May 2013
11:43am, 20 May 2013
162 posts
|
Carlos Fandango Jnr
Do you know that they hadn't done a "risk" assessment? It would be hard to have an alternative for every eventuality. Cows in the road, bridge collapse, unwanted puddles... the possibilities are infinite.
|
May 2013
11:46am, 20 May 2013
10,419 posts
|
SODIron © 2002
Craig...just how would you have re-routed the course to get an accurately measure 10K alternative in this situation?
I'm confident that there was a full risk assessment taken with all potential risks logged, and where possible mitigated...the course/route of the Hull 10K meant that it was not possible to run an alternative 10K and that moving the finish line an extra 1K when a race is in progress is probably a little too much to realistically expect. The organisers did the only thing they could do (and this was probably documented in the risk assessment), they took a diversion to avoid the bridge. I'm sure the option wasn't taken lightly, hence the 15 minute delay at the start, however it was a more palatable option than just cancelling the race.
|
May 2013
12:06pm, 20 May 2013
10,420 posts
|
SODIron © 2002
@Carlos..."It would be hard to have an alternative for every eventuality. Cows in the road, bridge collapse, unwanted puddles... the possibilities are infinite."
I've written a risk assessment for taking our juniors off site running...it was a 40 plus page document.! It's amazing what comes out of the woodwork when you start writing up risk assessments.
|