Hi
Without apportioning blame on any individual or the organisers at Nene at the weekend, I wanted to open the question of safety during open practice.
The event was run as well as most slaloms I've been too and like other slaloms they had the course available for open practice, specifically in the lunchtime slot.
During this period I was on the water and paddled down to the drop expecting to do a full run.
At the top of the drop it became clear that about 8 paddlers were waiting in the next gate line at the bottom of the drop, thus preventing continuance. I paddled to the other side of the drop and advised them to keep moving as it wasn't working.
At this point other paddlers were still coming over the drop.
The group moved on slowly and another young paddler had joined me, when the group had gone broke out but got caught in the stopper and exited the boat just as another paddler was approaching the drop. I gestured to stop but it was too late and it was a fairly near boat to paddler miss. Luck basically.
Obviously it's assumed that paddlers are going to do full runs (and I believe this is requested verbally and literally) but in reality some stop during open practice to practice certain gates repeatedly. Either that or the paddlers go down too close together or in random ability order which closes the gap at certain gates (such as described above)
It's fairly unique as that drop has no line of sight until the last moment and even then not if anyone has capsized in the stopper.
Whilst we all sign the assumed liability waver, I wonder what the legality is here. In these days of litigation can any organiser claim lack of responsibility - it's their event, their course.......
As I say, apportioning no blame as it's standard practice but is it time for a review. I assume the legality has at some point be checked out. I wouldn't like to think clubs or individuals may be open to repercussion in the event of an accident.
Open Practice - Thoughts on a near miss
-
John Sturgess
- Posts: 280
- Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 12:01 am
- Location: Gedling, Nottingham/Long Preston, North Yorkshire
Yes, I've seen this at Nene - in fact I've seen it during the actual event! As you say, no sight line; but also gate placement means that sometimes the paddlers accumulating in that left hand eddy, having missed the gate at the first try, are actually paddling full runs!
Solutions:
1) during race runs/full runs practice, use the comms to tell the starter when the next boat can start (but that would probably mean 2 mins + start intervals)
2) post a safety man at the top of the drop to tell boats to abort if the drop is occupied (would mean a lot of re-runs)
3) Design the course so that it does not happen, which would mean 'wasting' that difficult eddy
The other possible alternative - putting a safety man by the eddy to stop boats there when a boat is coming down - probably would not work because of the nature of the eddy.
Not ideal ...
Solutions:
1) during race runs/full runs practice, use the comms to tell the starter when the next boat can start (but that would probably mean 2 mins + start intervals)
2) post a safety man at the top of the drop to tell boats to abort if the drop is occupied (would mean a lot of re-runs)
3) Design the course so that it does not happen, which would mean 'wasting' that difficult eddy
The other possible alternative - putting a safety man by the eddy to stop boats there when a boat is coming down - probably would not work because of the nature of the eddy.
Not ideal ...
All salient points
There was probably an element of paddlers being left to their own device here. I expect some were attempting full runs but caught up with others practicing the cross.
In this case, pre-collision, I just shouted, signalled to stop and gritted my teeth and hoped as it was too late. Hope it doesn't get to a point when someone gets clobbered.
Further down the course on open practice I caught some others up (which anyone who knows me will tell you is ludicrous) and was signalled to stop. I did back paddle (probably pointless above the big drop)alleviating the problem but it was still a case of paddlers not doing full runs at this point. As some surfing was going on.
There was probably an element of paddlers being left to their own device here. I expect some were attempting full runs but caught up with others practicing the cross.
In this case, pre-collision, I just shouted, signalled to stop and gritted my teeth and hoped as it was too late. Hope it doesn't get to a point when someone gets clobbered.
Further down the course on open practice I caught some others up (which anyone who knows me will tell you is ludicrous) and was signalled to stop. I did back paddle (probably pointless above the big drop)alleviating the problem but it was still a case of paddlers not doing full runs at this point. As some surfing was going on.
-
oldandslow
- Posts: 180
- Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:11 pm
- Location: Peak District
I decided not to paddle at Nene for just this reason! You should have come to Matlock for the best ever Officials event of the year - not that we did much judging but we did put in the time organising a non-event! How many different combinations did we get for team runs?:D
Life is what happens when you're making other plans.
-
roodthomas
- Posts: 37
- Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 9:33 pm
- Location: Barnsley
... Because he's rubbish and clearly not an adequate paddler,
I therefore suggest that he should be relegated to div 3 to start through the rankings again ... alternatively div 4 as with the ranking system suggested he can compare how he does once more and as you have said Donna, it motivated him before
I therefore suggest that he should be relegated to div 3 to start through the rankings again ... alternatively div 4 as with the ranking system suggested he can compare how he does once more and as you have said Donna, it motivated him before
I think this is a very interesting question - what level of safety is required? I am sure that the assumed risk disclaimer really would be no protection for the organiser who would ultimately be responsible. I provide Safety/ Medical cover professionally for major events. Where these are large events or specific sporting events the level of cover may be prescribed in a variety of ways and may include statutory requirements. In slalom we have rules which cover safety and these would be looked at in detail in court in the event of litigation. In our case section 19 which is not comprehensive or indeed always observed (e.g. 19.3 Spot checks on buoyancy of jackets and boats?), is all we have to work to.
What I think the courts would like to see is a comprehensive risk assessment document including mitigation proposed and demonstration that this was delivered. All identified risks should be included even if the decision is that no mitigation is reasonably possible. Mitigation does not have to remove risk completely but simply ensure that reasonable measures are identified and taken appropriately. An on site air ambulance is reasonably required for a formula one race but not a canoe slalom.
Hopefully this is already practice for some but probably not all organisers. it should take into account numbers, expected experience and water conditions. Personally I think official practice times are the responsibility of the organiser but not outwith those periods identified but risks should still be identified. That said the organiser is not totally exonerated while the race arrangements are in place e.g. if a gate was left located in an unsafe place it would encourage paddlers to attempt it e.g. the previous evening.
I do not wish to put organisers off but it is they who would ultimately have to justify what was and what was not done to support safety - if a risk assessment is documented and actions taken in mitigation are 'reasonable' then they should have nothing to fear.
What I think the courts would like to see is a comprehensive risk assessment document including mitigation proposed and demonstration that this was delivered. All identified risks should be included even if the decision is that no mitigation is reasonably possible. Mitigation does not have to remove risk completely but simply ensure that reasonable measures are identified and taken appropriately. An on site air ambulance is reasonably required for a formula one race but not a canoe slalom.
Hopefully this is already practice for some but probably not all organisers. it should take into account numbers, expected experience and water conditions. Personally I think official practice times are the responsibility of the organiser but not outwith those periods identified but risks should still be identified. That said the organiser is not totally exonerated while the race arrangements are in place e.g. if a gate was left located in an unsafe place it would encourage paddlers to attempt it e.g. the previous evening.
I do not wish to put organisers off but it is they who would ultimately have to justify what was and what was not done to support safety - if a risk assessment is documented and actions taken in mitigation are 'reasonable' then they should have nothing to fear.
Yes, it's definitely interesting. I guess there is an element of it always having been this way and it's become accepted. However, that doesn't mean it's correct for these times, as you say.
I'd say that the difference between open practice and official practice (if indeed there is one) need to be reviewed in respect of responsibility.
Thankfully, in this instance it was ok but it was only down to luck
I'd say that the difference between open practice and official practice (if indeed there is one) need to be reviewed in respect of responsibility.
Thankfully, in this instance it was ok but it was only down to luck
-
kendall chew
- Posts: 101
- Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 11:21 pm
- Location: Cheshire
I wonder where the practical implications of parental responsibility lie. Perhaps we need to rosta people into being responsible for sections of the course as per judges.Identify the crash zones and place a parent on the bank. Washburn had a superb rescue team who were kitted up in dry suits and entered the water when needed to recover boats/ people, it really was very impressive,( It is unlikely that we would need quite such an impressive outfit at Stone for example) and, they were obviously trained in WWSR.The trouble with volunteer/ conscripted bankside help is that it may not be trained sufficiently for the job. Both Neil and I have seen that first hand last year.
Perhaps by introducing basic WWSR type courses bankside at slalom events, as per my comment in the Interclubs Champs thread, the sport might begin to "skill up" its dedicated followers allowing them too to take ownership of thier area of the sport, not just glorified taxi drivers. If this can be done we then have a pool of skilled volunteers who are both interested and willing to lookout for wayward paddlers before, during and in between competitive runs. If enough "courses" were to be run over a year, most parents attached to paddlers would have the opportunity to attend, thus virtually guaranteeing the presence of a trained bank rescuer at every event. I have seen prescious few rope holders/ throwers wearing a PFD.
Food for thought
Perhaps by introducing basic WWSR type courses bankside at slalom events, as per my comment in the Interclubs Champs thread, the sport might begin to "skill up" its dedicated followers allowing them too to take ownership of thier area of the sport, not just glorified taxi drivers. If this can be done we then have a pool of skilled volunteers who are both interested and willing to lookout for wayward paddlers before, during and in between competitive runs. If enough "courses" were to be run over a year, most parents attached to paddlers would have the opportunity to attend, thus virtually guaranteeing the presence of a trained bank rescuer at every event. I have seen prescious few rope holders/ throwers wearing a PFD.
Food for thought
You've got to separate dangerous water from paddlers just being dangerous. You can put safety in place on harder water and have volunteers with WWSR skills if necessary, but the biggest danger is from other paddlers. The number of times there have been near misses or worse with paddlers repeatedly practicing a crux gate (the gate below the drop at Nene as an example). Typically these are young kids, oblivious to anyone else on the course, egged on by their parents with no regard to safety. I've been forced to roll in the past to avoid being speared, which doesn't do much for your own practice. Organisers must enforce complete runs only during open practice.
John Kent
People seem to be concentrating on "organisers must do...". We are talking about free practice. This is not something that organisers are compelled to offer, many do as it allows paddlers extra practice while the organiser is dealing with late entries and start lists. If, as an organiser, I was forced into doing extra work on top of the work I already had at this point in time I wouldn't bother with offering free practice. Would you?
Perhaps, which I know is a novel idea in this day in age, we should take responsibility for our own actions? Or, if your child is too young to do this, the parent should take responsibility for their actions? There is nothing to stop a parent standing at the tip of the drop guiding paddlers down, nor is there anything to stop them signing up for a WWSR course. Hey, even Mr Munchkin has done one and he is not a paddler.
Just a thought...
Perhaps, which I know is a novel idea in this day in age, we should take responsibility for our own actions? Or, if your child is too young to do this, the parent should take responsibility for their actions? There is nothing to stop a parent standing at the tip of the drop guiding paddlers down, nor is there anything to stop them signing up for a WWSR course. Hey, even Mr Munchkin has done one and he is not a paddler.
Just a thought...
More good points from Kendall et al.
I guess it is an an issue that some paddlers can be left to their own devices but some can't.
At Nene though pulling open practice to avoid responsibility I feel would be detrimental to those who attend and the sport. I feel a person at the start line and one above the drop could communicate by hand signals - provided they aren't as short sighted as me (I can't see the poles in front of me as many will testify.)
YES! there is nothing to stop a parent standing at the top but I'd wager people wouldn't think about it unless asked. Maybe it could be mooted at registration to parents or volunteers asked for pre-event via web
I don't think it's about forcing anyone but more about where would the responsibility fall legally if the worst happened; as per my original point.
I like the idea of conscripting people in at Nene the open practice at lunchtime was only one hour so if that could be shared between several people it would lessen the burden, to say 15 minutes.
Oh yeah and I've been forced to roll also but that isn't through regard for anyone or personal safety but just through being lopsided
I guess it is an an issue that some paddlers can be left to their own devices but some can't.
At Nene though pulling open practice to avoid responsibility I feel would be detrimental to those who attend and the sport. I feel a person at the start line and one above the drop could communicate by hand signals - provided they aren't as short sighted as me (I can't see the poles in front of me as many will testify.)
YES! there is nothing to stop a parent standing at the top but I'd wager people wouldn't think about it unless asked. Maybe it could be mooted at registration to parents or volunteers asked for pre-event via web
I don't think it's about forcing anyone but more about where would the responsibility fall legally if the worst happened; as per my original point.
I like the idea of conscripting people in at Nene the open practice at lunchtime was only one hour so if that could be shared between several people it would lessen the burden, to say 15 minutes.
Oh yeah and I've been forced to roll also but that isn't through regard for anyone or personal safety but just through being lopsided
Surely open practice is undertaken at your own risk, the same as your own training. The organisers of events only need to ensure suitable safety cover duing official practice and runs.
I was taught from a very young age that the upstream paddler has right of way and if your responsable for keeping out of their way. I guess if people get in my way these days i'd very skillfully bump them out of the way sideways at the next eddy. Not many people do it twice!!
Alternativly lets all canoe in polo gear and go down the course 4 at a time like we did earlier in the year! I rather enjoyed that and do hope it comes around next year aswell, i think a new sport is born, SLALOM-X
sign me up for that!
I do hate this lets try to get rich off other people just because I chose to work off the wrong ladder without anyone footing the bottom for me culture! There is a very apt discription of people like that "IDIOT!"
You deserve everything you get if your that thick!
I was taught from a very young age that the upstream paddler has right of way and if your responsable for keeping out of their way. I guess if people get in my way these days i'd very skillfully bump them out of the way sideways at the next eddy. Not many people do it twice!!
Alternativly lets all canoe in polo gear and go down the course 4 at a time like we did earlier in the year! I rather enjoyed that and do hope it comes around next year aswell, i think a new sport is born, SLALOM-X
sign me up for that!I do hate this lets try to get rich off other people just because I chose to work off the wrong ladder without anyone footing the bottom for me culture! There is a very apt discription of people like that "IDIOT!"
You deserve everything you get if your that thick!Yeah I hate that culture too. All a bit too transatlantic for me. Sadly that is probably not the case for some and it seems to increasingly be the culture we live in.
What about that bint with the dodgy fringe taking a slip on a wet floor or whatever! Christ, I'd happily push her over and take the hit.
I wonder if there is anyone out there who could offer a definitive answer on how it would be viewed in the legal process i.e. an injury sustained in open practice where paddlers were left to their own devices, at an event organised by any club, anywhere, and an aggrieved paddler or parent pursuing an individual or club.
It has been touched on in this thread
Bottom line is it will hopefully never happen and litigation or not I'd hate to see someone hurt
What about that bint with the dodgy fringe taking a slip on a wet floor or whatever! Christ, I'd happily push her over and take the hit.
I wonder if there is anyone out there who could offer a definitive answer on how it would be viewed in the legal process i.e. an injury sustained in open practice where paddlers were left to their own devices, at an event organised by any club, anywhere, and an aggrieved paddler or parent pursuing an individual or club.
It has been touched on in this thread
Bottom line is it will hopefully never happen and litigation or not I'd hate to see someone hurt
-
kendall chew
- Posts: 101
- Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 11:21 pm
- Location: Cheshire
Neil,
The logical line this takes is that it would be up to the paddler to insure him/ herself for public liability. You can thank the Yanks ( sorry, politically incorrect slip. American partners, Y'all) for that one!!!!!!!
Just make it clear that parents are responsible for thier own kids whilst on the water. They are required to "spot" at danger points during open practise, and, deliver basic, quality safety programmes (rope throwing, etc). Signing a disclaimer might also help.
We, as osteopaths, have gone through a cathartic change with regard to practitioner/ patient communication. The whole thing appears to be legally neccessary but counter intuitive.
In short; Back against the wall and look after yourself. Personally I do not like it. but I fear that it is inevitable
The logical line this takes is that it would be up to the paddler to insure him/ herself for public liability. You can thank the Yanks ( sorry, politically incorrect slip. American partners, Y'all) for that one!!!!!!!
Just make it clear that parents are responsible for thier own kids whilst on the water. They are required to "spot" at danger points during open practise, and, deliver basic, quality safety programmes (rope throwing, etc). Signing a disclaimer might also help.
We, as osteopaths, have gone through a cathartic change with regard to practitioner/ patient communication. The whole thing appears to be legally neccessary but counter intuitive.
In short; Back against the wall and look after yourself. Personally I do not like it. but I fear that it is inevitable