Safety Matters

[alwaysinjured]

The rules are generalisations. In most cat A races you'd expect the conditions to be more variable than cat Bs even though there may be exceptions as you pointed out. And if the Cat B race is ran under bad conditions then the rules take account of that.

The reason we don't allow 14, 15 or 16 years olds to drive cars on roads is because the majority haven't got the maturity to do it safely. That doesn't mean there aren't a few exceptions who could manage it but unfortunately we have to have a clean sweep based on what is to be expected.

The problem I have with AI's position is his insistence on the competitor taking responsibility whilst writing up rules that remove it. Yesterday a Man was DQ from the AW because he decided, based on the conditions that carrying water was of more value to him than taking a pair of bottoms. He was doing the very thing AI keeps ranting on about I.e. taking responsibility for himself. And of course AI would say he was DQ because carrying kit is a requirement of the rules and isn't there for safety. Well why make a rule to carry something just for the sake of it? Doesn't sound right and of course it isn't. Action without reason in an attempt to disguise one's motives which are at all costs to protect ROs.

As I stated - Trying to tread a fine line between appropriate entry instructions, and not actually contradicting the rules of the insuring body (as inherited from FRA) and under amendment. I have to deal with the world as it is. Not as it should be.

A prime reason the waltz withdrew from FRA control was not only incompetent rule drafting , including statements of voiding of insurance, it was the disgraceful way Wynn was treated by FRA leaders subsequently for raising valid objections. No longer worthy of anyone's trust. Take Watson saying she was "deluded" and Breeze calling her "recalictrant" for not wanting to sign idiotic undertakings on paper. The first thing we need as criteria for being an RO is responsible people. And signing up for impossible undertakings (as they most certainly were at the time), is not responsible behaviour. It was loss of trust in the people that run FRA.

There is not much to choose between the rule books as they stand until SHR amend them, but there is a big chasm in attitude. SHR think they are there to serve the fell running community. FRA (or at least the leaders) think they are there to laud it over everyone. The word "permit" says it all...

However the prime rule and essential for every competitor was indeed broken - that is - deliberately breaking RO instructions.

In my proposed documentation, there are in essence only two rules.
(i) That RO write an event plan according to guidelines (which guidelines state that the plan should contain pullout documents for entry instructions and race day instructions) And that they follow that plan on raceday , and review it afterwards.
(ii) That the competitor obeys all instructions from the RO or his officials. (which by definition includes entry instructions and race day instructions)

So this guy does not belong in any fell race, anywhere ,ever. He is a liability.
He broke the only rule of the sport in my book. Deliberately disobeying the RO, his instructions or his officials.

If the RO wants to specify minimum kit, I have nothing against it: it is probably even sensible to cope with idiots who lie on the entry forms about having experience they do not have, or start races in conditions of which they do not have enough experience, and so protecting them from themselves. In this instance SHR rules demand the carrying of it, so it was a not a decision of wynn's.

That is.. Provided the competitor is told specifically in race day instructions to take a proactive decision - that is to assess for him or herself whatever else in addition to the minimum he needs to stay safe on the basis of experience (which is mandated) and prevailing and expected conditions in expectation of no support and a long wait for rescue. It is that act of assessment that keeps the runner responsible (and safer)

On your last point CL - you betcha - A PRIME reason for all the documentation and a lot of the wording used is to keep the RO out of problems. Do you have a problem with that?