Quote Originally Posted by alwaysinjured View Post
Thanks fg. Useful explanation.

Iain R - the LAST thing we would want is the UKA rep being alo the safety officer! The key is to get rules that work for the diversity of fell races, not compromised by conformance to UKA whose rules are aimed at a way different sport and are based on wrong assumptions of the ability to control or monitor that simply does not work on the fells. Sure they are a body whose opinions can be invited, but they have far less status than opinions from those operating similar sports to ours.
I agree.. but closer links up between the FRA and UKA are now bad thing and it should be a two way process so UKA can understand the unique needs of fell running.. that cannot be anything new as UKA is sucha diverse organisation. However I just can't see how its preferable that the two are not connected.

I also don't see why the FRA is england only.. yet under UKA.. the UK bit for me suggests it is UK wide... we then have the situation that the WA are effectively the equivalent in Wales yet with almost no fell running experience.. so then we have the WFRA.. and its more and more groups... and different rules.