Quote Originally Posted by alwaysinjured View Post
Clearly it needed reviewing after , rather than before the coroner reached a view and numerous lawyers scrutinized it. Do you organise races? If you do, how are you going to eliminate all hazards in compulsory parts of the course? Even if you could affird to smooth tarmac your course to comply and eliminate trip hazards, you would not get planning permission, and it would cease to be a fell course if you did.
I do organise races and have done since 1967 longer than most people. First of all before the Fra and rules even existed and then under several revisions and updating of rules brought in by the Fra. No one has defined hazards and most long standing hazards these days have been looked at and changes made not because the rules said so but because race organisers are generally sensible people and have the interests of the people they organise races for at heart. You previously mentioned the Borrowdale race. The previous start up Bessyboot was a definite hazard, it was changed, there are now no real hazards only natural obstacles to be overcome, the same encountered by any individual walker or runner. A barbed wire fence might well be considered a hazard, a bull in field or a farmer with a shotgun yes but a stony path or a narrow lane come off it they are part of the natural landscape, an obstacle to be encountered and overcome, all part of the challenge of the event.