford not to, and the fact that many do is the reason why the sport is has such a good record.

However (and unfortunately), Khamasin's point is also valid because, if something does go wrong, and legal people are involved, these outsiders see this responsibility as being solely down to the race organiser. The FRA has tried many times to persuade the powers that be otherwise, but they see a race as a service which is provided for a fee - not a race put on by mates for mates.

It's a dilemma we have to live with, and it's part of the reason for the rules review.

Top post Rudolph.

And we have to legislate for the d*ckheads lefty describes. If only just us intelligensia ran, we could have no rules at all!!

[fozzy]

You have a fair point Bigfella.

It appears all the bother is about AM & AL races but no one challenges the competitor doing BG's Paddy, Ramsey or Joss runs.

The long challenges appear's to be up to the people doing it but when the FRA stamp their rules on it, that's when it becomes problematic.

Back to basics is the way forward.

Because AMs, ALs and all other races are RACES! People on this thread are forgetting this distinction.

There is a difference between a RACE and RUN. Be it on the fells or roads or wherever.

BGs, PBs, RR, Joss Challenges etc are NOT RACES. They are challenges. At worst, they could be called time trials (although we enter the is Parkrun a race or time trial something else debate - let's not go there..)

If you have a RACE, there has to be some form of rules. Be they simple in that, you must run the route in the correct direction, taking in the correct CPs in the correct order, no short cuts, following flags across private land etc. Do the Rules-haters want to abandon these rules as well?

Now, if something is a race, then although I'm no legal bod, I am aware that this carries a certain legal connotation, which includes a duty of care by the RO, which means that they need insurance, just in case something should happen (which sometimes it does).

Now unfortunately we live in an era of increasing litigation and "no win no fee" claims and ambulance chasing lawyers. I don't like it either, but it's there. We need the rules to make sure our sport survives.

You could have a completely closed sport where it's just you and your group of mates and make it that cliquey. You could be incredibly secretive and not tell anyone else about "races" and have a special initiation ceremony for new members that think exactly the way you do and anyone who doesn't is immediately ostracised and eventually killed for finding out about the "fell running society" (ah melodrama....)

To be honest, I'm bemused about why so many of you are so against a few very simple, minor rule changes that won't affect the vast majority of people, or how the sport is run. And indeed, will actually allow the sport to continue, because it will allow ROs some cover to put on races. Yes, there are few silly bits and pieces, particularly about having to start numbers at #1, rather than just making them be contiguous. But rules like wearing your number unfolded have always been there - now they've just been clarified and highlighted.

My very simple argument would be that if you don't like the "new" rules (which I still think aren't really new, just slightly clarified versions of the old ones), then don't race. No-one is making you.

[IainR]

Are many people against the new rules?

Not seen many say they are?

[Alf]

Top post Rudolph.

And we have to legislate for the d*ckheads lefty describes. If only just us intelligensia ran, we could have no rules at all!!

Well I don't think I am part of the intelligensia (and I am sure many other forumites will agree on that ) but I know what you mean Wheeze :thumbup:

[Alf]

Are many people against the new rules?

Not seen many say they are?

Not me.