[Closed] What do we think about #Netty being asked to withdraw from the Spen 20?

He didn't

OK he didnt. He apparently asked her to do 1 lap as oppose to 2 from waht I have read.
Was he right to discourage her?

Hi didn't. He told her that if she didn't finish the first lap in decent time she wouldn't be doing a second. She chose not to complete her first lap. Neither side comes out of it well.

If you can be bothered, the debate is thoroughly covered on a thread on UK Climbing.

He told her that if she didn't finish the first lap in decent time she wouldn't be doing a second

OK I will try to be more specific (I am versed in it BTW) Should he have done this?

To clarify

I told her that while she could continue, if at the 10 mile marker she was still a long way behind the other runners and had taken over two hours to get to that point I would be asking her to withdraw from the race.

I am versed on it BTW

I think the organiser cocked up by not listing cut off times but she overreacted to reasonable guidance. No one wins the argument.

I can see it from both sides. If you don't state there's a cut off time, you can hardly then start arbitrarily stopping runners. One the other hand, if her first mile was 12mins what would her last mile taken her?

Having marshalled events where people are walking what's clearly supposed to be a running race it's frustrating when the weathers not great...Tough shit, that's what you're there for (unless there's a well signposted cut off time)

One thing's guaranteed: the next time the club organises a race the cut-off times will be [b]very[/b] clearly posted 🙂

And the race should be over subscribed which is good for a "grass roots" event such as this.
Leaving aside her treatment later by some of the Spenborough AC "team" which was pretty bad I do have a general concern about peoples expectation of events such as this that have been on the calendar for decades and are largely put on by people who simply want to put something back. They often work tirelessly with little reward or even thanks.
Races such as this are becoming rarer (largely due to dwindling numbers) and people have different expectations about what constitutes a "race" competitive endeavor, sacrifice and the willingness to prepare appear to be unattractive and there are other events taking their place which encourage "inclusion", medals, goody bags etc as oppose to competition.

So to clarify Oldgit my thoughts are that she should not have been subject to some of the treatment she received from the Spen 20 organisers but I do think the marshal had the right to request that she did not complete the event (for the reasons he gave) She was miffed by this and her attempts (and others) via Twitter to vilify and damage the race was disappointing.

[i]Races such as this are becoming rarer [/i]

Because they're such a ball ache to put on that's why, I used to organise a mixed off road and on road 10k for my club. the levels of petty bureaucracy from the LA/UKA and other interested bodies was astonishing.

I think it's a difficult one to have a view on, as I understand the race organisers are claiming that there was a separate start an hour earlier for people who thought they won't be fast, and that the runner in question knew this. If so, then i've no great sadness about someone being pulled out for being a selfish arse. Of course it might be possible that the organisers are just making this up to cover themselves. I don't know either way so can't comment.
But I've no problems with race cut-offs per se, providing that everyone who enters knows about them.

That said I did a lovely low key 16 mile trail race last weekend -
http://ashridgeboundaryrun.co.uk/
The winner was doing something like 6 min mile pace, and the last was around 13 min mile. Pulling people off the course was never a consideration of the marshalls

I think it's a failure of PR, rather than policy.

Races such as this are becoming rarer

Because they're such a ball ache to put on that's why, I used to organise a mixed off road and on road 10k for my club. the levels of petty bureaucracy from the LA/UKA and other interested bodies was astonishing.

I agree, only once they have all died off will we be left with the mass participation events that the majority feel comfortable in. My club organise an annual 5 miler in Birkenhead park. I have ran it man and boy however in spite of it being cheap and well organised and including a range of age group events numbers are dwindling.

Of course it might be possible that the organisers are just making this up to cover themselves. I don't know either way so can't comment.

Apparently their was an informal start time for slower runners but the organisers didnt encourage it however I have seen a facebook screen scrape of a conversation between Netty and the organisers where this was suggested to her so she was aware of this.

My involvement in event organisation has been in different sports where events have very much been volunteer driven and club organised. And everyone was in a club which organised something. There seems to be a new breed of competitor who hasn't come through that system and seems to think paying any form of entry fee entitles them to some form of gold plated experience. Clarity of what you get and what you don't at point of entry seems to be the only way to deal with it.

IMO it's no big deal that the organisers didn't state a cut off, they run the race so it's up to them, quite within their rights to tell someone they are too slow, so they can't do more than one lap. Some of the comments out there seem to think this was fun run, or commercial 10k, which it wasn't. If she was serious she'd have finished the lap, and then entered again next year having done more training.

Birkenhead 5 is a good race and it's a shame it's part of a dwindling band of events (still dealing with the aftermath of the cancelled 4 Villages here). I was just looking at the Great Manchester run - 38 quid for 10k! That's the alternative.

Clarity of what you get and what you don't at point of entry seems to be the only way to deal with it.

Unfortunately so. The FRA has always been wary of this.

I used to get around this issue, by breifing the marshalls by saying "If you've got a reason to stop a runner then go ahead and stop them, that could be because they are taking too long,or they're injuring themselves by carrying on, or they're present a danger to the public or other competitors, if the runner has a problem with that direct them to me" (as race director).

I would then brief the runners by saying "follow all instructions given to you by marshalls"

stops all of this.

OK, my take on this (based on what I've read):

she took far more than 12 minutes for the first mile - nearer 15 - and was by that point way behind the next person (I've seen a comment from another runner doing ~12 minute miles saying that the organisers and marshals were great).
there was the option of an early start for slower runners - unofficial and not publicised, but she clearly knew about it and decided not to bother.
the organiser only suggested she'd be asked to withdraw, not that she'd be dragged off the course, if she really wanted there would have been nothing to stop her carrying on.
if she'd done the full 20 miles she'd have almost certainly been over an hour behind the next slowest finisher.

having been told about being asked to stop at 10 miles she then does a huff and decides not to even bother doing that - one of her comments was that she could do 10 miles on her own without entering an event - well why couldn't she do 20 on her own then?
she's gone on a social media offensive, forgetting about her posts showing she was aware of the early start time option, and her diet and liquid intake the night before.

there was a complete idiot from the organising club posting offensive stuff about her - which was IMHO almost the only thing wrong from the organiser's side.

blogs and posts have defended her using all sorts of strawmen about this being the sort of thing which discourages slower runners - there are plenty of opportunities for slower runners, including using the early start in this event. I don't see any reason why all events have to be inclusive anyway.

organiser should probably have a published cutoff time to avoid this, but commented that they had done in the past and it had caused issues - presumably they will have one again next event.

I agree with all of that Aracer

I agree with all of that Aracer

+1

Most of the trail races I do have cutoff times, presumably for safety, and I find it hard to imagine what kind of "issues" this could cause - assuming they're published beforehand, of course! Any idea why they didn't have them this year?

She needs to get fitter it was a run after all not a sponsored walk. The oor marshals would have been out for ages .It was bad enough being sweep runner at Parkrun where the slowest person took 53 minutes ,thats not even a decent walking pace

It was bad enough being sweep runner at Parkrun where the slowest person took 53 minutes ,thats not even a decent walking pace

Serious bragging rights in the office on Monday, though: "Set a new PB this weekend at the Parkrun" "How did you do?" "53min". "That's a 10K, right?" "er..."

Having Googled her and read the Daily Mail article, and thus now being a top expert on the events I concur with aracer.

She'll dress differently next time

[img] [/img]

Having thoroughly googled it, I am strongly in support of freeing Deirdre Rashid.

As a (fell) race organiser myself, neither part has come out of this well in my opinion.

The club should have had clear cut off times and anyone continuing to run past this will do so at their own risk. In fell running that would get you a ban.

So no they should not have dissuaded her from continuing unless they had these clear guidelines.

Synopsis: a slight lack of organisation/information up front came into contact with an arsehole, and that arsehole then inspired other arseholes, and now it's just arseholes all over the place.

You're confusing this with the anal bleaching thread.

I do find it funny when the likes of the Guardian come out and say this discourages people doing events. How many events do they think would exist if it wasn't for the hard work of clubs in all sports up and down the country every weekend? The marshals and organisers are putting in a sh*t load of effort often for no profit, and yet apparently they are discouraging people 🙄

Good job Netty doesn't race road bikes, she'd hate it. If you can't keep up then go home.