Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Two die in the Ironman at Youghal

Options
18911131416

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 13,137 ✭✭✭✭hotmail.com


    It costs 600 euro for this rubbish?

    And hundreds of people pay for it?



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,458 ✭✭✭valoren


    Why is it rubbish? The price? Thousands pay for it globally.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10 jimiseve


    Does anyone have the financial breakdown of this event. 2,000 athletes at €600 each is a lot - with so many volunteers are there any professional safety people paid. Where does the money go? The incentive not to cancel could be quite high.



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,895 ✭✭✭✭whisky_galore


    Not the council's baby, what happens out on the water is not their jurisdiction anyway.



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,868 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Its not the price, its the fact there is a commercial fee.

    That commercial aspect makes it a business enterprise and so the HSA can climb all over the Ironman organisation to investigate what happened.

    The Guards have said 'tragic accident, misadventure, no criminal investigation', but I think that may be premature.

    The HSA can and may prosecute woth the Guards and DPP under Gross Negligence Manslaughter. Very much a criminal offence.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,722 ✭✭✭Large bottle small glass


    Are you sure?

    The HSA are the authority under the 1989 Act, but are they only concerned with places of work?



  • Registered Users Posts: 23,868 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Running a commercial event, as a corporate entity, taking money for entry....

    It is a place of work. I'm pretty confident of that case being made.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,369 ✭✭✭iwillhtfu


    They're the lead sponsor for the event afaik so I'd guess it's some form of damage limitation on their side.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,369 ✭✭✭iwillhtfu


    It's closer to €700 by the time you add on admin fees. That's just for the ticket to race there'd be thousands spent on travel, training, equipment etc. Not to mention the amount of money it brings into Youghal.

    On the other hand many more spend thousands in the pub or in paddy power and not an eyelid batted. 🤷‍♂️

    Post edited by iwillhtfu on


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,722 ✭✭✭Large bottle small glass


    The Deceased weren't working?

    What specifically from the 1989 Act or any regulations there under would you please?

    I think they need to worry, just can't see the HSA getting them



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,971 ✭✭✭Genghis


    Unless it has changed, TI event sanction is made via a signed race licence, issued before an event start and after a course assessment. It is signed by a Technical Official from TI and the Race Director.

    Its not verbal and should not be ambiguous.

    I wonder with the chaotic morning was the race was started before a proper meeting was held between TI and the Race Director?

    A race licence TI **refused to sign** (and the RD goes ahead anyway) is totally different to a scenario where the step to agree a race licence was missed. It shifts blame significantly.

    IMHO if it was a refusal to sanction / over ruling, TI would have withdrawn its officials. Feels to me like the step was missed.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,137 ✭✭✭✭hotmail.com




  • Registered Users Posts: 16,106 ✭✭✭✭Loafing Oaf


    I always think there must be a dollop of masochism involved with these extreme sports, perhaps even a bit of Russian roulette. You're certainly going way beyond the amount of exercise you actually need to boost your health & fitness.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,971 ✭✭✭Genghis


    Its people doing what they love, nothing more, nothing less.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,977 ✭✭✭Padre_Pio


    TheJournal is reporting that TI communicated their refusal to sanction the race several hours AFTER the race started.

    "The organisers said that they work in collaboration with national federations for triathlons around the world as they organise over 150 Ironman and Ironman 70.3 events annually. The relevant body in Ireland is Triathlon Ireland.

    “As such, federation representatives were present during the event and performed their duties. Several hours after the swim was completed, they communicated to the onsite Ironman Ireland officials that they would not approve the sanctioning for the event,” the organisers’ statement said."

    Well this puts a new spin on things.

    TI refused to sanction the race after the two unfortunate participants had passed away.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,886 ✭✭✭Rows Grower


    "Very soon we are going to Mars. You wouldn't have been going to Mars if my opponent won, that I can tell you. You wouldn't even be thinking about it."

    Donald Trump, March 13th 2018.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,649 ✭✭✭rovers_runner


    This Ironman scene is more a new money thing where middle aged people who've done the bucket list triathlon and marathon move on to this as the ultimate water cooler brag. You are looking at a few thousand disposable income to set yourself up to do one, no other sport is so brazenly out to exclude based on social status.

    The tattoos and visors encapsulate the whole scene, lads who do one 70.3 half Ironman turning up at parkrun to show them off for the next decade.

    Some even go so far as to set themselves back years the injuries they cause themselves in order to tick the box. You don't see it happening in the individual events.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,369 ✭✭✭iwillhtfu


    I think that may well be the case and the reason TI got to the punch before IM. As you say if there was sign off from TI then IM should have the race the paperwork. If there was no sign off why did TI officials remain on course including the swim start and exit?

    If it isn't that simple it certainly should be in future.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,971 ✭✭✭Genghis


    So which scenario was it:

    1) TI were willing to sanction but didn't sign the paperwork in time (then changed story later)

    2) TI refused to sanction but did not tell the RD in time

    3) The RD went ahead without first seeking any sanction from TI

    4) TI had not made any decision before the race started

    5) RD overruled TI

    I think 3 or 4 most likely.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,369 ✭✭✭iwillhtfu



    I'd say it's 3.5 - Race director pushed through to get going and didn't look for info he didn't want to hear. TI were dragging their heels humming and hawing and the ball was already rolling when they decided so let it roll.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,977 ✭✭✭Padre_Pio


    Wow,where did that chip come from?

    It takes years to compete for iron man, you'd want to be doing it for more than bragging rights. I'd say that anyone who competes it deserves to brag.

    Besides, I can think of plenty of sports that cost multiples of the iron man to compete in. Any Motorsport for instance. The amount of money you spend on sport rarely equates to social status.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,977 ✭✭✭Padre_Pio


    The race was scheduled to start at 6.30am.

    I believe it started 30 mins late, so if TI couldn't make up their mind, and it wasn't a requirement anyways, you can't blame the race director for pushing ahead.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,168 ✭✭✭prunudo


    Or 6, TI weren't happy with long swim, said couldn't be sanctioned, RD offered solution of shorter option but TI dragged their heals and didn't say one way or another whether it was acceptable until after the event.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,649 ✭✭✭rovers_runner


    The ones that brag aren't the Ironman finishers, i made a point of saying it's the 70.3 ones, you know the ones that can't bring themselves to call it a half Ironman.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,663 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    Well I think you can 'blame' the race director for pushing ahead. Given the by now multiple accounts of athletes in the water and observers on the land.

    Maybe they should have cancelled the swim part of the 70.3 entry, given the more typical profile of those entering this.

    Clearly the outcome was most regrettable and could have been a lot worse.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,340 ✭✭✭TheW1zard


    Thought it was supposed to be an ironman event not who cant swim 200m into a current christ almighty



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,971 ✭✭✭Genghis


    We don't know if a TI sanction was or was not a requirement for insurance (insurance may have been via Ironman).

    All we know is it was planned as a TI sanctioned race, all entrants had to pay for TI licences, and TI were providing race officials to enforce competition rules.

    The race director would know that this means their event must be licensed - in writing - an hour or so before the race.

    If there was no race licence say 60 mins before the scheduled start, the race director really should have no other business than trying to get one. This would mean discussing and liaising with the technical official and - if required -agreeing a delay, a different course, a shortened swim, a cancelled swim, etc.

    These 'plan B' options would be set out in their plan, weather conditions are foreseeable risks.

    I would be interested to know how the decision to postpone Saturdays 70.3 was arrived at. Did TI and the RD agree to postpone that event.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,136 ✭✭✭Rebelbrowser


    I think TI could have a problem in saying, on the one hand, that they wouldn't sanction it as it was (presumably) too dangerous and, on the other hand, having done nothing to let the competitors know this. On the contrary, it seems now to be suggested that their staff facilitated the swim.

    In order to make a virtue of refusing to sanction, they would surely need to be able to show they were frantically trying to tell competitors they were not sanctioning it and were advising them not to compete. If they didn't they are arguably in a worse position than the organisers in one sense. The organisers are saying they saw no real danger so let it proceed, TI are effectively saying they actually saw the danger but, as far as I can see from reports, they nonetheless did nothing tangible about it. At least the organisers position has a certain (if flawed) logic to it.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I was a health & safety rep where I worked, a public venue. The safety of the public recreational users was very much part of my remit.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 7,886 ✭✭✭Rows Grower


    t wasn't TI's job to tell the competitors the event was not sanctioned, they communicated that decision to the Organiser's before the event started. It was the responsibility of the Organiser' ie. Iron Man to communicate to their customers that the event was not sanctioned and they obviously chose not to do this.

    "Very soon we are going to Mars. You wouldn't have been going to Mars if my opponent won, that I can tell you. You wouldn't even be thinking about it."

    Donald Trump, March 13th 2018.



Advertisement