There are always (well usually) good reasons for regulations but it doesn't necessarily mean they are a good thing for the majority of people.
It does seem (and I may be wrong) that these changes are being made as a result of a specific tragedy for which the inquest has not even been held yet.
And of course, Breezy will be slapping his forehead for the stupidity of letting these suggestions out into the wild for forum bashing before any changes have yet been made! No, in all seriousness, I think its great that we've had the chance to maturely and immaturely thrash this issue around a bit. I'm sure the proposed changes have come from a lot of internal discussion and from external pressures of which we have no comprehension. Have we mounted one single serious challenge to any of them? I think there's been some cogent points made about garment standards. But very little discussion about first aid points for example.
I have to confess, that you lose the will to live after trying to read more than a few pages of a thread like this - so at the risk of repeating what others have said.
It seems to me that.. " where a number is pinned" is rules for the sake of rules, the nanny state strikes again, to no real value..
Clearly.
Organisers have to do a minimum set of things to cover their backsides.
Like stating and enforcing kit rules.
Making sure that you have a means count everyone back, with at least two counts done to make sure.
So don't rely on he says that she says that so and so finished. Coming down hard on anyone who does not follow the systems for retiring because of that!! The single biggest error any organiser can make is to not know someone has not finished..... Methods for working out who is missing, should be left to the organisers discretion. What suits the event in hand.
Runners must do what the organisers ask! Period.
Just as in the corporate world "an employee who fails to cooperate with safety policy is committing a serious disciplinary offense, which may lead to sacking!"
But after that, fell runners should not be on fells if they are not willing to take responsibility for THEMSELVES, and willing to sign away the responsibility of the organiser in that regard.
The rest is expedience down to the organiser - and cannot be prescriptive - And in that regard, my view you cannot specify where a number is pinned! On a very busy checkpoint it is up to runners to either call out their numbers if they cannot be seen or - the solution LDWA often use on early busy checkpoints works fine and dandy. A drop bucket for a number you are given at the start. Vest numbers get covered by goretexes anyway on inclement races which really need the checks to work so how does it help? At later checkpoints it is always easier, since the flow rate of runners slows down. In short let the organisers decide. Provided they guarantee to know someone is missing, the rest should be left up to them on how they narrow down who it was, and where they were last seen.
It does look a tad though like this is the FRA protecting itself.. seems overkill.. first aid kits for marshalls.. first aid points sign posted.. got to say I've marshalled and never had a 1st aid kit.. nor seen any signs at any small evening race..
Details from a death in a cross country race a couple of years back.
http://www.times-series.co.uk/news/9...coroner_rules/
http://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/9411965.print/
http://arbroath.blogspot.co.uk/2011/...efused-to.html
I believe that one of the coroners recommendations to UKA was that first aiders should be able to get to any part of the course within (I think) 3 minutes.
coming from another outdoor sport ( motorcycle trials) following a rare accident to another rider (broken hip) and the need to be able to access the air ambulance / emergency services all our marshalls are now provided with dayglo vests ( so they can be seen easily from the air/ afar) details of the location of the half dozen first aid kits and the nearest postcode.
At the start/ signing on all the above info is available now on a large blackboard as well as details of the nearest A&E. in hindsight all simple stuff which could save 10 minutes which could in turn save a life.
I do enjoy the "spinnaker effect" of having an unfolded, uncrumpled number pinned to my vest. There's been many a time in a race, in a following wind, I have been swept along using this method. If the wind is coming from another direction or the front then I go into "tacking or beating mode" rotating my upper torso to get the best angle for the wind to catch my number and the noise when it does catch tells me I have judged it just right
So don't mess with your numbers me hearties and make them work for you :thumbup:
As a former member of the FRA committee I have noted with interest that most of the comments on this thread have come from runners. When considering the FRA Safety Requirements for Fell Races one should realise that there are several groups/bodies who have an interest in these viz:-Originally Posted by alwaysinjured
- Runners - whose safety is obviously very important in what could be regarded as a dangerous sport.
- Race Organisers who when they accept entries have a duty of care to the competitors and who require insurance in case something goes wrong despite their best efforts.
- The FRA to whom UKAthletics/England Athletics delegate governing body status for fell running in England.
- UKA whose insurance is provided without charge to the FRA/race organisers.
- The insurers who provide the UKA insurance and obviously have an interest that fell running and the other athletic disciplines covered by UKA insurance are organised as safely as possible.
Fell running has had very few tragedies like the one last year. Nevertheless I would consider that the FRA committee has a responsibility to review the Safety Requirements and provide additional guidance/requirements for race organisers, runners and others involved in the light of past events.
Last edited by MargC; 14-08-2013 at 11:48 PM.
Not true I mount my number central on my shorts when running vestless.
Last edited by Woodzy; 14-08-2013 at 11:17 PM.
The FRA is a 'company limited by guarantee' of its members, therefore it could be said the FRA is its membership, not some quango. The FRA committee is elected from the members by the members. It would seem reasonable that the FRA committee seeks to protect the membership it represents by evaluating and improving rules.
The Safety Requirements document was issued in draft form for discussion; how many of the opinions expressed on this forum have been forwarded by email to the document author as requested? Or is this all the usual forum hot air? How many of the posters are actually current FRA members?
Posting Permissions
