Two die in the Ironman at Youghal

It's was always about the money.

The money was already in their account and it was never going to be leaving even if they ad cancelled the entire race, so the argument isn't really there. I get most of ye have never done any IM event but they're not keen on parting with money already paid and if you do manage to get some back it will be a pittance in comparison to what you paid.

Deferral was offered to 70.3 entrants after Sat was cancelled/rescheduled to Sunday.

You could argue they had 2024 in mind and previous cancellations/covid hit them hard. IM have already changed the format from a 2 day to a one day event next year as uptake in the full is low in comparison to the half. It will be interesting to see how Sundays outcome of an albeit hurried one day event will sway minds. Either way next year is their last contracted race I believe, so if they somehow push ahead with it I'm sure that will be the last for Youghal possibly Ireland.

This word sanction is being abused to the point of being meaningless now.

Is there a governance process somewhere stating that if TI do not "sanction" the event, the event should not take place? Is it in writing somewhere?

It comes across as a CYA exercise by TI unless there is due process and procedure.

Fighting over the timing of the verbal "non sanction" is futile unless there is a defined governance process and schedule for event approval/go-ahead.

The article talks of investigations but the only specific reference to Gardai is below.

It says:

My colleague Minister Byrne has been very clear in relation to Sport Ireland now having the space and the opportunity to help try and ascertain some of those facts and I'm also very conscious that the gardaí may be preparing a file for the coroner too, so there'll be a number of processes that are underway.

That doesn't mean as part of that they will look into establishing all the facts about the event, or just do the minimum as part of a coroner's report.

I assume you don't know the draw IM events have so.

No denying the system is broken or was it ever right in the first place is the real question.

A governing body without any meaningful overall say is basically all bark and no bite.

I'd imagine the majority of entrants weren't even aware of what TI sanctioning meant before this IM event. they probably would've been none the wiser if told on the morning also but at least they would've been informed.

Everyone that entered the water Sunday did so of their own choice that is on each individual. The break down in water safety is the major issue, Metalman swim was cancelled this year as the current was so strong the current was dragging the turn buoys under. One person might say they should've just had bigger buoys another would realise the current was too strong for the majority of swimmers so better to cancel. 🤷‍♂️

I'm not sure the blame game is useful. I think now it's a matter of learning from the mistakes and making water safety paramount and the the individual or organisation should be separate from the race director/organisers.

I still firmly believe there should be a strict qualifying criteria for these races.

Indeed, personally I would say its should be up to the organisers but thats just me and ive no experience wiuth these events so not completely familiar with the relationship between the competitors, organisers and TI, there's surely a process for this that is in place as I doubt this is the first time its happened. But if there isn't an official process then that's just another problem and why we are seeing the finger pointing.

They still shouldn’t send people into seas like that though. It was difficult to navigate the safety kayaks safely never mind watch swimmers at the same time.

A touch of victim blaming going on here.

Main headline on Irish Times now is that they had to sign a waiver.

Aren't these "waivers" normal for these kinds of events?

I'm sure I've signed those for mountain runs, half-marathons, maybe even shorter distances. Hardly headline worthy is it?

Don’t know about kayaks, emergency services etc but volunteering for IM is quite common. Handing out gels, putting medals on athletes, loads of different things. I suppose a paid volunteer is a bit of an oxymoron, so no, don’t get paid afaik. People do it for many reasons: club members helping out their club mates, the sense of community, the buzz. It’s not unique to IM. Lots of commercially run races depend on volunteers. All I can say is that I’m always grateful for their help and input.

Clubs did get money towards volunteering. If you were a group you get assigned out and the club get paid (water stations, transition, check in / out etc). Another way for fundraising. This is not restricted to Tri clubs. Its paid by Ironman. Not huge money but enough to get a club involved.

We should stop blaming orginisations / events when people voluntarily participate in an event and get hurt because they can't handle the circumstances. It's their own risk. I did an Olympic triathlon (about a quarter of an Iron Man) once, when I was a teenager and very fit. Most participants were middle aged men who were not good swimmers.

And let's be clear here: an Iron Man is by definition a very high risk activity. The human body was not made for this (look up where the name Marathon came from). Most participants will be fine, but there will always be a high risk of death. Some would call it accidental, others would call it entirely self-inflicted.

I watched all the videos on the start of this swim and, although not ideal because the large number of people starting at almost the same time, I have done swimming and windsurfing in much worse conditions. I would have had no problem with that, but of course an inexperienced open water swimmer could get into difficulty. If they weren't confident in the first few meters, they could have and should have safely returned to shore.

All the people who say they have swum in worse conditions. ARE YOU INSANE???

While not familiar with Triathlon, I have some experience of the sanctioning process in another sport. I assume most sports are similar. Generally speaking sanctioning is all about compliance with the minimum H&S standards for the sport..It generally has nothing to do with being part of the Governing Bodies own schedule of events, standings etc. Essentially going thru the 'checklist' of what needs to be in place for the event to safely take place. Applications would normally be made in advance and approved in advance subject to compliance on the day. For example, in the sport I was involved in there is a requirement for a paramedic crew/ambulance to be present. Organisers would be told that if e.g. the crew were not present, the sanction is automatically invalid. The reality is that an organiser may agree to do X,Y, Z in advance, but until the day of the event, you dont really know if they will.

The big problem is that there is a huge inbalance in power between the National Governing Body and these private organisers. They seem to have a direct line to the Dept of Tourism & Sport and will frequently complain about Governing Bodies. The Dept ALWAYS backs the organiser citing tourism/economics etc. The Dept is also quick to threaten Governing Bodies with withdrawing funds e.g. Sporrs Capital and Sport Ireland NGB grants if sanction is not given.

I nentionec earlier in this thread that a Govetning Body got a dressing down for refusing to sanction an event that didnt have safety up to scratch. This was an event involving c.50 people run by a part time sole trader - not something you'd think would get such a response from high ranking government officials.

Two other things I came across in my time:

1. Private operator was refusing to put in place some safety requirements (as they cost money)........The Dept made the Governing Body arrange and pay for them out of its own funds - threatening withdrawal of grants. So essentially fees collected from members including kids were diverted to this private event.

2. Private opetator failing sanctiion process and decides to cut losses and withdraw from the event even though people from overseas had arranged travel/,hotel etc. Dept made the Governing Body run a replacement event at its own cost because of "the embarrasment to Ireland if people who paid money to come to Ireland didnt get their event.

In each of the above no additional funding was given to the Governing Body.

There is also the conflict of interest in that local authorities and the tourism bodies sometimes "sponsor" (i.e. grant aid) these events. They NEVER check with the Governing Body re sanctioning requirements.

You seem to base this on what "most trained Iron men" can handle. But someone has to make that assessment, unless you are arguing for a free for all?

They cancelled it on Saturday. By your argument, they could have gone ahead with it regardless of consequences, everything would still have been 'at own risk'. Or what basis would you argue Saturday should have been cancelled?

So there appears to be a line drawn somewhere? The question is whether, if Saturday was unsafe, Sunday was too.

I would not say that they had both cleared that section from what I heard about the Strava GPS. The one I heard about looked like he had not cleared the first buoy when he got into trouble. There's a lot of information there about how long he was in the water etc.

Well that's the key point for me: "And unless it turns out they had not taken adequate safety measures as are the norm in such event."

So you accept there is an onus on the organisers to take adequate safety measures.

Yes, the participants should make their own assessment, but if the organisers give the impression it is 'safe' then that will sway \ factor into the individual assessment.

I've seen the strava track - it looks pretty clear from stroke rate recorded that he got over 1000 yards and was well out of that area