how difficult would it really have been to get everybody to park a few km away on the nearest suitable site and then have a few pick-up trucks ferrying everybody to and fro. or even use the first aid vehicles that would have been waiting on site ready. many people could have simply walked.
probably somebody in a suit somewhere wanted a proper bus and a health and safety assessment written up.
They would never do something like organise buses though. People would have to make their own way there. Then can you imagine if some kid was knocked down by a car making their way to the race?
Somebody mentioned up thread that the Scottish Championships aren't cancelled. Thats because its an Scottish Athletics Event and they are a small group of dedicated, sensible people in charge of their national and regional events. But in Scotland, other running events are cancelled all the time. The flakiness extends very far.
I'm now beginning to think that British athletes do well because they are so used to overcoming difficulty that by the time they get to the international stage, the typical athlete problems seem quite small. And they are used to dealing with disappointment and rejection.
In Florida late last year, they held the AAU national xc races in Tallahassee where there was an absolute deluge all day with most of the waiting area under a foot of water and a pond about two to three feet deep formed near the finish line so the boys were all jumping in and swimming in the mud and water. We were absolutely soaked an hour before the race but it was fun. Most cars parked a quarter or half mile away.
Just curious, because I've seen the figure thrown around several times in reference to the senior men's race from last year, but what's the point of having 1,473 racers all in one race? Seems like it'd be very congested from the get-go, especially on a course with laps. Is there not a masters division to help split it up? Or a separate race the slower competitors can do instead? Genuinely curious because it seems like it'd be a nightmare being stuck in the midpack.
History and tradition. It's an event, on the men's side, that dates back to 1884 (officially) and was originally a "closed" club event. To run you had to be on the club team of 12, no mean feat in my old club, and there are a lot of running / athletics clubs in the UK- England athletics alone has 1600+ clubs currently affiliated. Many of these would send some athletes, hence large fields.
The National was , and still is for many, the culmination of the cross country season, following on from county champs in December, and then area champs (Southern, Northern etc) in Jan/Feb. For many athletes - far removed from the gods that are the posters on this board - making the team was a serious matter and at the National you could line-up, cheek by jowl, with greats from the English athletics scene, current and past and torture yourself over the same muddy 9 mile slog.
From the history books, the senior men's race at Newark 1992 had 2197 finishers with 246(!) clubs managing to finish 6 to score. I ran the junior race that day.
This post was edited 10 minutes after it was posted.
On the subject of laps, yes athletes at the back get lapped but the laps are long so the field gets thinned out and its pretty obvious who's up front and who's vying for the lantern rouge.
I've changed the title of the thread to reflect it's the English XC champs - not the British champs. Let's don't pin this on all of the British people - just the English.
I guess it's appropriate, right? I'm not an expert of British culture but aren't the English the ones who think they are much more sophisticated than the Scots and Welsh? I can see why they don't want to get muddy - that's very working class :)
I write that previous paragraph somewhat in gest, but can someone in the know confirm to me that the English look down upon the Scots and Welsh way more than a Northeastern elite looks down upon a Southerner in the US?
The English don't really look down on the Scots, but they do kind of look down on the Welsh.
The bigger divide is between Southern and Northern England.
Southerners think Northerners are all hicks, and Northerners think Southerners are all ponces. It's all very tied up in class politics; the North having a higher percentage of working class people, and the South being associated with London's Metropolitan elites.
Just curious, because I've seen the figure thrown around several times in reference to the senior men's race from last year, but what's the point of having 1,473 racers all in one race? Seems like it'd be very congested from the get-go, especially on a course with laps. Is there not a masters division to help split it up? Or a separate race the slower competitors can do instead? Genuinely curious because it seems like it'd be a nightmare being stuck in the midpack.
English Nationals is very much a club event. It gets decent domestic athletes, and occasionally top stars like Alex Yee, but it's primarily an event aimed at club participation. Some clubs take it very seriously, like Tonbridge, Leeds, and Farnham, but for most clubs, it's just about being there. And the UK has a really strong club system. There's 6 affiliated clubs within 10 miles of where I live.
Also, tradition matters. It's always been a big event. And one that usually goes off in the early afternoon. Most XC races continue to be run at that time because it dates back to when people used to work Saturday mornings and go to church on Sunday. Saturday afternoon was the only free time for a race.
The real top XC event in the UK, which does attract elites and usually acts as the selection race for Euro/World XC is the British Athletics Cross Challenge at Sefton Park in Liverpool in November. But even that gets over 700 for the senior men's race.
This post was edited 2 minutes after it was posted.
In Florida late last year, they held the AAU national xc races in Tallahassee where there was an absolute deluge all day with most of the waiting area under a foot of water and a pond about two to three feet deep formed near the finish line so the boys were all jumping in and swimming in the mud and water. We were absolutely soaked an hour before the race but it was fun. Most cars parked a quarter or half mile away.
I think London sucks asss. Unfortunately I have been there more than a few times.
Have you really though? In London, one sucks arse, not "asss'.
In theory yes but sucking arse is a phrase rarely bandied about, amongst any class, although it's actually quite apt to sum up the thread title. 'Bummer' vaguely comparable, in both sentiment and body part.
I think London sucks asss. Unfortunately I have been there more than a few times.
And yet you call yourself "geezer": a now obsolete Cockney (London) term 'guiser' originating from the Middle Ages. It means someone who walks around in disguise, a performer in masquerade. How confusing for you.