New UKA road running rules - now with added headphone bans!!
28 watchers
May 2018
6:09am, 15 May 2018
4,757 posts
|
larkim
The problem with the headphone debate it seems to me is that it is a combination of entrenched personal opinions and classic "first world problems". I started this thread a while back really to discuss and highlight the rules, not have the debate about whether it is good or not. The bottom line is UKA rules allow headphones in races on closed roads, they don't on open roads. Everything else is moot. |
May 2018
8:32am, 15 May 2018
109 posts
|
DavidAP
Aftershokz are allowed though? Aren't they? Bone conduction approved by UKA and Triathlon Association?
|
|
May 2018
8:34am, 15 May 2018
653 posts
|
AndrewS
I am not familiar with Aftershokz. Do they actually block out ambient sound in the same way that ear/headphones do? If so, then I think that they should be classified as the same. |
May 2018
10:02am, 15 May 2018
6,223 posts
|
The_Saint
It isn't entrenched personal opinion, every week at parkrun I watch people with both ears covered whilst the race director does his briefing, he specifically asks that one ear be free to hear marshals instructions and to be aware of others, these people do not even hear him, let alone comply. This is simply objective fact.
|
|
May 2018
11:28am, 15 May 2018
4,759 posts
|
larkim
Sorry, I didn't mean that TS - the "entrenched personal opinions" are held by *a lot* of people who simply don't think anyone should ever run with music in their ears, or that anyone might actually (believe they) need music to run well in a race. Actually the safety concerns come into the "first world problems" (IMHO). Whilst I'm sure a few trips and slips and other issues no doubt have been caused by headphone wearing, my own view is that these incidents are relatively benign and cause little harm. Yes, if there has been first hand experience I'm sure people are more concerned by it, but I've now run well over 100 races (including parkrun) and headphone wearing might have caused mild inconvenience once, but no real jeopardy. Dogs, on the other hand, both on and off leads, children (or other slower runners) starting in the "wrong place", fancy dress costumes, etc cause many more issues (in my experience). (I'm a very infrequent headphone wearer - about once every 20-30 runs, and I've never worn them in races, so I'm no advocate for it - just suggesting that it is a minor issue, but one that people often hold strong opinions about!) |
May 2018
12:52pm, 15 May 2018
34,049 posts
|
Hills of Death (HOD)
It always amazes me the amount of people that do London Marathon with headphone what is the fucking point
|
|
May 2018
12:54pm, 15 May 2018
6,224 posts
|
The_Saint
Basically it comes down to the question - "Are marshals ever there for safety reasons?" leading to a follow-up question "Would it be useful to hear what they have to say?" In terms of first world problems, the morbid fear of not being plugged into some kind of entertainment 100% of the time would be a much better example. When it comes to a "how many races?" contest I think I'm covered. |
May 2018
1:02pm, 15 May 2018
1,260 posts
|
CumbriAndy
A slight tangent if I may - I've just come across this on the website for the Liverpool Marathon this coming weekend. "Policy on the use of personal headphones: There are many sections of the RnR Liverpool course where runners are in a closed road lane, but the adjacent lane is separated by traffic cones and open to vehicles. The wearing of headphones in such areas is now prohibited under UK Athletics rules 240 S5. As a race organiser affiliated to UK Athletics we are bound by the rules of racing and headphones are therefore prohibited. However we do recognise the motivational power that music provides and have arranged a line-up of over 50 of Liverpool’s best bands to entertain you around the course. We will not be instructing officials to enforce this rule strictly by implementing disqualifications, but you should be aware that you will be in breach of UK Athletics rules and are running at your own risk. We will however enforce UKA rules which state runners can be disqualified for not following the instructions of a race official – this includes stewards controlling the flow of traffic and runners, and marshals at controlled crossing points. Not hearing a marshal due to the use of headphones is not a valid reason to avoid disqualification in this case." So - if I read this correctly - they are telling everybody what the rule is but have made an explicit statement that they do not intend to apply that rule. So - a question - do people think this is a pragmatic approach (I think it probably would be in practice if not advertised in advance) or does the explicit statement constitute a violation of the terms of their UKA licence/permit? Or some other variation in between? |
|
May 2018
1:17pm, 15 May 2018
4,765 posts
|
larkim
Agreed, I'm not the most raced individual TS - just noting my experience / sample size in terms of whether I've experienced enough races to give at least a mildly informed view as to whether it is an actual problem or a perceived problem. My point though is that, in recent memory (i.e. a couple of years ago) UKA looked into this (I presume!) and made a change to the rules. They determined that the only good reason for barring runners wearing headphones was where it reduced their awareness of traffic sharing the same road as the runners. Runners being barged, marshals not being heard etc etc must have been considered by UKA as less important factors in the grand scheme of things. It's irrelevant really whether people think that there are other issues that UKA should have taken more notice of - the point is they didn't. Whether they did that on a risk assessment basis (i.e. if we prevent runners from wearing headphones in races, will that cause fewer people to run and get the health benefits vs the injuries and risks from headphone wearing on closed roads) we don't really know. But insofar as the rules allow headphone wearing in races, them's the rules. The bigger point is CumbriAndy's one, and I've referred to this previously. It is ludicrous that organisers such as RnR feel that they can put in place different rules simply by failing to enforce the rules they are supposed to operate under. I suppose at least they are explicit about it, I'm sure there are plenty of races where nobody at all is instructed to enforce the UKA rules. Equally, when organisers (like the organisers of the Stockport 10) do enforce the rules they are given grief for it by participants. Mass participant runners are not used to being affected by UKA rules (e.g. under the rules anyone who carries a phone should be DQd, I also presume there are quite a lot of runners with banned medication on board who will never get tested etc etc), but this one is so badly written and enforced. |
May 2018
1:30pm, 15 May 2018
2,426 posts
|
Surrey Phil
Every year, I'm always intrigued by the organisers of the Abingdon Marathon. Last year, they DQ'd six people, half of whom for 'wearing MP3 player or portable audio device.'
|
Related Threads
-
Bluetooth bone conduction heaphones/buds
Apr 2024
-
Headsets for Teams
Nov 2023
-
A chance of free Shokz headphones
Jun 2022
-
Wireless Headphones?
Sep 2021
-
Earphones + hearing aids
Dec 2020
-
Fed up with Rubbish Earphones!
Nov 2020
-
Aftershocks head phones
Jun 2020
-
Bone conduction headphones
Feb 2020
-
bluetooth headphones
Sep 2019
-
Wireless Headphones/earbuds
Aug 2018
