New safety rules

[IainR]

The FRA disciplinary sub committee have decided on a 6 month ban, expiring on 2 May 2014, on Richard Wells, unattached, for failing to report to the finish at the 3 Shires race having retired earlier in the race. Race organisers are asked to note this decision.

‘Race retirement - runners – please read.
You are all keyed up at the start of a race and the organiser starts wittering on about retirements and the need to report in at the end if you drop out. Later you are injured or timed out, you’re possibly cold and probably for the first time. The checkpoint marshal knows you are out of the race and you make your way back to the finish.

You forget to tell the organiser you have retired as you want to get changed and get warm.

The organiser is rushing round getting increasingly worried that the number of runners back doesn't add up and knowing that his/her responsibility is to account for all runners at the finish.

Where are you? Sat in your car having a coffee or the pub with your club mates.

Recently the FRA has investigated a similar situation after the 3 Shires race where, unusually 38, runners retired or were timed out in bad weather with 4 runners failing to report to the race organiser.

Selwyn Wright and his team had enough to do without trying to find the whereabouts of the missing runners.

In this case 3 of the runners were very contrite; holding their hands up. They messed up. The race organiser and the FRA committee members investigating the issue have decided not to take any further action in relation to them; this time.

However Selwyn and the committee members involved do want all runners to know that the requirement to report to the race organiser if you drop out is mandatory; no if’s and but’s.

Missing runners can lead to mountain rescue being called out; marshal’s unable to stand down and frantic race organisers.

So please, if you drop out of a race, let the organiser know; if your club mate drops out make sure that they report in at the finish. You know it makes sense. You could be injured on the fells whilst Mountain rescue is out looking for a runner who is driving down the M6.


Nick Harris, Secretary

Will the 'new rules ' help to focus runners minds or do some of them even know there are certain rules which must be obeyed. I await your reply Al.

It is fair enough, my worry is when it can be confusing if you've told the right person... I like it at the UTMB when they cut your tag off.. then you know you are out and officially counted.

I did a 50k a few months back and dropped out, returned my chip, but I couldn't tell if I'd told the right person... but at least they had my chip.. the problem was it was a dutch race so not many spoke english.... In the end I found the organisers son who spoke english.. and then emailed the race when I got back and I was clearly logged as a DNF.

At a race finish there can be many people officially involved and busy so its hard to know who to inform.

[withaY]

at a recent long distance swimming event in the open sea bad weather set in and over 100 abandoned without letting the oraganisers know.. all were found eventually at home in the car park down the pub.. all the more reason for all participants to be 'chipped' and face stiff financial penalties for not declaring a DNF

[Dynamo Dan]

Before or after the rules become fait accomplis? I suspect after - when nothing they say will make any difference to what is published!

I really don't understand what you have against the people who volunteer to run the FRA on your behalf (assuming you're a member).

You speak of a "fait accomplis" but you'd struggle to find another organisation as open and responsive to its membership.

Some race organisers have issues with the new rules and the FRA are taking steps to consult with them - what's the problem?

[wynn]

I really don't understand what you have against the people who volunteer to run the FRA on your behalf (assuming you're a member).

You speak of a "fait accomplis" but you'd struggle to find another organisation as open and responsive to its membership.

Some race organisers have issues with the new rules and the FRA are taking steps to consult with them - what's the problem?

I'm not sure open and responsive is how I see them.....with all the behind the scene comments.

As far as I know Always injured has been a member of the FRA for 20 years possibly more.

[Fudge the Elf]

Having read all the comments on this important topic I fail to understand the mentality of those who would criticise alwaysinjured in such an apparently uninformed and sometimes insulting manner. He is clearly trying to put forward a constructive and knowledge based argument in favour of improving the guidance document for race organisers. For this we should all be grateful. Nobody is forced to read this thread although I sincerely hope the people with responsibility for reviewing the safety rules for race organisers will take heed of the valuable advice that has been put forward.

[alwaysinjured]

Will the 'new rules ' help to focus runners minds or do some of them even know there are certain rules which must be obeyed. I await your reply Al.

Me?
There always was a duty on a retiring runner to report to the RO, pre current rules, and failure to do that without good reason is clearly "failing to comply with a race organisers safety policy" for which FRA should have and should use sanctions in appropriate cases. I entirely support that sanction, and the discretion which allows case by case view. I am glad race winners have been sanctioned for failure to carry kit, and if they get upset with an RO they should get an even longer ban.

Does not alter one iota the first duty of a retiree is to get to a place of safety or assistance, only then to call or report to race HQ -

Why is it a new vs old rules issue?

I do think that as part of the race submission, all the runner instructions should be compiled together, including for example checkpoint, start , finish, equipment and prominently displayed at race HQ - the rules and registration form demanding runners read it.

[In an employer situation failure to comply with a safety policy can constitute gross industrial misconduct warranting summary dismissal, and tribunals do support that, although for me as an employer of hundreds over the years, I have never had to progress it beyond a written warning]

[Lefty]

I'm not sure open and responsive is how I see them.....with all the behind the scene comments.

Wynn. Surely you will know most or some of the committee personally as I do. Have you yourself been in contact with any of them to discuss your concerns, people like Jon Broxap, Scoffer and Graham etc etc have fell running running through their veins and are all approachable people and I'm sure willing to listen ( that's my experience anyway) their contact details phone numbers and email contact addresses are all available on the Fra website, Jon Broxap organises the Ian Hodgson and Scoffer the Borrowdale race as you know and they are races similar to the AW, why not call them up and speak to them I'm sure they would be receptive and be able to offer advice. It's what I would be doing in your situation.

[noel]

Having read all the comments on this important topic I fail to understand the mentality of those who would criticise alwaysinjured in such an apparently uninformed and sometimes insulting manner.

I agree. I think it could be related to AI's writing style. I don't think he made many friends on a few other threads. Sorry AI.

[wynn]

Tried explaining why I pulled the race to the chairman - thought she had the right to know - got asked why i'd phoned, got ranted at ( though in honesty I was pretty p**sed off so ......) left the conversation thinking WTF why bother.... the concern wasn't for RO's only how many entries they had for the calendar.... pity I was on the hands free with a car full of people... otherwise I might have tried harder

[alwaysinjured]

I agree. I think it could be related to AI's writing style. I don't think he made many friends on a few other threads. Sorry AI.

If you mean I defended mo farah , paula and froome very robustly against repeated ill considered accusations of doping, and I dislike people who are willing to make such accusations without evidence, mea culpa! I would do it again...