New safety rules

[Lecky]

I've watched this tortuous debate for a long time now and hoped against hope that the amended rules would help to genuinely increase the safety of the sport without compromising the absolute right of fell runners to make intelligent choices about their own safety. Sadly, this has not happened.
As an experienced fell runner and mountaineer (and rescuer), I will soon lose the right to make decisions about my own welfare: Even if it's a record heat wave, I can't chose to use pertex kit on A/ long B races, or take off my vest if I overheat, In winter I'll have to queue to unzip my top at busy, freezing checkpoints, instead of wearing my number on my shorts as I believe it is safer. These may not sound huge issues to some, but to me they are fundamental freedoms that are part of our wonderful sport. The statement near the start of the FRA safety rules draft - The philosophy of fell running is that it is the competitor, him or herself, who is primarily responsible for their own safety whilst competing. seems completely at odds with this arrogant decision to remove our ability to take responsibility for ourselves. Sadly, If I have my right to make choices as an informed adult removed in this way, I just can't see any way of continuing to compete in FRA races in future.

If you had tried to record numbers at the 3 Shires race this year, as I did, you would be aware that it is very difficult indeed to read numbers on shorts, they are invariably folded small and on the wrong leg when approaching. The effect of this is to make it hard to read the next persons number. That person is unlikely to want to slow down, so it is more likely to misread, or entirely miss that number. The following person then has their number obscured by their rucksack straps - that's another missed person. Just think how many problems of accounting for who has been through the checkpoint that all this causes.

I think that this shows that you are NOT an informed adult, so perhaps making it clear where you should have your number is a good thing.

[Alf]

Acrobat Reader says the file containing the new rules for 2014 is damaged and cannot be repaired, long story short- it doesn't open.

That's strange as it opens ok for me ?

[Witton Park]

If you had tried to record numbers at the 3 Shires race this year, as I did, you would be aware that it is very difficult indeed to read numbers on shorts, they are invariably folded small and on the wrong leg when approaching. The effect of this is to make it hard to read the next persons number. That person is unlikely to want to slow down, so it is more likely to misread, or entirely miss that number. The following person then has their number obscured by their rucksack straps - that's another missed person. Just think how many problems of accounting for who has been through the checkpoint that all this causes.

I think that this shows that you are NOT an informed adult, so perhaps making it clear where you should have your number is a good thing.

They probably need to use younger marshalls, a bit sharper though for that job

[Woodzy]

At Dunnerdale last weekend i had my number un folded and pinned on my chest the marshall read it wrong and i had to tell her what my correct number was! and it wasn't like i was in a group of runners at the cp - nothings fail safe!

If you had tried to record numbers at the 3 Shires race this year, as I did, you would be aware that it is very difficult indeed to read numbers on shorts, they are invariably folded small and on the wrong leg when approaching. The effect of this is to make it hard to read the next persons number. That person is unlikely to want to slow down, so it is more likely to misread, or entirely miss that number. The following person then has their number obscured by their rucksack straps - that's another missed person. Just think how many problems of accounting for who has been through the checkpoint that all this causes.

I think that this shows that you are NOT an informed adult, so perhaps making it clear where you should have your number is a good thing.

[alwaysinjured]

Don't let the words of the few drive you to cynicism. Most of us fully support the FRA and realise the great job you're doing.

Who is finding fault?

We expressed surprise at taking a document from something wholly disconnected to fell racing, designed for a different type of event.

It is all back to front as a process. Again.

We should be deciding which are our best organised races, held up as exemplary (take the waltz, by all accounts, and the fact FRA Has in the past sent new RO to Wynn to see how it is done) then we should document what they do, and produce document examples that way. Obvious is it not?
Instead of putting those ROS noses out of joint by making their procedures non compliant, and not even asking her as part of the initial review! Then taking random documents from elsewhere. Bizarre!

We should also go accross the spectrum to look at the realities of events such as Wittons, to make sure we do not give him problems - and some of the prototyp examples should come from his sort of race.

And I fail to agree on " great job " considering the amount of abuse I and others received in pointing out basic flaws and the inertia it took to get ridiculous terms out of such as courses and weather, and the lack of recognition of how a previous impossible rule 13 , and the assumptions behind it,almost led to a disastrous situation for an RO. Even now the documents betray an ignorance of modern safety practise.

I still believe that the rules and guidelines should be reviewed by a permanent subcommittee headed up by a safety professional such as fellhound, to honour our obligation to keep safety policy and assessments under review , in the light of incidents, precedents, experience and what we can learn from related sports, such reviews a normal part of safety management regulations, where good principles rather than personalities or authority are likely to dominate.

Part of the problem is that neither of those heading the process are either safety trained or RO, or experienced document drafters, and it shows - and another part of the problem is that the rules reviews are only ever being done as crisis management against a deadline, not considered carefully over a longer timescale of our choosing.

[Wheeze]

If you had tried to record numbers at the 3 Shires race this year, as I did, you would be aware that it is very difficult indeed to read numbers on shorts, they are invariably folded small and on the wrong leg when approaching. The effect of this is to make it hard to read the next persons number. That person is unlikely to want to slow down, so it is more likely to misread, or entirely miss that number. The following person then has their number obscured by their rucksack straps - that's another missed person. Just think how many problems of accounting for who has been through the checkpoint that all this causes.

I think that this shows that you are NOT an informed adult, so perhaps making it clear where you should have your number is a good thing.

That little exchange puts this debate in a nutshell. I wish people would try to restrain the temptation to get personal in a debate like this. Lecky, you might feel passionately about this but so does Peateater. What right do you have to suggest that he is not an informed adult? I KNOW how frustrating it might be to try to see numbers if they are stuck on the leg, but I think we should not lose sight of the wider issues that Peateater appeals to with regards to taking responsibility for ourselves.

I actually wonder if we should even bother with all this 'runner takes responsibilty for themselves' cr*p and just dump the ENTIRE responsibility for safety on the RO. I mean, thats the way its going isn't it? Can't you just see the thin end of the wedge sliding in to the heart of our sport???

[alwaysinjured]

At Dunnerdale last weekend i had my number un folded and pinned on my chest the marshall read it wrong and i had to tell her what my correct number was! and it wasn't like i was in a group of runners at the cp - nothings fail safe!

Try telling UKA lawyers that! All marshalling is fallible. All people are fallible. All communicationS are fallible. Facts of life. And in any event over prescription is pointless because in bad weather when number recording matters the most rain gear covers up the numbers anyway. It is up to the RO to decide on what methods and numbering suits the race and conditions the best.

[Alan]

I actually wonder if we should even bother with all this 'runner takes responsibilty for themselves' cr*p and just dump the ENTIRE responsibility for safety on the RO.

It's not crap, and you know it.

The fact that runners take responsibility for themselves is the main reason why our sport has such a good safety record. The recent fatality wasn't caused by anything the RO did, it was down to hypothermia, and the most important lessons to be learnt from it should be all to do with how we deal with cold wet days on the hill, and it is us runners who need to sit up and take notice.

That's not to say that the rules didn't need to be changed, they certainly did, and that is, and always has been, an ongoing process.

[Witton Park]

Yes but the the whole number thing is a bit crap.

the posts above have demonstrated it.

What Lecky has inadvertently done is outlined how difficult it is full stop, regardless of where the number is.
It's difficult because the number can be obscured because of so many different factors EVEN when it is pinned full square on the front of the vest.
It is also difficult because even when it is clearly visible on the front of the vest, it can still be misread.

Yes, at times it is difficult to read a number on shorts, but yes it is also difficult to read a number on the vest.

I want to make clear I have never worn a number on shorts, it's always on the torso, so I have no VESTED interest

What I do have in my mind are lots of these archive pictures that are in the Feellrunner, on Facebook etc which show some of the legends of the past in races, topless, with numbers attached to their shorts.
ie. It seems to have worked fine for decades.

[Wheeze]

The fact that runners take responsibility for themselves is the main reason why our sport has such a good safety record. The recent fatality wasn't caused by anything the RO did, it was down to hypothermia, and the most important lessons to be learnt from it should be all to do with how we deal with cold wet days on the hill, and it is us runners who need to sit up and take notice.

Exactly Alan. No amount of rule changing will bring Brian back nor decrease the chance of similar fate befalling any of us who chose to deliberately put ourselves in harms way by doing a fell race. By following your suggested logic of high personal responsibility contributing to safety you could argue that the rules should have been SIMPLIFIED not increased or made more comprehensive. I think what Always Injured is repeatedly pointing out is that the more you say, the worse it gets. Say less and keep responsibility where it should be....with the individual.


Of course, this is all very well if your organising committee is just a group of like minded individuals. Damn near impossible if they have transformed themselves into a limited company (as pointed out by our Welsh Chair). But thats another kettle of carp altogether!