New safety rules

[alwaysinjured]

I can think of a few. I'm not going to name them, for fear of them being stopped for safety reasons. But I would happily do some of them again.

"Unnecessarily" is a interesting word. How does that work? "It was necessary to go down that gulley, as otherwise the race would be a lot longer" Or "It was necessary to go that way as it's been run like that for 60 years and we don't want to lose touch with historical records"

"Unnecessarily" is a ridiculous word for legal drafting, as I pointed out in a very long post.
I used simple examples ,"reductio ad absurdum" , take the race that goes through a slippy therfeore hazardous river bed rather than over an adjacent bridge. "what if questions" prove that, so why is that word still there?

I lost all respect for athletics officialdom over the Modahl affair, who I met a couple of times in local athletic circles.They were bullied into acting by IAAF , and compromised integrity in the process of allowing themselves to be used. Whilst IAAF themselves ran to monaco to escape liability after the reynolds affair, then able to excercise authority, whilst carrying no responsibility.

FRA must not allow themselves to be compromised when faced with evidence from anyone including UKA. As it was it was left to the police witness to be the voice of reason, and I for one am determined that we must not let the documents give any more scope to be used for whipping an RO by anyone.

I actually think the risk to an RO is fairly low, but only if the documentation does not screw them first.