IVCA race canceled this Sunday

Eamonnator

ROK ON wrote: »

Given that AGS has an abysmal record of investigating pretty serious alleged wrongdoing by the Gardai then best of luck with this.

Either ignore the direction or build bridges to get an accommodation on what is a subjectively grey area in terms of the law.

But it's not a grey area. It's black and white. Road racing is in breach of the law, as it now stands. And until such time as the law is changed, road racing will remain in jeopardy. Turning a blind eye will achieve nothing in the long run, it may solve the problem for a while, but nothing more. "Health and Safety" concerns will not allow either ignoring the rules or making an accommodation with the holding of races.

lennymc

Inquitus wrote: »

But you'll happily give him the finger and run your race in breach of the ROTR?

Just to clarify, Drogheda Wheelers are putting on a race weekend on 18th/19th April, on road in Co Meath, with input from AGS, including the super in charge of the roads on which the races will run. I am a member of the Drogheda Wheelers committee. As outlined earlier in this thread, and in other threads, there will be a mandatory briefing for all race staff outlining their roles and responsibilities and the expectations on them for the day.

I (personally) expressed an opinion on the situation (that I clearly said was my opinion) - if it wasn't this incident that triggered the current impasse, there would be some other incident. I don't see that as giving the finger to anyone.

wav1

An interesting sideshow to the racing problems,is that there appears no problem with running as many leisure tours and sportives as you want,because ite perceived that they will obey the RoTR.I would see it differentlty[well I would],Hundreds of riders in a sportive spread for miles along the road and going through junctions in dribs and drabs has a far worse effect on traffic flow etc,than a racing group of riders moving at a consistent speed.

Hmmzis

wav1 wrote: »

An interesting sideshow to the racing problems,is that there appears no problem with running as many leisure tours and sportives as you want,because ite perceived that they will obey the RoTR.I would see it differentlty[well I would],Hundreds of riders in a sportive spread for miles along the road and going through junctions in dribs and drabs has a far worse effect on traffic flow etc,than a racing group of riders moving at a consistent speed.

Hmm... The Balbriggan Leisure Tour weekend... As long as there are still categories and grading points there, why not? At least until we get changes in the law that would allow races to be run on open roads.

wav1

There are many[and always have been] cycle race friendly Garda who go and have gone out of their way to be a presence at cycle race events.Eamonnater in his day would have been one of them.This angle of help has now been diluted this week,with the directive given by the Supt in our area to local stations that no assistance is to be given to any races that don't have a road closure.In fairness to him,he did pledge no hindrance either,which is the one positive you can take from it.

Beasty

Hmmzis wrote: »

Hmm... The Balbriggan Leisure Tour weekend... As long as there are still categories and grading points there, why not? At least until we get changes in the law that would allow races to be run on open roads.

What do you think CI would say? What about their insurers?

ROK ON

wav1 wrote: »

An interesting sideshow to the racing problems,is that there appears no problem with running as many leisure tours and sportives as you want,because ite perceived that they will obey the RoTR.I would see it differentlty[well I would],Hundreds of riders in a sportive spread for miles along the road and going through junctions in dribs and drabs has a far worse effect on traffic flow etc,than a racing group of riders moving at a consistent speed.

Having been caught behind both races and sportifs while driving my car then I know what I would prefer to be on the road with if driving in same direction of an event.
This might be used in the advantage of racing - maybe CI could build evidence as to the average length of time that a motorist is actually held up for in an open road race - I would imagine that the number is at most single digit minutes. Sell the idea that the inconvenience created by road racing is actually relatively small.

wav1

Beasty wrote: »

What do you think CI would say? What about their insurers?

In my discussions with CI this week,they said to me that the insurers are fully aware of the current situation and will be fully behind promotions ''once race staff and marshalls act in the appropriate manner''

Hmmzis

Beasty wrote: »

What do you think CI would say?

What are they saying now? From what I've read here they're trying to keep everything as quiet as possible. From that I'd think they won't really say anything about rebadging an event.

What about their insurers?

This would be more of a concern.

lennymc

ROK ON wrote: »

Having been caught behind both races and sportifs while driving my car then I know what I would prefer to be on the road with if driving in same direction of an event.
This might be used in the advantage of racing - maybe CI could build evidence as to the average length of time that a motorist is actually held up for in an open road race - I would imagine that the number is at most single digit minutes. Sell the idea that the inconvenience created by road racing is actually relatively small.

Playing devils advocate - from a legal perspective, I would have thought being behind a race where there may be multiple breaches of the ROTR would be very different from being behind a sportif, where there are (in theory) a lot less breaches of ROTR. Sportifs could be considered slow moving traffic, and it is up to the traffic behind to overtake safely and legally. The fact that the drivers behind suffer an inconvenience wouldn't have any standing in law as far as I can tell. Besides, the main cause of concern for the authorities seems to be the breaches of ROTR rather than driver inconvenience.

I think it is inevitable that racing as we know it will change, but really hope it will change for the better.

ROK ON

lennymc wrote: »

Playing devils advocate - from a legal perspective, I would have thought being behind a race where there may be multiple breaches of the ROTR would be very different from being behind a sportif, where there are (in theory) a lot less breaches of ROTR. Sportifs could be considered slow moving traffic, and it is up to the traffic behind to overtake safely and legally. The fact that the drivers behind suffer an inconvenience wouldn't have any standing in law as far as I can tell. Besides, the main cause of concern for the authorities seems to be the breaches of ROTR rather than driver inconvenience.

I think it is inevitable that racing as we know it will change, but really hope it will change for the better.

True - but I have been caught behind a sportif with several hundred participants spread out over 20km all going slowly in very narrow roads.
With a races the bunches are smaller than average sportif and the pass relatively briskly.

In my own experience from living in a place that sees a lot of sportifs, some road races (Ras Mumhan and the Ras every few years), several triathlons. If you are caught behind a sportif you are better off stopping and turning around the races pass quickly. If CI could get evidence of this it might help in building some acceptance if racing. Show that the inconvenience (when RoTR is followed with respect to incoming traffic) is actually pretty minor all things considered. I don't get much of an opportunity to race or do sportifs any more. I would prefer a race to pass my road than a sportif.

De Bhál

on the other hand I know which one I'd prefer face in a car if going in the opposite direction.

pprendeville

AGS??? Are they some new company putting in a bid for AerLingus?

lennymc

pprendeville wrote: »

AGS??? Are they some new company putting in a bid for AerLingus?

They are looking to branch out

pprendeville

wav1 wrote: »

Stamullen and Drogheda both go ahead.Garda help would be nice but neither event perceives that it needs any powers that be to rescue them.

This is going to sound like a really silly question and I apologise in advance if it is but in the case of these races, are riders expected to stop at Stop signs or will riders be following what the Marshall dictates. No flag then proceed through the stop sign. If the Marshall flags (and by that I mean he is either waving the flag that makes it look like we have to stop or doing something else, I'm actually not sure what the signal is from a Marshall for stopping) then the riders are expected to follow the ROTR and stop at the stop sign?

Eamonnator

As we have seen, it takes only one garda to wreck havoc with a cycle race. On any given Sunday, one garda, in uniform, could, if he/she so wished, legally stop any cycle race from taking place. As long as this situation pertains, the problem will persist.
Race organisers, who have good working relations with their local gardai, don't want to rock the boat. In general race organisers are keeping their heads down, hoping the problem will go away. Cycling Ireland, seemingly, are afraid to stick their nose above the parapet. It would appear that the I.V.C.A. don't know, what to do. Local authorities want to please everybody. The gardai, whether from vindictiveness or a sense of duty, have to uphold the law, as it exists. Bringing all these elements together, in a manner, that satisfies everybody, is a big ask.

As the saying goes, it's much harder to get the sh** back into the horse.

Beasty

Hmmzis wrote: »

What are they saying now? From what I've read here they're trying to keep everything as quiet as possible. From that I'd think they won't really say anything about rebadging an event.

CI would have to re-write the rule book. Are you suggesting such events would only be open to racing licence holders for example? It's not a race but we are going to award more points to the guy who finishes first than the ones behind. Think about it a little more deeply and you will quickly realise how completely impractical your suggestion is, and that's before the Gardai start to look at it

Beasty

pprendeville wrote: »

This is going to sound like a really silly question and I apologise in advance if it is but in the case of these races, are riders expected to stop at Stop signs or will riders be following what the Marshall dictates. No flag then proceed through the stop sign. If the Marshall flags (and by that I mean he is either waving the flag that makes it look like we have to stop or doing something else, I'm actually not sure what the signal is from a Marshall for stopping) then the riders are expected to follow the ROTR and stop at the stop sign?

I would suggest, from a racers point of view, it will be largely business as usual (although I am sure there will be a little more emphasis on certain issues in the pre race briefing)

One thing they may consider is making it clear that if the marshals think a dangerous situation may be developing they could possibly step in and hold up the race. That's certainly something that is on the IVCA's agenda.

pprendeville

lennymc wrote: »

They are looking to branch out

I'm still no clearer who AGS are.

Inquitus

Beasty wrote: »

I would suggest, from a racers point of view, it will be largely business as usual (although I am sure there will be a little more emphasis on certain issues in the pre race briefing)

One thing they may consider is making it clear that if the marshals think a dangerous situation may be developing they could possibly step in and hold up the race. That's certainly something that is on the IVCA's agenda.

It doesn't work. Marshall can't hold up traffic, fast bunch approaches left turn onto main road, car refuses to yield to slow arm down gesture and waved flag, carnage ensues.

Eamonnator

pprendeville wrote: »

I'm still no clearer who AGS are.

An Garda Siochana

Eamonnator

Inquitus wrote: »

It doesn't work. Marshall can't hold up traffic, fast bunch approaches left turn onto main road, car refuses to yield to slow arm down gesture and waved flag, carnage ensues.

That's it in a nutshell.
As it stands, a marshal has absolutely no power to stop or direct traffic.

lennymc

At the IVCA riders briefing it was suggested that if you were a marshal in the situation whereby a motorist decided that they would continue on regardless of you informing them of a potential hazard ahead, the marshal should turn their attention to alerting the riders of the hazard, and the riders should react accordingly.

Beasty

Inquitus wrote: »

It doesn't work. Marshall can't hold up traffic, fast bunch approaches left turn onto main road, car refuses to yield to slow arm down gesture and waved flag, carnage ensues.

IVCA had a CI Commissaire presenting last weekend and that was pretty much his proposal. Each corner requires a "senior marshal" with a good line of vision and a very loud whistle! Once the riders hear that it's an instruction to stop or at the very least proceed with great caution

EDIT: lenny was there also!!

pprendeville

Beasty wrote: »

IVCA had a CI Commissaire presenting last weekend and that was pretty much his proposal. Each corner requires a "senior marshal" with a good line of vision and a very loud whistle! Once the riders hear that it's an instruction to stop or at the very least proceed with great caution

EDIT: lenny was there also!!

That's a very good idea. Very simple and effective.

buffalo

Beasty wrote: »

IVCA had a CI Commissaire presenting last weekend and that was pretty much his proposal. Each corner requires a "senior marshal" with a good line of vision and a very loud whistle! Once the riders hear that it's an instruction to stop or at the very least proceed with great caution

EDIT: lenny was there also!!

When I'm marshalling, the whistle is normally a routine warning that riders are approaching.

If you need riders to stop, the signal is a bit like this:

Beasty

Even with something like that there's going to be a situation where the marshals seek to "warn" motorists of approaching racers and requestng their "co-operation" in holding until the racers go through. Obviously those actions may be subject to some interpretation and could leave marshals in a difficult position if they are approached by Gardai. The alternative is not to seek to "hold" traffic, which would be pretty unworkable on most circuits (but is a perfectly reasonable approach in my mind for TTs and that is the basis on which we have agreement to run TTs in Fingal)

pprendeville

buffalo wrote: »

When I'm marshalling, the whistle is normally a routine warning that riders are approaching.

If you need riders to stop, the signal is a bit like this:

so you need 2 marshalls then, one to "do the sign" and the other to pull the strings?

Beasty

Beasty wrote: »

IVCA had a CI Commissaire presenting last weekend and that was pretty much his proposal. Each corner requires a "senior marshal" with a good line of vision and a very loud whistle! Once the riders hear that it's an instruction to stop or at the very least proceed with great caution

EDIT: lenny was there also!!

Just to add - I faced a difficult situation in an IVCA race last year when I was stationed as a marshal in Kentstown. As the race approached there was a lot of activity around the church. We quickly established there was a blessing of the graves taking place. I basically went up the road a couple of hundred metres with my warning sign and as soon as I saw the racers I signaled for them to slow down which they duly did (had to stand in the middle of the road for them to do so mind). The message got back to the organisers/safety officer and on all subsequent laps the race was brought under control at a much slower pace as it went through the village

brasshead

Beasty wrote:

Just to add - I faced a difficult situation in an IVCA race last year when I was stationed as a marshal in Kentstown. As the race approached there was a lot of activity around the church. We quickly established there was a blessing of the graves taking place. I basically went up the road a couple of hundred metres with my warning sign and as soon as I saw the racers I signaled for them to slow down which they duly did (had to stand in the middle of the road for them to do so mind). The message got back to the organisers/safety officer and on all subsequent laps the race was brought under control at a much slower pace as it went through the village

Beasty wrote:

Just to add - I faced a difficult situation in an IVCA race last year when I was stationed as a marshal in Kentstown. As the race approached there was a lot of activity around the church. We quickly established there was a blessing of the graves taking place. I basically went up the road a couple of hundred metres with my warning sign and as soon as I saw the racers I signaled for them to slow down which they duly did (had to stand in the middle of the road for them to do so mind). The message got back to the organisers/safety officer and on all subsequent laps the race was brought under control at a much slower pace as it went through the village

Was in the break that day if memory serves! Everyone duly slowed down, though we were still eventually caught

Lusk_Doyle

pprendeville wrote: »

I'm still no clearer who AGS are.

Jesus <snip>!

Hmmzis

Beasty wrote: »

CI would have to re-write the rule book. Are you suggesting such events would only be open to racing licence holders for example? It's not a race but we are going to award more points to the guy who finishes first than the ones behind. Think about it a little more deeply and you will quickly realise how completely impractical your suggestion is, and that's before the Gardai start to look at it

It's CI's rule book, they wrote it once so they should be able write it again or make amendments to it. Allow leasure riders to ride as weel but as a different group. Same way as we have now with A4-A1/+. It's not a perfect solution and by no means a permanent one. In order to save road racing as a sport in this country the proper solution is to change the law or precisely add a new one that regulates what sporting events can and can't do when using public roads as the venue. What is needed now is a quick fix to bridge the gap. If some sort of agreement can be made with the guards to keep the sport alive then I'm all for it.

lennymc

CI's Technical rule book currently states that all riders should obey the rules of the road

CI Technical rules wrote:

CHAPTER T6 - BEHAVIOUR OF PARTICIPANTS IN A CYCLING EVENT
13. Participants must at all times conform to all traffic regulations in force relative to the course on which the
race is held.

Even with a re-written rule book, CI have no power to ignore or over rule the rules of the road.

Inquitus

Beasty wrote: »

IVCA had a CI Commissaire presenting last weekend and that was pretty much his proposal. Each corner requires a "senior marshal" with a good line of vision and a very loud whistle! Once the riders hear that it's an instruction to stop or at the very least proceed with great caution

EDIT: lenny was there also!!

If a car is travelling at 80kph-100kph along a road, surely there is not enough time to gauge his intentions and alert an oncoming peloton effectively were the driver to decide to simply ignore the Marshal.

Also given the risks some riders seem willing to take with regard to oncoming traffic are we not likely to see people try to capitalise on these warnings to the detriment of their safety and others safety? While I recognise the method outlined above is about the only way to proceed within the law it strikes me as making racing more dangerous for all concerned.

lennymc

That system is not perfect, but with enough marshals it could be workable. There are a lot of people working very hard behind the scenes to try to protect and promote racing, yet, every compromise or suggestion seems to be shot down. What would you suggest as a workable alternative that would keep everyone (especially the authorities) happy?

07Lapierre

Inquitus wrote: »

If a car is travelling at 80kph-100kph along a road, surely there is not enough time to gauge his intentions and alert an oncoming peloton effectively were the driver to decide to simply ignore the Marshal.

Also given the risks some riders seem willing to take with regard to oncoming traffic are we not likely to see people try to capitalise on these warnings to the detriment of their safety and others safety? While I recognise the method outlined above is about the only way to proceed within the law it strikes me as making racing more dangerous for all concerned.

This is the argument put forward by the County Council and the Gardai.

There is no Legal requirement for motorists to stop if signalled to do so by a marshal. BUT, in the event that the driver ignores a request to stop, and the motorists proceeds and there is a collision with oncoming riders, then it really depends on the circumstances of the collision.

if the motorist is on the correct side of the road, then the race organisers (and the marshals and the riders) are potentially liable.

The motorists is only liable if he/she is found to be negligent ( e.g. speeding and over the white line).

Chips Lovell

Marshals have never been legally entitled to stop traffic. This has always been the situation. Their role is to warn riders and traffic. They can politely ask traffic to stop for a race, but they can't make them stop.

lennymc

07Lapierre wrote: »

if the motorist is on the correct side of the road, then the race organisers (and the marshals and the riders) are potentially liable.

I don't know if the section below is legally enforceable, or if it would cover the scenario above, but, every rider when taking out a licence agrees that they are responsible for their own actions.

CI Terms and Conditions of issuing a licence wrote:

I understand, and agree, that I participate in events, whether on the public highway or otherwise, at my own risk, and that no liability whatever will attach to the promoter, promoting club, or any officials of any cycling event nor to Cycling Ireland, Provincial Board affiliated thereto, for any injury, loss or damage suffered by me in or by reason of any event however such may be caused.

07Lapierre

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

Marshals have never been legally entitled to stop traffic. This has always been the situation. Their role is to warn riders and traffic. They can politely ask traffic to stop for a race, but they can't make them stop.

That's correct...and the Gardaí tended to "Turn a blind eye" to this and race organisers were under the impression that in the event of an incident, the gardai would look at the situation sympathetically.

It has now been confirmed (in Fingal anyway) that that is no longer the case. The law of the land will be applied "to the letter".

Bristolscale7

Did someone say Critical Mass?

07Lapierre

lennymc wrote: »

I don't know if the section below is legally enforceable, or if it would cover the scenario above, but, every rider when taking out a licence agrees that they are responsible for their own actions.

CI Terms and Conditions are "Guidelines" only. The Road traffic Act is "the law"...again this is what was relayed to me by the Gardaí.

besides...CI states that all participants must obey ROTR. The fact that the Races organisers and Marshals may also be liable in the event of an incident is whats causing the problem.

couerdelion

07Lapierre wrote: »

That's correct...and the Gardaí tended to "Turn a blind eye" to this and race organisers were under the impression that in the event of an incident, the gardai would look at the situation sympathetically.

It has now been confirmed (in Fingal anyway) that that is no longer the case. The law of the land will be applied "to the letter".

What blind eye were they turning? We were always told in briefings that as a marshal we were unable to legally stop traffic therefore by asking traffic if they minded waiting no RoR were being broken. If they said No then we were to stop the race.

Chips Lovell

07Lapierre wrote: »

That's correct...and the Gardaí tended to "Turn a blind eye" to this and race organisers were under the impression that in the event of an incident, the gardai would look at the situation sympathetically.

I'm confused. What were "Gardai turning a blind eye" to?

07Lapierre

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

I'm confused. What were "Gardai turning a blind eye" to?

When was the last time you were in a race where the whole race stopped at a Stop sign? were there gardai assisting with that race? did they "have words" with the marshal? if they didn't, then they were "turning a blind eye" to the marshal stopping the traffic.

Inquitus

lennymc wrote: »

That system is not perfect, but with enough marshals it could be workable. There are a lot of people working very hard behind the scenes to try to protect and promote racing, yet, every compromise or suggestion seems to be shot down. What would you suggest as a workable alternative that would keep everyone (especially the authorities) happy?

A Marshall whether legally entitled to or not can stop traffic effectively wearing a high vis, and standing in the middle of the road with a flag. This has worked effectively for decades and the Gardai have turned a blind eye to what is a fairly harmless thing. Builders, Truck Drivers and many others control traffic "illegally" on a daily basis as well.

A Marshall who is hamstrung by watching Gardai and only allowed to stand at the side of the road doing the approved arm down warning sign is far less effective.

Personally I don't see a workable alternative, if Gardai wish to monitor Marshall's and hamstring their effectiveness by applying the very letter of the law, it only makes everything more dangerous for everyone.

lennymc

I give up.

Inquitus

lennymc wrote: »

I give up.

That said I'll still turn up and pay my 15 euros Its a risk I am willing to take, but I think we have to acknowledge this Garda intervention is putting people at greater risk.

nilhg

07Lapierre wrote: »

When was the last time you were in a race where the whole race stopped at a Stop sign? were there gardai assisting with that race? did they "have words" with the marshal? if they didn't, then they were "turning a blind eye" to the marshal stopping the traffic.

While marshals don't have the authority to stop traffic, is it an offence for them to? Can you imagine the general reaction if the guards hauled a marshall or a club up before a court for stopping traffic for 30 seconds?

07Lapierre

nilhg wrote: »

While marshals don't have the authority to stop traffic, is it an offence for them to? Can you imagine the general reaction if the guards hauled a marshall or a club up before a court for stopping traffic for 30 seconds?

Yes it is an offence to stop traffic...only gardai (and Traffic Wardens) have the legal right to do so.

I doubt very much if gardai would haul a marshal into court for just stopping traffic. But They have confirmed that they will prosecute marshals and race organisers in the event of a serious incident involving a rider and a motorist.

Chips Lovell

07Lapierre wrote: »

...then they were "turning a blind eye" to the marshal stopping the traffic.

But as a marshal I've never been told by a race organiser I could "stop traffic", either if the Guards were present at the race or not. That's always been the case, even before these difficulties began in Fingal.