|
May 2020
11:41am, 15 May 2020
26,710 posts
|
Wriggling Snake
you would not only have to pre-enter, but possibly geographically restrict, then have no supporters, have social distance at the start, during and finishing, have no members of the public about...etc, etc, as I said, let alone insurance or signing a form saying If I die of Covid it's my fault.
Races ain't happening, for a long time.
|
|
May 2020
11:44am, 15 May 2020
7,369 posts
|
jda
You sound like someone who's never entered a local club race. No-one turns up to watch a handful of middle-aged joggers run off into the distance and come back an hour later in dribs and drabs. Well, almost no-one.
|
|
May 2020
11:47am, 15 May 2020
585 posts
|
BexleyKev
WS - it will be very easy. We have a regular Sunday 5k/10k Time Trial with about 15 runners so once they raise the numbers that are allowed to meet we just need to ensure social distancing guidelines are adhered to and set runners off at intervals. Most running clubs do similar time trial or handicap events.
|
|
May 2020
11:51am, 15 May 2020
356 posts
|
Maccathecracker
I can see low key trail races taking place with a few amendments in place. I don’t think anyone can confidently say at this stage what will or will not happen. I’ve deferred to next year anyway.
|
|
May 2020
11:53am, 15 May 2020
16,427 posts
|
Bazoaxe
Middle aged injured runners show up.
|
|
May 2020
12:01pm, 15 May 2020
26,711 posts
|
Wriggling Snake
hmmm Macca, strictly speaking you shouldn't even be doing that. One other person from another household at anyone time, hmm? Ah well that's up to you. My clubs have discussed that sort of idea and decided they can't risk it.
As I said, no club, organisation, will sanction an official race of any great number for a long time, you'll see.
Plenty of low key races here, notable Hayfield, we're actually mid season for the Hayfield fell races, and there have been no, and they get as little as 100 runners, they know they can put a race on.
|
|
May 2020
12:11pm, 15 May 2020
357 posts
|
Maccathecracker
WS - I think you mean Kev ? I’ve not run with anyone since lockdown began.
|
|
May 2020
12:22pm, 15 May 2020
586 posts
|
BexleyKev
WS - Important part 'once they raise numbers that are allowed to meet' so, that would make it possible in our circumstances and adaptable for others. I would also suggest that you are assuming that races have to be 'official' or sanctioned. Our group has been meeting and racing on an informal basis with no formal club connection we just turn up, someone times and if someone is not available to time we self-time.
|
|
May 2020
12:30pm, 15 May 2020
1,652 posts
|
auburnette
I think the questions around risk, liability of event organisers etc are ethical questions as much as they are legal questions. There is a certain level of risk in life from all types of infectious disease and unless there is clear negligence and exposure of someone to an unacceptable level of risk, the law would probably be reluctant to find blame. E.g. your estate would almost certainly not be able to successfully sue your employer if you got a nasty variant of flu from commuting on busy trains and sadly died (as a very small number of healthy people do, each year). Your estate potentially would be able to sue your employer if you were an Ebola nurse and your employer failed to provide adequate protection, including both in equipment and facilities and in training to be able to use it safely.
For most healthy people, covid is more the flu on the train scenario than an Ebola without PPE scenario. Although covid is nastier than ordinary seasonal flu the foreseeable risk is overall small.
However, for people in vulnerable populations exposure to covid may be a very high risk scenario. The problem then comes because it is very difficult to maintain perfect protection for vulnerable populations in a world where non-vulnerable populations do not change their behaviour. But these are ethical questions about what we owe to each other as a society, and what we do when one set of rights and freedoms must be considered against another.
To some extent this has always been an issue, e.g. immunocompromised individuals face a much greater degree of risk in relation to regular seasonal viruses than the healthy do. I guess the issue is that the group who face the foreseeable risk is very much bigger now than it has been in the past.
I think the onus will be on the government to set out what size of gathering it finds acceptable and what are the mitigations which must be put in place in order to reduce (but not eliminate) covid related risk. I expect as part of that event organisers will be able to start reinstating events, small at first, the very big ones like VLM and Manchester coming last. There are interesting questions about whether race organisers have any duty of care to spectators etc as well as the general public, or just the people who pay to enter. However I think we would be getting the balance wrong if we expect all risk to be eliminated.
|
|
May 2020
12:35pm, 15 May 2020
11,061 posts
|
larkim
Irrespective of what the govt suggests, individuals will agree / disagree, as we're seeing already with education. Fundamentally, the govt has lost a chunk of trust from the general population that they are giving out valid advice.
|
Manchester Marathon 2021
Oct 2021
