Some interesting items in the article worth discussing.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-38798775
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Unfortunately the article makes it sound like it's not possible to measure a course accurately if it goes against traffic.
I agree, Mark. There a few options when the road can't be completely closed, but one of them isn't riding following the rules of the road (unless run is going to be restricted to one side of the road). I'm sure many of us have faced this at one point or another.
I wonder if using GE would have caught their mistake? I would think so.
I wonder if using GE would have caught their mistake? I would think so.
One of the bigger issues I see is what is our liability as a measurer!
Few may want to admit it, but in most cases we are independent contractors and therefore could be sued for errors.
This may have been discussed before (can't remember) but there might be a way around this.
An official working a track meet who makes a wrong call has never been sued. Why not??? An athlete who got screwed out of a place on an Olympic team or a cash prize should have every right. Yes, there is a Jury, but they get it wrong as well.
I need to check but it seems that any official working a Sanctioned event is covered. So the bottom line is that a measurer should become a Certified Official! We already have the mechanism in place.
Few may want to admit it, but in most cases we are independent contractors and therefore could be sued for errors.
This may have been discussed before (can't remember) but there might be a way around this.
An official working a track meet who makes a wrong call has never been sued. Why not??? An athlete who got screwed out of a place on an Olympic team or a cash prize should have every right. Yes, there is a Jury, but they get it wrong as well.
I need to check but it seems that any official working a Sanctioned event is covered. So the bottom line is that a measurer should become a Certified Official! We already have the mechanism in place.
If we are to be held liable for a mis-measurement, then we need to require that we have police escort to measure against traffic, if that is how the event will be run. The event can pay for that, or we won't measure for certification.
The problem I see is that they state in the article that measurers must follow the rules of the road. I guess most of my courses could not be measured accurately, then, as I am riding against traffic, and across lanes, on almost every course I measure.
Further, this was measured overseas. If I am not mistaken, only in the USA (and, maybe, Canada) are two measurements of the course required. I would not put my name on a course if I have not measured it twice, as I am human, and could make mistakes that are not apparent until someone else measures the course (if only with a GPS). I like our requirement for two measurements, preferably one in each direction.
How embarrassing for the measurer!
The problem I see is that they state in the article that measurers must follow the rules of the road. I guess most of my courses could not be measured accurately, then, as I am riding against traffic, and across lanes, on almost every course I measure.
Further, this was measured overseas. If I am not mistaken, only in the USA (and, maybe, Canada) are two measurements of the course required. I would not put my name on a course if I have not measured it twice, as I am human, and could make mistakes that are not apparent until someone else measures the course (if only with a GPS). I like our requirement for two measurements, preferably one in each direction.
How embarrassing for the measurer!
We require two measurements in New Zealand