As an RO and fell runner of some years I'm totally perplexed by this thread...can someone offer me a digest or summary....I've become compliant with the new FRA safety rules having submitted my 2 permits apps, going gently into that good night...
As an RO and fell runner of some years I'm totally perplexed by this thread...can someone offer me a digest or summary....I've become compliant with the new FRA safety rules having submitted my 2 permits apps, going gently into that good night...
Wasn't I explicit? My statement was a generalisation. The coroner cannot demand the impossible and if he/she does we should ignore them. Good judgement requires it and if we cowardly take the position of 'the Emperor's new clothes,' which is what you are suggesting, then nothing we do can ever be right.Originally Posted by alwaysinjured
Last edited by CL; 06-11-2013 at 09:10 PM. Reason: choice of words
You can ignore them all you like. Feel free.The coroner cannot demand the impossible and if he/she does we should ignore them.
Then, when you get the injunction from a relative of a dead race entrant, feel free to ignore that, too.
I'm surprised by your tone here. The question is not how many races are currently registered? It's what will happen to the race organiser next time there is a tragedy?
1. Competitors will have had to get their act together.
2. But if there is a tragedy the RO will be in a far better position than ever before because of the 2014 Safety Requirements.
3. The FRA/UKA will support the RO to the nth degree as it did with Mike and Hazel Robinson.
4. The RO will have the might of one of the biggest Insurance Companies in Europe paying the legal bills.
Summary: There has never been a better time in the history of fell running to be a RO than in 2014.
Last edited by Mondo Cane; 06-11-2013 at 11:23 PM.
"So, an inability to spell.. (and punctuate)... is compounded by a proclivity to break promises overlaid by a rampant egotism and an unquenchable desire to opine your views to all who venture near this thread?
What..."
On point 1 as the rules stand, competitors MUST disobey them , just to remain safe, which is as bizarre as it is ridiculous. The drafter of the document seemed to feel a need to mandate, where saying nothing was far better if you want the runner to remain responsible for their own safety, stop telling them what they MUST do instead. Not being allowed to cover ears with hats, or retire to a place of safety, rather than direct to HQ is dangerous, and incompetent instruction. Period. The document needs redrafting by someone with the eXperience to do it.
On point 2 , you have absolutely no evidence to support that, indeed common sense belies it , let alone anything else
On point 3 , the help that was really needed was to tell UKA where to get off, and to contest the veracity of their interpretation, or their A class mountain RO/marshall experience from which they felt competent and compelled to comment. But that was left to SHRA instead, and thank goodness at least someone did. What the RO also needed was a defensible set of rules from FRA, so the old impossible rule 13 could not be used against them, instead our first draft as approved made it worse for whoever is unlucky enough to be next.. A lot worse.
On point 4 , the rules say at least twice that insurance depends on compliance with rules, so rules that make compliance impossile or too difficult, can also invalidate insurance and proves what you say is errant nonsense, We can only hope that the worst of the nonsense is gone Or modified by tomorrow night. Like the weather clause for example.
Every MUST (which have no place in safety documents for the purpose this document uses the word, yet well over 50 appeared out of nowhere ) leaves the RO more exposed. It still does not read like any safety document, except those long since binned pre 1970 because prescriptive mandates do not work as a basis for safety, which is why they were replaced by HaSWA. Excessive mandating and prescription is a temptation for every novice at safety drafting. It is also not the way it is done.
You either have not been paying attention, or you are deliberately misleading. Which is it?
The best we can hope for now is a workable fudge, with some of the worst rough edges removed, to be replaced in 2014.
Last edited by alwaysinjured; 07-11-2013 at 09:08 AM.
Sounds like you need to get your entry in (before midnight) for the RO meeting tomorrow. ER NS LK
Last edited by OB1; 07-11-2013 at 12:21 AM.
I've registered my three races as per the FRA request to do so and await developments on the rules. My club has a committee meeting tomorrow to consider how we can help our race organisers operate within the proposed safety framework. I will wait and see what comes out of both processes before I make a final decision on whether the events will happen or not.
The fact that races have been registered shouldn't be used to suggest everything is all right or otherwise. It seems more likely to me that the majority of race organisers are prepared to bear with the FRA while they try to sort a difficult problem out.
With regard to this thread at least it has brought a couple of God points to the forefront of my mind which I hadn't really considered before so I think the debate's a positive thing as long as folks don't start taking anything personally.
Jim
Sadly the number of races that have registered is being seen by some as " end of crisis", rather than " wait and see". I suspect there are many in your position, of reevaluating on the basis of what transpires, and my view righly so.
Posting Permissions
