New safety rules

[alwaysinjured]

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.

Separating the content from delivery: On delivery it has been a historic problem with this thread,that those expressing dissenting views are insulted. It really does not help.

On the content:
Reality is as many have said, the races in which hypothermia is most likely are those in which many or all of the field are wearing body cover. So in the situations where monitoring is of most importance, the over prescriptive rulings on numbers are so many wasted words.

There are alternatives, from tags both electronic and physical, wrist bands and so on, and it is up to the RO to decide what combination of numbering scheme, and checkpoint processes (automated or manual) best suits his race. The rules should specify what needs considering, and what needs achieving, not how it is done, with guidance documents mentioning alternatives for different levels of race risk. The RO needs to put check point instructions in his "runner information" document, and describe checkpoint processes and start/finish processes in his "marshalls information" - so that everyone knows what their job is

And that is how safety documentation is written, with the RO responsibility to assess what best manages safety for his race, and documents it. Simples. Say what you do, then do what you say: which is the best defence against failure of duty.

An indelible marker writing on a leg, is plenty good enough in some races, such as the "fast and feral up and downs" with a few score runners on a summers evening. An unfolded number is clearly useless in others, when hidden below a goretex. Electronic tags work fine in some situations. SHRA have used wristbands before now.

[luxinterior]

There is a process that has to be gone through in order that you can continue to race. It's called Race Organisation.
Perhaps there should be a separate ROs forum so we don't bore stupid those that just want to run?
Or perhaps those that find the thread tiresome can chose to look at the other threads and leave this one to those that are interested?

Its not that I am bored with it. A debate has been had the rules have been rewritten by some persons giving up their free time and yet people still keep picking holes in it.

Lets acknowledge all the hard work that has taken place and leave it be until the rules are up for consultation again.

[Sam Harrison]

Isn't it time this thread stopped and we get on with it. People have spent a lot of their spare time doing all this so we can go racing. So let's say thanks a lot and get on with it instead of once again picking everything to pieces.

The one thing I really don't get is people saying we should just stop the thread. If it is that boring to you, then don't read it. I think the debate and discussion is useful, informative and, dare I say, interesting. If only a little bit long-winded...

But at the end of the day, what's the use of a forum where we can't discuss such issues!?

Lets acknowledge all the hard work that has taken place and leave it be until the rules are up for consultation again.

Plenty of acknowledgements have been said in the previous pages. We're all very grateful for the time that the Committee has given up (I've been a member of a number of Committees and completely understand how un-rewarding it can be), but let's not forgot the time that ROs give up organising their races and hence let's not just dismiss points raised as "picking holes".

once again picking everything to pieces

It was partially this "picking everything to pieces" to have resulted in the clearer, more workable Safety Rules that have just been published. So don't say it like it was pointless the first time around.

[Lefty]

The idea of wearing numbers, usually folded on shorts is just plain selfish. As someone who has stood at the end of a finish funnel or on a remote mountaintop attempting to accurately record numbers literally hundreds of times I can safely assure you that numbers on shorts or folded numbers anywhere else is difficult. Why would someone deliberately make it difficult for the RO who is organising a race on their behalf, not for any other reason but on behalf of the people who are running his or her race ! I presume that most people are racing for a time and a position so why make it difficult for the people attempting to accurately record that by placing unnecessary obstacles in their way, Unobscured, unfolded waterproof numbers worn on the chest is what is called for, not difficult is so why the problem ?
Some people should try wearing the Race organisers hat for a day and get a sense of the worry and stress and the amount of work which can be involved, not just on the day or night of the race but pre planning, negotiating with farmers and landowners, flagging, de flagging etc etc and trying to think of everything to get it right on the day so that its enjoyable and safe for everyone who enters and runs. It's not easy,in my opinion the new rules and guidelines are not to going to make it more difficult. I come from an era in our sport where there were no rules only those imposed by individual race organisers. We don't live in those times anymore unfortunately, the Fra has listened to everyone and made changes, they are organising regional events to talk to RO and are looking at ideas and suggestions for best practice.....let's get on with.

[Paul Brannigan]

I would recommend the FRA draw up a questionnaire that enables feedback on each of the safety changes/rules and make it available to all ROs.

During 2014 the ROs would then respond with how they addressed each aspect (including 'it could not be addressed')

This feedback could be combined, analysed and best practice fed back to ROs and a revision of the rules based on experiences in 2014 if necessary.

As well as making practical sense it will also be seen as a positive by the powers that be.

[alwaysinjured]

I would recommend the FRA draw up a questionnaire that enables feedback on each of the safety changes/rules and make it available to all ROs.

During 2014 the ROs would then respond with how they addressed each aspect (including 'it could not be addressed')

This feedback could be combined, analysed and best practice fed back to ROs and a revision of the rules based on experiences in 2014 if necessary.

As well as making practical sense it will also be seen as a positive by the powers that be.

Makes sense.

Safety process has to be kept under review, it is as much of a journey as a destination.
You cannot /should not draw a line under it.

I also think we should choose up to say ten? of what are regarded as the "best organized races" of their class, and document their procedures as templates, to fill the void that Nick is trying to fill, but to do it with documents created for races known to be managed well.

Which opens an interesting topic.

Which stand out as well managed/best managed races - no disrespect at all to the rest - but some must stand out in peoples minds as exemplary for the class. In the case of big races , that is big organisation, but it is also important to keep it simple/straightforward where all that is needed is straightforward.

In the class of lakes medium-long, I vote for the Wynny and the Waltz, having both run it, and marshalled a few times over the years, and was probably the first/one of the first to go with online entry. Which others races spring to peoples minds - In all of the classes from short up /down in moorland/parkland to lakes A superlong? What stands out and why?

[Witton Park]

Its not that I am bored with it. A debate has been had the rules have been rewritten by some persons giving up their free time and yet people still keep picking holes in it.

Lets acknowledge all the hard work that has taken place and leave it be until the rules are up for consultation again.

Which is more or less my position. I've just asked about what procedure if any is in place for the fuller review as in the communications I've had directly (and backed up by forum info) this meeting was likely to give us a temporary but satisfactory position for the 2014 races with a more substantial review to follow.

[alwaysinjured]

Isn't it time this thread stopped and we get on with it. People have spent a lot of their spare time doing all this so we can go racing. So let's say thanks a lot and get on with it instead of once again picking everything to pieces.

Complete non sequitur. It does not matter how much time was spent, or whether it was free:

There are only two tests that matter:

If the rules leave an RO any more exposed to civil or criminal liability than they absolutely have to be, then the rules are not good enough, and have to be changed.
The first changes undoubtedly made that worse, not better.

Subject to the above - If rule amendments do not make fell racing any safer, they are a waste of the time spent amending them, and the obvious test for that is "would they have made any meaningful difference to the previous fatalities?", or would they have prevented other known "near misses" As yet, I fail to see how despite 78 "musts": I have put two ideas forward for those, neither accepted as far as I see?

For sure it has wasted a lot more time of mine/others to get over initial intransigence, and get a few glaring errors removed, but thankfully there has now been a review. Since we were not made officially party to the latest changes until released now, now is the first time allowed to read/ comment. So therefore the discussion must happen now?

And finally - a misunderstanding - you can never decide as you imply that safety is done and dusted. There has to be a continuous process of review: it is part of what you have to do, to prove you are taking safety seriously. And it is understood a review is agreed for next year, as it should be.

For those that have no interest in it, they do not have to read or comment.
Leave the thread to those who are?

[luath]

Unobscured, unfolded waterproof numbers worn on the chest is what is called for, not difficult is so why the problem ?

There's already been several posts on here explaining what the problem is, so I won't repeat them.

Perhaps it's time that we acknowleged that a number worn on the chest isn't always the best solution for identifying runners?

To pick up on one of AI's points, the rules should just state that RO need to consider how to identify runners and it's then up to RO to decide what system they will put in place to do that.

[wynn]

Isn't it time this thread stopped and we get on with it. People have spent a lot of their spare time doing all this so we can go racing. So let's say thanks a lot and get on with it instead of once again picking everything to pieces.

Are you a RO - do you actually race. then this is an important debate..... as said by a committee member most races are non-compliant .... that's a big thing. RO's will be fed to the lions by way of the rules and their compliance to them... NO RO's = NO Races. and the committee has a very important contribution to make in that it needs to make the rules such that it is possible to comply with them and then check that RO's do. if a RO has an incident and the RO is found non compliant and negligent then the committees limited liability is not worth the paper it's printed on. It is Important to get it right..