The 2017 Rallying thread
Discussion
chunder27 said:
So tell me this.
Why no cush problems in Italy, France, Spain, Holland, Belgium, Germany?
Are we just unluckly, do mroe people die here than those countries?
No, we have a weak MSA who are petrified and d not fight their corner.
I'm sure the MSA and MSI (whose livelihoods rely on being able to run these events) would love to hear your suggestions on how to reduce third party and public liability insurance. Personally I'm hoping it's a bit more substantial than wailing " but look at the foreigners" , but I won't hold my breath.Why no cush problems in Italy, France, Spain, Holland, Belgium, Germany?
Are we just unluckly, do mroe people die here than those countries?
No, we have a weak MSA who are petrified and d not fight their corner.
chunder27 said:
So tell me this.
Why no cush problems in Italy, France, Spain, Holland, Belgium, Germany?
Are we just unluckly, do mroe people die here than those countries?
No, we have a weak MSA who are petrified and d not fight their corner.
Belguim once again dodged a bullet today. Francois Duval ran wide hitting a pile of hay with spectators on top, narrowly avoiding them. Given how strict the marshals were when I watched the IRC in Ypres it amazes me how stupid fans are over there when I watch the videos from Rally Media etc..Why no cush problems in Italy, France, Spain, Holland, Belgium, Germany?
Are we just unluckly, do mroe people die here than those countries?
No, we have a weak MSA who are petrified and d not fight their corner.
Instead of harping on at me for mentioning this. Provide some fact.
Why aren't the MSA's of all those other countries held to account as ours are? Why is it just our MSA that has been so pathetically over reactionary over this.
They probably have just as many accidents, just as many fatalities? And in places like France, nearly all of their rallying is on closed roads, not forests or anything or single venues like we use. I know why clubs stop speccy access, so that they do not have to worry about it, and then pass on costs to crews. AND deal with insurance and staffing.
And answer me this, Jim Clark rally was the only closed road rally in the mainland really, yet after all this crap, it is fine to let clubs put together a close road rally after the rule change a few years ago, it is possible we have a few coming up in the next few years.
Double standards I think. Yeah we'll let a ruling ruin speccy access for all rallying in the UK, but the self same type of event that caused it, hell yes, run one one if you like?
I realise there is not much you can do if decisions are made and you have to comply But you have to admit they rolled over with a whimper.
Why aren't the MSA's of all those other countries held to account as ours are? Why is it just our MSA that has been so pathetically over reactionary over this.
They probably have just as many accidents, just as many fatalities? And in places like France, nearly all of their rallying is on closed roads, not forests or anything or single venues like we use. I know why clubs stop speccy access, so that they do not have to worry about it, and then pass on costs to crews. AND deal with insurance and staffing.
And answer me this, Jim Clark rally was the only closed road rally in the mainland really, yet after all this crap, it is fine to let clubs put together a close road rally after the rule change a few years ago, it is possible we have a few coming up in the next few years.
Double standards I think. Yeah we'll let a ruling ruin speccy access for all rallying in the UK, but the self same type of event that caused it, hell yes, run one one if you like?
I realise there is not much you can do if decisions are made and you have to comply But you have to admit they rolled over with a whimper.
chunder27 said:
And answer me this, Jim Clark rally was the only closed road rally in the mainland really, yet after all this crap, it is fine to let clubs put together a close road rally after the rule change a few years ago, it is possible we have a few coming up in the next few years.
Double standards I think. Yeah we'll let a ruling ruin speccy access for all rallying in the UK, but the self same type of event that caused it, hell yes, run one one if you like?
Not double standards, the new legislation for English closed road events is different from that which the Jim Clark and Mull ran under which was specific to each event. The problem which the Scottish legislation is that it's worded so that event organisers etc can potentially have unlimited liability should there be an incident. Hence why Mull got canned this year. If (a big if) the FAI report means that closed road events could potentially happen again in Scotland then the Scottish legislation will need changed to be similar to the English version. The FAI is due to report this month so perhaps we'll know more soon. Double standards I think. Yeah we'll let a ruling ruin speccy access for all rallying in the UK, but the self same type of event that caused it, hell yes, run one one if you like?
I am aware why the new Clacton event is possible, due to the new closed roads ruling in the last few years.
And obviously I do understand why rallies are now battered with the rules they are regarding speccies.
but even in the 90's it was often discourage to watch events.
And the question HAS to remain, why? If you stand in a field in Belgium, aren't you just as at risk as next to an old airfield in Norfolk
I don't get it, and never have understood why rallies in the UK have always been so horrendously hard for people to spectate at.
On venues that are closed!!! Not open like most rallies abroad.
I am going to RAC next week and fearful of what might happen,yet you could see on the GB rally that policing was not as good as it might have been
And obviously I do understand why rallies are now battered with the rules they are regarding speccies.
but even in the 90's it was often discourage to watch events.
And the question HAS to remain, why? If you stand in a field in Belgium, aren't you just as at risk as next to an old airfield in Norfolk
I don't get it, and never have understood why rallies in the UK have always been so horrendously hard for people to spectate at.
On venues that are closed!!! Not open like most rallies abroad.
I am going to RAC next week and fearful of what might happen,yet you could see on the GB rally that policing was not as good as it might have been
chunder27 said:
So tell me this.
Why no cush problems in Italy, France, Spain, Holland, Belgium, Germany?
Are we just unluckly, do more people die here than those countries?
No, we have a weak MSA who are petrified and do not fight their corner.
I agree we have a weak MSA, and that they are hopeless when it comes to rallying. However, as you know, we have a litigious and H&S society....Why no cush problems in Italy, France, Spain, Holland, Belgium, Germany?
Are we just unluckly, do more people die here than those countries?
No, we have a weak MSA who are petrified and do not fight their corner.
It's no good hoping that speccies will use common sense, as if anything happens, the fault is all on the organisers. End of. Organisers who are usually volunteer clubs struggling to break even on an event.
From what I remember, there was a real possibility that the Forestry were going to pull access for rallying if the sport didn't sort itself out. The MSA panicked, and running order was changed - and most obviously, the spectator safety regulations.
Well there are multiple issues.
Forest rallying was up until fairly recently a free for all. Some events were fine as they were miles away from anywhere, but ones like Wyedean, Bournemouth attracted locals who have no clue about rallying. Welsh events only attract hardy fans usually, so you can expect only people who know what they are doing. If FC want to hike up costs so be it, but surely any incidents are nothing to do with them and never will be so why were they b
hing?
That MUST be the same elsewhere in the world, so what do they do differently elsewhere to allow fans to roam free relatively?
Single venues are usually on private land, old airfields or little used ones. Why could there not be a wristband system used that you have to pay fr, say 50 quid a year that covers you to enter any single venue event other than highly restricted ones. You waiver any insurance and go on a course or watch a vid or something to get the clubs out of you not being aware of anything. That way, you get to go to events still instead of being penned into useless viewing areas, they get out of having worry about you being there, maybe you sign in or something? Theclub is not responsible., anyone else there is tresspassing and they are not liable as they were not signed in.
It's not bloody hard is it?
Forest rallying was up until fairly recently a free for all. Some events were fine as they were miles away from anywhere, but ones like Wyedean, Bournemouth attracted locals who have no clue about rallying. Welsh events only attract hardy fans usually, so you can expect only people who know what they are doing. If FC want to hike up costs so be it, but surely any incidents are nothing to do with them and never will be so why were they b
hing?That MUST be the same elsewhere in the world, so what do they do differently elsewhere to allow fans to roam free relatively?
Single venues are usually on private land, old airfields or little used ones. Why could there not be a wristband system used that you have to pay fr, say 50 quid a year that covers you to enter any single venue event other than highly restricted ones. You waiver any insurance and go on a course or watch a vid or something to get the clubs out of you not being aware of anything. That way, you get to go to events still instead of being penned into useless viewing areas, they get out of having worry about you being there, maybe you sign in or something? Theclub is not responsible., anyone else there is tresspassing and they are not liable as they were not signed in.
It's not bloody hard is it?
chunder27 said:
Well there are multiple issues.
Forest rallying was up until fairly recently a free for all. Some events were fine as they were miles away from anywhere, but ones like Wyedean, Bournemouth attracted locals who have no clue about rallying. Welsh events only attract hardy fans usually, so you can expect only people who know what they are doing. If FC want to hike up costs so be it, but surely any incidents are nothing to do with them and never will be so why were they bhing?
That MUST be the same elsewhere in the world, so what do they do differently elsewhere to allow fans to roam free relatively?
Single venues are usually on private land, old airfields or little used ones. Why could there not be a wristband system used that you have to pay fr, say 50 quid a year that covers you to enter any single venue event other than highly restricted ones. You waiver any insurance and go on a course or watch a vid or something to get the clubs out of you not being aware of anything. That way, you get to go to events still instead of being penned into useless viewing areas, they get out of having worry about you being there, maybe you sign in or something? Theclub is not responsible., anyone else there is tresspassing and they are not liable as they were not signed in.
It's not bloody hard is it?
Well if it’s not hard why not join your local motor club and organise a Stage Rally, it’s a piece of piss really. Forest rallying was up until fairly recently a free for all. Some events were fine as they were miles away from anywhere, but ones like Wyedean, Bournemouth attracted locals who have no clue about rallying. Welsh events only attract hardy fans usually, so you can expect only people who know what they are doing. If FC want to hike up costs so be it, but surely any incidents are nothing to do with them and never will be so why were they b
hing?That MUST be the same elsewhere in the world, so what do they do differently elsewhere to allow fans to roam free relatively?
Single venues are usually on private land, old airfields or little used ones. Why could there not be a wristband system used that you have to pay fr, say 50 quid a year that covers you to enter any single venue event other than highly restricted ones. You waiver any insurance and go on a course or watch a vid or something to get the clubs out of you not being aware of anything. That way, you get to go to events still instead of being penned into useless viewing areas, they get out of having worry about you being there, maybe you sign in or something? Theclub is not responsible., anyone else there is tresspassing and they are not liable as they were not signed in.
It's not bloody hard is it?
chunder27 said:
Single venues are usually on private land, old airfields or little used ones. Why could there not be a wristband system used that you have to pay fr, say 50 quid a year that covers you to enter any single venue event other than highly restricted ones. You waiver any insurance and go on a course or watch a vid or something to get the clubs out of you not being aware of anything. That way, you get to go to events still instead of being penned into useless viewing areas, they get out of having worry about you being there, maybe you sign in or something? Theclub is not responsible., anyone else there is tresspassing and they are not liable as they were not signed in.
It's not bloody hard is it?
Again you show your lack of understanding. A club can not negate it's responsibilities just by getting people to sign a bit of paper. I have tried to explain to you on several occasions on different forums, it is not the MSA that puts restrictions on access to what is basically private property. It is the land owners and their agents. That includes the Forestry Commission. It's not bloody hard is it?
You always say the MSA are "running Scared" have you read the SPECTATOR SAFETY AT MULTI –VENUE STAGE RALLIES IN SCOTLAND
Review Group on Motorsport Event Safety
December 2014.
If you had you would perhaps understand where the MSA are coming from. It can not be ignored just because it was done by the Scottish Government.
What happens in the rest of the world is in the context of this report irrelevant.
OK then tell me this.
That is what is annoying about this. Imagine being told you could not watch golf or football anymore because a ball hit a spectator, that is how stupid this rule is. You could still die after being hit by a golf ball!
I get it, I really do and am obviously playing devils advocate here, and it simply is the point that clubs, crews, just gave in , they did not fight, they felt unable to so speccys are banned basically.
No-one sought to argue the point, and if they did, they did a useless job
That is what is annoying about this. Imagine being told you could not watch golf or football anymore because a ball hit a spectator, that is how stupid this rule is. You could still die after being hit by a golf ball!
I get it, I really do and am obviously playing devils advocate here, and it simply is the point that clubs, crews, just gave in , they did not fight, they felt unable to so speccys are banned basically.
No-one sought to argue the point, and if they did, they did a useless job
chunder27 said:
OK then tell me this.
That is what is annoying about this. Imagine being told you could not watch golf or football anymore because a ball hit a spectator, that is how stupid this rule is. You could still die after being hit by a golf ball!
I get it, I really do and am obviously playing devils advocate here, and it simply is the point that clubs, crews, just gave in , they did not fight, they felt unable to so speccys are banned basically.
No-one sought to argue the point, and if they did, they did a useless job
Absolutely this.... there have always been signs up on the stages stating that you spectate at your own risk.That is what is annoying about this. Imagine being told you could not watch golf or football anymore because a ball hit a spectator, that is how stupid this rule is. You could still die after being hit by a golf ball!
I get it, I really do and am obviously playing devils advocate here, and it simply is the point that clubs, crews, just gave in , they did not fight, they felt unable to so speccys are banned basically.
No-one sought to argue the point, and if they did, they did a useless job
The very first time some brain-dead spectator tried to sue for getting "injured" the MSA should have thrown every resource they had at the defence, used every tactic possible to ensure that the case was dismissed as frivolous.
If they had done that then we wouldn't be here now.
Sadly the MSA have always viewed rallying as an inconvenience and will continue to do their best to kill it until its stone dead.
And think about it another way.
The dangers in any motor sport are less maybe, but imagine spectating at Oulton and a car flies into the crowd, and someone decides to sue, they get a top lawyer and he finds a loophole in the rules and all of a sudden spectating at circuit racing becomes difficult. Imagine the Keith Odor shootout thing happening now instead of 1990 or whenever it was and there being 50000 people there. Almost certainly a fatality.
I can guarantee then that something would be done.
The dangers in any motor sport are less maybe, but imagine spectating at Oulton and a car flies into the crowd, and someone decides to sue, they get a top lawyer and he finds a loophole in the rules and all of a sudden spectating at circuit racing becomes difficult. Imagine the Keith Odor shootout thing happening now instead of 1990 or whenever it was and there being 50000 people there. Almost certainly a fatality.
I can guarantee then that something would be done.
K50 DEL said:
The very first time some brain-dead spectator tried to sue for getting "injured" the MSA should have thrown every resource they had at the defence, used every tactic possible to ensure that the case was dismissed as frivolous.
I'm definitely no fan of the MSA but given that, so far, non of the claims for getting "injured" have actually succeeded perhaps they have put in more resources to the defence than we are aware of?Two things about that, the MSA has a pretty much bottomless pit I would think!
And the chances of winning a claim like that have to be pretty rare considering one of the people killed was a press man, so not even an innocent.
Weird to think the incident on the 88 Monte when Fiorio went off the road, he hit a former rally driver who was walking back to his car to go elsewhere. Probably a similar incident. Back turned, no expectation of someone going off there.
This is what is commonly known as, an accident? Yes? How anyone can sue for that I don't know.
Well I do actually, we are the 53rd bloody state sadly!
And the chances of winning a claim like that have to be pretty rare considering one of the people killed was a press man, so not even an innocent.
Weird to think the incident on the 88 Monte when Fiorio went off the road, he hit a former rally driver who was walking back to his car to go elsewhere. Probably a similar incident. Back turned, no expectation of someone going off there.
This is what is commonly known as, an accident? Yes? How anyone can sue for that I don't know.
Well I do actually, we are the 53rd bloody state sadly!
Got to love seeing WRC cars out on road sections, always interesting to see their own interpretation of the laws too!
https://t.co/02rTgzmgJg
https://t.co/02rTgzmgJg
chunder27 said:
OK then tell me this.
That is what is annoying about this. Imagine being told you could not watch golf or football anymore because a ball hit a spectator, that is how stupid this rule is. You could still die after being hit by a golf ball!
I get it, I really do and am obviously playing devils advocate here, and it simply is the point that clubs, crews, just gave in , they did not fight, they felt unable to so speccys are banned basically.
No-one sought to argue the point, and if they did, they did a useless job
Because golf balls or footballs did not kill 4 spectators (and severely injured several others) in the space of 18 months. That is what is annoying about this. Imagine being told you could not watch golf or football anymore because a ball hit a spectator, that is how stupid this rule is. You could still die after being hit by a golf ball!
I get it, I really do and am obviously playing devils advocate here, and it simply is the point that clubs, crews, just gave in , they did not fight, they felt unable to so speccys are banned basically.
No-one sought to argue the point, and if they did, they did a useless job
I WILL SAY FOR ONE LAST TIME THE MSA HAVE NOT BANNED SPECTATORS.
The only event I have done this year where spectators were not allowed was the Pendragon Rally and that was on MOD land and it was a condition of use. (so nothing to do with the MSA)
Instead of just spouting rubbish give me specific examples of what events have banned spectators and I will endeavor to find out why they are not allowed. But as I have said several times before, the events that I know that have banned spectators it is because the landowner has made it a condition of use.
My point refers to me personally chap.
I FEEL like I am being banned from events.
I understand the reasons, and they have been around for years, military, landowners etc. But in the past you could often rock up and if you stood somewhere sensible, listened to marshals you were OK, but even that is being frowned upon now. With the threat of you basically causing an event to be stopped because of you, you are made to feel utterly unwelcome, whereas in the past tolerated unless you were an idiot.
So even though it is not written, some of us feel like we are being banned.
I FEEL like I am being banned from events.
I understand the reasons, and they have been around for years, military, landowners etc. But in the past you could often rock up and if you stood somewhere sensible, listened to marshals you were OK, but even that is being frowned upon now. With the threat of you basically causing an event to be stopped because of you, you are made to feel utterly unwelcome, whereas in the past tolerated unless you were an idiot.
So even though it is not written, some of us feel like we are being banned.
giveitfish said:
So, Roger Albert is the next big one. Anyone going?
Thought about it, but don't fancy the 7 hours of driving needed to get to and from the stages Sat. The Rally of The Tests will be heading through very close to me Fri, so will head out to have my motorsport fix with them instead.
They're also at Harewood Hillclimb on Sun pm as well, but can't make it.
https://heroevents.eu/event-type/rac-rally-of-the-...
chunder27 said:
My point refers to me personally chap.
I FEEL like I am being banned from events.
I understand the reasons, and they have been around for years, military, landowners etc. But in the past you could often rock up and if you stood somewhere sensible, listened to marshals you were OK, but even that is being frowned upon now. With the threat of you basically causing an event to be stopped because of you, you are made to feel utterly unwelcome, whereas in the past tolerated unless you were an idiot.
So even though it is not written, some of us feel like we are being banned.
Couldn't agree more... I've all but stopped going to spectate on rallies as it seemed as though I was a nuisance who wasn't wanted...I FEEL like I am being banned from events.
I understand the reasons, and they have been around for years, military, landowners etc. But in the past you could often rock up and if you stood somewhere sensible, listened to marshals you were OK, but even that is being frowned upon now. With the threat of you basically causing an event to be stopped because of you, you are made to feel utterly unwelcome, whereas in the past tolerated unless you were an idiot.
So even though it is not written, some of us feel like we are being banned.
It doesn't matter whether spectators are actually banned or not, if they feel unwanted then they won't come.
This weekend's Wyedean is a case in point, I first attended the 'Dean in 2001, competing on it several times, marshalling and spectating in other years.
Looking at the spectating information for this weekend (for the cost of £10) spectators are allowed to choose one of 5 points to watch from, in earlier years I remember there being species all over the sides of the stages with no stupid pens to worry about.
I've even almost stopped marshalling nowadays as so many new marshals have no common sense and are simply on some kind of power trip and I'm embarrassed to be associated with them.
I know people will say that you don't have to stick to the pens and you can still move about the forests, but the fact remains that you're made to feel like a criminal whilst doing so so people just vote with their feet and stay away.....
This sadly also has an effect on competitors at a lower level... without Dads taking sons into the forests at a young age, less and less youngsters are being bitten by the rallying bug, so grass roots stuff is struggling for entries - 12 years ago the Road Rallies I used to compete on were always full with waiting lists, this year's Barbara Carter (one of the oldest, best run) is touch and go if it'll even run due to competitor apathy......... the blame for this rests squarely with the MSA and their incessant rules and regulations driving up the cost of competing.
Anyway, I'll get off my soapbox now, I just hate what is being done to the only sport I've ever really got involved with.
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff