Safety Matters

[alwaysinjured]

but what if, using AI's example, the waterproof top led to asphyxiation in mild conditions? However unlikely the event, the possibility still remains - in this case, it would be the kit requirement that led to the runner's death.

As I said, I was playing Devil's Advocate but something to consider.... I would prefer a 'recommended' rather than mandatory kit requirement.

And as I said, it is not whether the kit did have a contributory cause, it is whether that was a reasonably forseeable consequence of that instruction, that could lead to a negligence claim. So I doubt that any liability could ever attach, because hundreds of thousands wear such garments every week on the hills without the bizarre happening.

As regards reasonable forseeability:
The clause in our rules stating that field size has to be such that there is no forseable risk of accidents in crowded areas - clearly does create a liability ( solicitors have pointed at - but FRA not listening) since the risk of a group of any size moving over rocks is forseeable. So you cannot run a langdale or borrowdale with that clause in: both of which have a first trip up mile whilst runners are tightly packed, cannot see, and trampling is also possible. Those accidents in the first mile are forseeable hindsight and foresight.

Because of that inane piece of drafting the RO cannot even do the responsible thing of warning the runners of the clearly forseeable risk in the first mile, (the correct control measure) because in doing that he is owning up to a risk the rules say he should not have - owning up his course is not compliant and so is rulebreaking, putting a further target on his back, in event of problems!

[Lecky]

So, there is a pack of documentation doing the rounds of SHR and WFRA.

Why not publish it and put a link on here so the rest of us can view and comment?

[Fellhound]

So, there is a pack of documentation doing the rounds of SHR and WFRA.

Why not publish it and put a link on here so the rest of us can view and comment?

It will be made public in due course, when all the properly interested parties have had a chance to review and comment.

[TheHeathens]

And as I said, it is not whether the kit did have a contributory cause, it is whether that was a reasonably forseeable consequence of that instruction, that could lead to a negligence claim. So I doubt that any liability could ever attach, because hundreds of thousands wear such garments every week on the hills without the bizarre happening.

You're right but it doesn't stop expensive legal action from occurring; the argument being is that if the RO hadn't made the kit mandatory, the accident wouldn't have happened.

I agree that the chances of such an accident happening are extremely remote but if you are mandating anything, then you are also taking on a modicum of responsibility.

[Lecky]

It will be made public in due course, when all the properly interested parties have had a chance to review and comment.

I am an interested party, obviously.

[Stolly]

Haha the Heathens is trying to out pedant the pedants

It's like running with a bobble hat and swallowing the bobble. I sure hope the new safety rules cover that eventuality off

[Ilkley Swimmer]

It is clearly not the responsibility of the Langdale Horseshoe RO to tell runners to turn left at a particular point in the course. Navigating with a map and compass is all part of the sport we love. It is why so many fell runners also enjoy the challenges of orienteering and mountain marathons. Further, having map-reading ability and a responsibility for one's own safety (rather than being "told" which way to go) is surely important at all times? Otherwise where does it all end up? Red and white marker tape stretching 15 miles round the entire course? The thought fills me with horror...

[alwaysinjured]

You can also say what you like on a forum, and complain as much as you like about current structures.

But, nothing will change unless you either get elected on to the committee and work within the organisation to turn things around OR produce a set of regulations (documents) that are much better than what is already there AND sell these to the committee and the fellrunning public.

I offered to present the approach (jointly with andy till he was pushed off committee) for the purpose of "selling" it to committee for months. Given up.

Consistently refused, as were Andy W's various sensible suggestions - and in as far as it could have affected meaningful documents and events - the rules (now wrongly frozen), the statements to coroner - the meetings with ROs, now are passed/ too late to have intended effect.

The refusal even to even hear it is reprehensible : by people who made a bad mistake in accepting nem con a set of dreadful rules back last july (and accepted as such) so clearly need advice but wont take it.

Given the length of time that has passed. one might think that he has tried to write a decent set of documents and found it rather hard.

Not so. The basic document framework is easy. Pointed out several times.

The effort document is "guidelines for creation of race plans" - and to create that document in a professional way , needs exactly the same now , as I said it did when first commenting on problem rules in my first few posts over six months ago.

One of the biggest problems with the july rules was the lack of involvement of a broad church of RO in creation of it, and the lack of a group of RO critiquing before release of it, taking legal advise on behalf of RO only.

It always needed two teams of RO - about 10 in the first group to make sure that the prime variations are represented, mountain, parkland, moorland, long short, summer winter, with& without road crossings, navigation or not, rocky or not, fields of 100 and 500 or 1000 etc. Hard to do with less than 10 RO or races . It also needs a commitment from them to put the effort in, attend meetings and so on. That involves interaction. A lot of safety documentation is talking to the people that have to do the job. As in this case.

Could have got most of that by having an opportunity to ask questions in a couple of RO meetings. Harder now.

It then needs a second team who were not part of the creation (so see the documents through fresh eyes, so judge them on what they say, not what the first group intended to mean. The second interaction could be done only electronically - but does need a broad church of comment..

Any technical documentation drafter will tell you that tramlined thinking is a problem. A lot of the jargon and use of words may make sense to those who drafted it, but means something else or nothing to others. And it has to be readable by all. Take "critical marshalls" in our rules. Never defined. EXTREMELY bad. Bad communications, misunderstandings, ambiguity are the source of many accidents, so this must not be done in a buckshee way.

Only when passed by both teams does it become the "public" document circulated for general comment.


I estimate at least a hundred man hours involved in creation of it start to finish ( I have done the first couple) ,and a score of hours at least for each of the RO. by the time they have finished. I have created many SOPs before so can estimate that. This is not just writing an SOP, it is creating a document to explain how to get others to do that in place of training and accreditation, and because of that has to be far more bullet proof.

I would guess knowing the propensity of public bodies to waste money, the HSE similar "event organisers guidelines" probably took many 1000's hours to produce: so 100 is not that much. Except HSE guidelines are generally designed to be normally read by competent people. Ours cannot assume knowledge of safety except of fell racing - so ours has to be more bulletproof not less.

That said the plan that arises could be as short as 10 pages, depending on what is involved in the race.

But the guidelines have to work just as well for the three peaks, and mountain marathons as well as it does for a summer up/down.

It is not hard , or easy. Just a job for a properly qualified person to do.

Either they buy the idea on the basis of presentation, a which case it is supported by FRA and done to the point of trialling. Or not.

Just not going to put that kind of effort in in pure speculation - or without the commitment of a varied RO team. And it will take addressing the FRA core safety personnel weakness issue to be resolved, and a different attitude to qualified help. to even get me interested in helping now.

It would be easy to get that guidelines document 90% right quickly.
The problem is , if it is the mainstay of race safety, 90% is not good enough.

I have written a long email to the powers that be on one issue of concern to me, for example, that should be in those guidelines- but only ever raised in an oblique way before, and has not been considered elsewhere on these threads. I will wait for a response before deciding to write further on it here. Wonder if I even get an answer?

[Lecky]

It is clearly not the responsibility of the Langdale Horseshoe RO to tell runners to turn left at a particular point in the course. Navigating with a map and compass is all part of the sport we love. It is why so many fell runners also enjoy the challenges of orienteering and mountain marathons. Further, having map-reading ability and a responsibility for one's own safety (rather than being "told" which way to go) is surely important at all times? Otherwise where does it all end up? Red and white marker tape stretching 15 miles round the entire course? The thought fills me with horror...

Couldn't agree more.

Picking one place on a course to say "be careful navigating here" and then NOT saying the same in all the other places that going astray is possible must surely leave the RO open to liability.

And, anyway, how does this move the responsibility for self to the Runner and away from the RO? Something that AI has been on about for months?

[alwaysinjured]

It is clearly not the responsibility of the Langdale Horseshoe RO to tell runners to turn left at a particular point in the course. Navigating with a map and compass is all part of the sport we love. It is why so many fell runners also enjoy the challenges of orienteering and mountain marathons. Further, having map-reading ability and a responsibility for one's own safety (rather than being "told" which way to go) is surely important at all times? Otherwise where does it all end up? Red and white marker tape stretching 15 miles round the entire course? The thought fills me with horror...

I actually oppose most course marking - except in as far as it forms an agreement with a landowner on permissive routes on private land - because it can never be done well enough to be foolproof creating a mountain of work, and it does detract from the event in the way you say.

But it does not alter the fact, that known blackspots should be highlighted.
Places at which people either regularly get injured, or regularly go off route.
I actually oppose the giving of a bearing/ or landmark, marking of the point or marshalling it ( solutions to the problem). Only highlighting the problem.

Why? because the very pronouncement of a problem, and the fact that many succumb, heightens safety awareness for the need for caution , and that "follow the leader" provably does not always work, which is something an RO should do. Get less idiots being more cautious, doing more recceing, gaining more nav skills knowing the problem is real, not overstated. In short being better in formed of the risk they are taking. How is that ever a bad thing? How does it detract from the race?

Who else was at langdale that year the clag was well down, and Helen Diamantides as was came in about 4th?. It was streaming with water. Runners were coming in for hours after, from mosedale, cockley beck, three shires....Scores of them. One of our club mates ended in eskdale!!???? In addition - A vet I seem to remember, came in with broken arm from having tried to descend to the tarn in the wrong place further on. After that experience If that was my race I would have said something in following years particularly claggy ones along the lines of:

"Don't think you can follow the leader. Get your compasses out, you will need them. Runners go everywhere in clag on this race, for example from the end of the crinkles where they just seem to go everywhere instead of turning for Pike of Blisco - You have been warned".


At very least...as the RO you might get to go home earlier next time!