ASK YOURSELF WHY
C o l u m n of cost , and at the end of the day , the reduction in risk must be balanced with the cost of the implementation .
The Down Run start is about four lanes wide … hence the problem with the narrow Epworth Road section in the first few kays in 2023
Of course , any risk that involves injury or death clearly must be given top priority , and unfortunately , organisers are frequently faced with situations that could result in death . Therefore , at some stage they will feel that the costs and resources required to reduce that risk will exceed the likelihood of it occurring . The risk may never be eliminated , but could be taken to a level of acceptability . A simple example of this is running or cycling a race on a road that is partially open to traffic . However , in many cities and towns , there are standard practices that reduce this risk : Coned lanes , run facing traffic , fences , etc , and local drivers may recognise well-established measures , which further reduces the risk level .
Repetitive Review
The review of safety measures never stops , and requires a humble approach of acknowledging that one person can never see all the risks , never have all the answers , and never achieve zero risk . Every event , every venue , every situation has differing risks , and furthermore , participants don ’ t all do the same things . As a result , while safety can be informed by regulations , it ’ s primarily learnt from everyday experience , including mistakes or failures , and is constantly evolving .
Reviews should therefore be undertaken not simply in the event build-up , but during the event , in the post-race debrief , and in the commencement of the next event . And an event organiser should listen carefully to warnings or concerns about safety , even if just to allay fears , and such warnings or concerns can result in a risk reduction that saved an outcome .
As such , any person or group that disregards or ignores warnings or concerns should never be allowed to be in charge of an event again , because such action makes them entirely responsible for any outcome of that risk . I believe that the situation of the woman who broke her leg after being tripped in the Epworth Road section of this year ’ s Comrades is a classic situation that can be directly attributed to the Race Director and Race Advisory Committee choosing to ignore such warnings .
Later in the race the field spreads out , but earlier in the race safety is a huge concern
The ABC of Safety
It is worth stressing the simplicity of safety , which to a large degree can be described as an ABC :
• Appropriate : A considers the appropriateness of the event and resources , with consideration given to the environmental conditions , the fitness and ability of participants , spectators , volunteers , resources , and all that goes with it .
• Build : B is concerned with the structures , gantries , stands , activations , cables , locations , road closures , marquees , signage and anything that is brought to and constructed on site .
• Capacity and Casualties : C is much more people-orientated , as it reviews the capacity of venues , and what scenarios will play out if there are problems . Not surprisingly , this was a major portion of the original Safety In Sport Act , as there are ( too many ) well-documented cases around the world with tragic outcomes from overcrowding and exceeding capacity limits . The Act requires every stadium venue in South Africa to be registered with a capacity limit , which cannot be exceeded in normal use .
Again , using Comrades as an example , the 2016 Down Run exceeded the stadium limit , and in 2018 , the Race Director stated this to be the reason for the move away from Kingsmead to a new finish in the Moses Mahbida Stadium . Quite simply , the finished runners and gathered spectators in Kingsmead in 2016 had exceeded capacity limits , and there were further concerns because the layout required the building of scaffold bridges for runners and supporters to get over the finishing straight . The situation was aggravated in that Comrades finishers ’ legs do not move with the agility of a normal person , and for that reason , it was considered essential in 2016 to have central safety rails and a dictated two-way flow over these bridges . This was mysteriously , and in my opinion , dangerously , removed in 2023 , when the race moved back to Kingsmead .
Images : Courtesy Comrades Marathon Association
There can be little doubt that runner outcry over the steps and the lack of atmosphere at Moses Mahbida contributed to the decision to break the longterm contract with the 2010 stadium as a venue . That said , the decision to return to Kingsmead increased the event ’ s risk score , and implies a decision to wilfully exceed the stadium capacity limits . In short , this was a decision that potentially put the health and safety of all runners , spectators , volunteers and participants at risk . Was it an acceptable increase in risk ? All we can answer is that no-one died this year … but does that mean the same will happen next time ?
Safety at the Start
Many races start in open areas , quite often on a road , and runners often spend over an hour at the start venue , including 30 minutes-plus in the fenced seeding pens at large events . It is the organiser ’ s obligation to calculate and maintain safety in these situations . That is more than simply covering cables , it is predetermining the flow of runners and supporters , and working with the culture of the participants , to ensure safety , including sufficient space in waiting areas and at the start .
In most countries , runners are disciplined , but in others , the desire to be on the front line sees runners climbing over fences , disregarding barrier tape , and ignoring instructions . Unfortunately , South Africa is one such country , and few who witnessed it will ever forget how the 10km runners at the Soweto
39