Ok i have steered clear of this subject as i know those involved but all of us know we are watching a very dangerous sport but sadly we are all there at own risk, i first volunteered to marshall in the early 70's at Ballacrae cos my late mate JG said its awsome, guess what there was a elderly lady and her husband sitting on the wall they said to me ' if anything goes wrong will you help us' luckily all was ok on the day but on the same day as we passed quarter bridge there were guess 100+ so called marshalls, and the marshalls supper what did we receive a so called hot pot with pickled cabbage and 1 free pint whilst the table reserved for the ACU ask Smithy he will tell you and thats not been on on Bill because he has a genuine care for a great sport be it road racing or tracks.

thewitch Wrote:The "paid"/"not paid" thing actually makes no difference if you do something wrong or stupid or do not do something you should have, and a disaster occurs as a result. In law you would still be held responsible.
If you do what you have been trained and instructed to do, and still something terrible happens, you are not culpable... paid or otherwise.
However, there would be an unbelieveable amount of paperwork recording who worked and when, tax implications of dealings with people from off-island etc etc.
I know from doing work for organisations in Scotland, the tax people there get in a real twist. They don't seem to know their own rules.
Perhaps a way of having your marshal's credentials signed by the DSM might entitle you to something.. eg, discount on the next trip on IOMSP. The more sessions covered, the more reward.

Spot on Helen, payment is irrelevant. H & S legislation doesn't differentiate or recognise rates of pay to determine laibility. Neither does it recognise any difference between paid work and voluntary whether a contract of employment exists or not. The rules apply to all just the same. Roles and responsibilities are more important.

Also I'd agree with you that a person cannot be held liable if they are doing their job in a manner that's neither reckless or careless but compliant with the manner in which they have been trained and to a standard to which they are deemed to be competent. In most circumstances the practitioners on the factory floor, so to speak, do just that. The most likely scenario depicts the underlying causes in almost every example that I can think of as, yes, you've guessed it, management failings.

The more I read the Coroner's report the more I'm convinced that that is what he is saying. When I read some of the initial news reports I winced at the expression Mr. Moyles had used to describe the DoT, a laughing stock if my memory is correct, and thought he'd been too harsh. Now that I've read the full report I no longer think that his choice of words were in any way harsh.

alf

Having read Mr Moyles findings, I would have to say Mr Moyle has got it spot on, those that have tried to pass the buck must go and never be allowed to have any say in the TT again.
Over the years riders have lost their lives at the TT only for their families to be told a pack of poo.

FC Wrote:Having read Mr Moyles findings, I would have to say Mr Moyle has got it spot on, those that have tried to pass the buck must go and never be allowed to have any say in the TT again.
Over the years riders have lost their lives at the TT only for their families to be told a pack of poo.

Very well said FC- Get rid of the rubbish, and run it like a professional buisness that tit is! Just ask the Finance sector over there how good it is, O, Only the half the income of the farming community

Great debate guys..........I think I'm quite proud of you all..............

Couple of little rude words fixed Hope you like the replacements


I think I suggested paying marshalls as a way of encouraging marshals to stay in the job and help with siging up new guys.

I do realise however that more problems could be created by that perhaps as Helen says perhaps there could be a hefty discount for travel based on the number of sessions marshalled.

There is no doubt that there could be problem with numbers this year for both TT (and more worryingly for me) MGP

cargo-instead of payment how about payment in kind-if cover every day of the fortnight then you get your boat ticket paid for, if you do a week then half paid for-problem with that and there is 2 main ones-
1)who monitors who did what and
2)what do you give to the local marshals

one prob not addressed/discussed so far that mr moyle mentioned is that of promotion above level of competence-do you think he was suggesting obliquely that at marshal entry level IMC or whatever it now turns into after review is acceptable but then DSM/CSM should also have some form of examinable course/qual (as well as having courseside experienced), and from there progress up the chain of ranks into the grandstand tower, this although lengthy would ensure competence (and therefore confidence) in role

I'd agree that more/better training for marshals new or otherwise can only be a good thing.

Certainly for DSM and SM training should be as advanced as is possible.

I would hope to try and get on an IMC at the Manx this year and would encourage anyone who wants to marshall to do the same.

No doubt local marshals would enjoy getting a discount on their travel away from the IOM

It concerns me that everyone is getting caught up in the misapprehension that addressing the weaknesses in the organisation uncovered by the Inquest will magically prevent a similar tragedy from ever happening again.

Out of control machines can and do kill. No matter how many new precautions are introduced the reduction in risk can only be minimal. At any point on the TT Course an out of control bike has the potential to cause injury or death in any direction, and the at-risk area in such circumstances probably extends for hundreds of yards off the course. Either you accept that, or you reduce the velocity of the machinery. Accidents will always happen, in or out of the TT.

However, to my knowledge, the short stretch of the Course between The Hawthorn and Ballacraine has suffered three fatalities in seperate tragic accidents in very recent years, none of them on closed roads. What has been done to reduce the risk of such accidents happening again? I believe that just one new road sign was put up as a result of one of the accidents.

If the authorities are unable to counter the risks present on open public roads, why should such great expectations be placed on the organisers of the TT?

While everyone’s putting in what they would like to see done. I do have concerns about medical staff or whoever having to cross the road during a race. That Just spells danger as I’ve seen people fall, not at a race meeting, while carrying a stretcher. Seriously injured people are way more important than the race itself.

No disrespect to one of the previous posters who said it was on the last lap. Does that really matter? Personally I don’t care if it’s the first or last, life and safety of others is much more important. If the helicopter has to land on the opposite side of the incident then the race should stop. It’s just another accident, however remote, waiting to happen that is preventable.

http://www.iomtoday.co.im/news/TT-worki ... 3920241.jp

TT working group say event is still viable



TONY BROWN: The chief minister set up the working group to examine communication and review Coroner Michael Moyle’s recommendations in relation to running the TT Races


"Prohibited areas need to be properly enforced but every year the course is examined and it is important not to go too far"
Chief Minister Tony BrownA WORKING group set up by Chief Minister Tony Brown in the wake of the TT inquest has said the TT will remain viable but responsibilities must be made clear.
Mr Brown set up the group, which held its first meeting on Wednesday, to examine communication and review Coroner Michael Moyle's recommendations in relation to running the races.

Mr Brown said: 'We are trying to make sure everyone is clear about their responsibilities. We want to make sure there is no misunderstanding about things like putting out signs.

'The TT has been going 100 years so we want to examine everything because it has evolved over that period.

'Areas of misunderstanding need to be clarified. It is important to emphasise that work goes on and some things have already been done since the 2007 races.

'It is always prudent to keep re-examining the situation.'

>> Chief minister orders top level probe into TT
26 March 2008

Mr Brown said he did not expect the working party to carry on indefinitely and any changes should be implemented in time for this year's TT races in eight weeks' time.

'We are looking at whether we need to change any of the legislation or how the various orders are made,' he said.

Asked about the implications for the future of the racing Mr Brown offered an emphatic endorsement of the TT festival.

'As long as the volunteers, the people who provide support and the riders want to continue, it will continue,' he said.

'The TT is in good shape and has a good future. Things move on and we need to ensure we can continue to operate it properly.

'I have marshalled myself on the Southern 100 races and it is a responsibility. We need to make sure all the marshals are supported and have confidence and are clear of their duties.

'We need to ensure we are giving them the proper information and training. Supporting them is vital because they contribute valuable time.'

On the issue of possible spectator restrictions in future races, Mr Brown said it was important to ensure safety but also not to over-react.

'This was a very unfortunate incident. Prohibited areas need to be properly enforced but every year the course is examined and it is important not to go too far,' he said.

'It is a balance to provide spectators with safe viewing and an enjoyable experience at the same time.'

Delivering his inquest findings on March 20, coroner Michael Moyle made a scathing attack on TT organisers whose incompetence he said had been instrumental in the deaths of two spectators.

Dean Adrian Jacob, 33, of Kidderminster, and Gregory John Kenzig, 52, of Queensland, Australia, both died in the 26th Milestone accident on June 8 last year, as did competitor Marc Ramsbotham, 34, of Norfolk.

------------

An online poll at iomtodayfound that most respondents agreed with the working group in that the TT has a viable future.

A total of 471 votes (54 per cent) clicked the option which read 'lessons have already been learned and there is a different organisational structure in place' while 287 votes (33 per cent) felt the coroner's verdict will signal the beginning of the end for the TT.

The remaining 118 respondents (13 per cent) felt the races had a future 'only if there are many more changes to the way the races are run'.

------------

WHAT DO YOU THINK? DOES THE TT HAVE A FUTURE? OR HAS THE SENIOR TRAGEDY SHOWN THE RISK TO SPECTATORS IS TOO HIGH?
Send your comments to newsviews@newsiom.co.im

Something that was mentioned at the inquest was risk assessments, problem is the Island is so far behind in this type of training, Health & Safety up untill the past couple of years was a joke and the new regulations introduced for H&S in the UK have not been brought in here yet. Part of my job is creating risk assessments and method statements on almost a daily basis, some of it could be seen as BS but saying that every item of safety is important and any risk no matter how small has to be identified and acted on by all involved.

The TT is a long public roads event and no matter how good you are at the job you will always get something wrong which may result in a death, that mistake made should never be allowed to happen again.

What is the answer, do they erect catchment fences at ever area, move the fans back 30mtrs or so, it cant be done for many reason, but some can be done. Then you have another problem, you move the fans back or restrick to many areas for spectating then the fans dont come, the TT then dies as a racing event.

Example of a risk assessment for the QB as I would see it.

1. Bikes entering the first bend, fans in line of site behind a low non impact fence. Bike could be ejected in or over into fans placed in this area. Petrol could be ejected from a crashed bike onto fans leading to a possibvle fire risk, Rider could be ejected over into fans resulting in injuries (happened at the Creg ).
2 Actions to be taken. Move fans from area (to where, not to the barriers to the right as this is a run off area). Erect catch fences, this is no use in the event of fuel being ejected over.
Only possible answer would be to erect a raised grandstand to the rear of the QB carpar protected by a catchfence.
Would this be done No due to costs, would only work at a track that has regular use.

If an accident was to happen in the future at the QB and fans were injured what I have posted could be used in a court even though I was not asked to provide the risk assessment. Reason being that the risks have been identified. Thats the nature of the Beast, so how do they resolve the problem they cant. If a marshall at the 26th had of told his senior in writing that he thought spectators were at risk in that area and they were not acted on then someone has to take the blame.
Mr Moyle has spelt it out very clearly get it sorted or lose what you have.

Colin a mate of mine was racing his Ducati a few years ago but when he started braking on the aproach to q/b his brakes failed and he had to lay it down, his only thought was hoping the bike didnt go in the crowd and the bike was a compete wreck but he was ok.

being honest chris and even tho i'm in the more fashionable lemon and lime as opposed to orange (i still have marshals warrant tho) i'd rather not get paid-and any money that people feel due me go to the safety and welfare of the racers/marshals and spectators-more investment in the course and spending wisely of that investment can only be to the good of the TT/MGP

more money=more IMC and other training courses/more airbales/more radios/more kit at side of road/more signs

adding more money onto boat fair likely to cause a riot tho

A few years ago the senior race was posponed because of the weather and was held on the Saturday morning. ( cant remember what year). As a lot of the marshalls had gone home there was a appeal on Manx radio for marshalls. A guy that I know was helping me with the TT Race Mission with his dad, it was his second visit to the TT and his dads first ever TT, they voluntered to be marshalls. They were given a bunch of flags and about 10 minuits training. Could this happen again?????

I'd imagine not - I think that the MGP Senior was cancelled last year partly because they didn't think that they would have enough marshals around to run it on the Saturday.

Harvey T Wrote:While everyone’s putting in what they would like to see done. I do have concerns about medical staff or whoever having to cross the road during a race. That Just spells danger as I’ve seen people fall, not at a race meeting, while carrying a stretcher. Seriously injured people are way more important than the race itself.

No disrespect to one of the previous posters who said it was on the last lap. Does that really matter? Personally I don’t care if it’s the first or last, life and safety of others is much more important. If the helicopter has to land on the opposite side of the incident then the race should stop. It’s just another accident, however remote, waiting to happen that is preventable.

Having now seen the mess Me and My bike made all over the road, and the medics having to carry me across the road ( Putting them at risk) I fully agree with your post Harvey!

Chris Thackeray Wrote:Would TT Fans object to paying a small fee say 20 pounds on top of the Boat/Flight fares.
And all the money raised is matched by the Isle of Man Goverment and then paid in full to all marshalls.

I dont think I would object.....maybe a crazy idea i know just a thought.
At the end of the day no Marshalls no racing.

With the Steam Packet Co getting a ear bashing year in, year out, from the TT fans, there would be noway they would even consider giving the ferry company an extra 20 quid, even though the idea is a good one.

Anyway, the Isle of Man Government ain't short of a penny or two, especially when the island is a tax haven.

FC Wrote:Something that was mentioned at the inquest was risk assessments, problem is the Island is so far behind in this type of training, Health & Safety up untill the past couple of years was a joke and the new regulations introduced for H&S in the UK have not been brought in here yet. Part of my job is creating risk assessments and method statements on almost a daily basis, some of it could be seen as BS but saying that every item of safety is important and any risk no matter how small has to be identified and acted on by all involved.

The TT is a long public roads event and no matter how good you are at the job you will always get something wrong which may result in a death, that mistake made should never be allowed to happen again.

What is the answer, do they erect catchment fences at ever area, move the fans back 30mtrs or so, it cant be done for many reason, but some can be done. Then you have another problem, you move the fans back or restrick to many areas for spectating then the fans dont come, the TT then dies as a racing event.

Example of a risk assessment for the QB as I would see it.

1. Bikes entering the first bend, fans in line of site behind a low non impact fence. Bike could be ejected in or over into fans placed in this area. Petrol could be ejected from a crashed bike onto fans leading to a possibvle fire risk, Rider could be ejected over into fans resulting in injuries (happened at the Creg ).
2 Actions to be taken. Move fans from area (to where, not to the barriers to the right as this is a run off area). Erect catch fences, this is no use in the event of fuel being ejected over.
Only possible answer would be to erect a raised grandstand to the rear of the QB carpar protected by a catchfence.
Would this be done No due to costs, would only work at a track that has regular use.

If an accident was to happen in the future at the QB and fans were injured what I have posted could be used in a court even though I was not asked to provide the risk assessment. Reason being that the risks have been identified. Thats the nature of the Beast, so how do they resolve the problem they cant. If a marshall at the 26th had of told his senior in writing that he thought spectators were at risk in that area and they were not acted on then someone has to take the blame.
Mr Moyle has spelt it out very clearly get it sorted or lose what you have.

H&S/Risk Assessments by and large and IMHO = common sense. Apply it to every braking point, every acceleration point for newbies and for notso newbies then the big guys. Extrapolate that to include every white line that may or may not be crossed in both wet, very wet, damp, dry but wet under the trees or dry, failing light or sunshine in either morning and early or late evening in every circumstance..
Further examine every type of equipment /component failure that could occur in each of the above instances. Don't mention the two-strokes yet.

Actions to be taken will run into libraries, not volumes.

There surely has to be an element of common sense embraced in everything TT, Road Racing and Mountain Circuit. Unique event with unique and possibly bizarre situations. That's not to say that everything reasonably possible and acceptable should be done. F1 has seen some incidents that are less than laudable, have learned and moved on. The equipment mods poss with respect to Bikes are not the same, I know. Big run-offs etc too not poss. Motorcycle Road Racing cannot possibly be equated with, f'r'instance, a Works Canteen or a Call-Centre. The parameters are just not the same. The Risk-assessing process is..... but whatever happened to "acceptable risk" and is that an acceptable way to approach this?

Anyone have access to, say, NW 200's or Dundrod's risk assessment. There must be some parallels and precedent in law for this situation?

There is a human element here that will endure and impact on many souls for a long time. Let's never let that be far from our thoughts. The Challenge is the Mountain Circuit and that's what this is all about. Is it an acceptable challenge and do those who accept the challenge have the right to continue to do so?

My 2p, FWIW

Just a quickie, risk assesments have to be included in the course licence application.