Rule Proposal - Safety (draft)

Mike Murray

2016-01-06

It would be best to not require it be the CR or that the danger is not limited to others A hypothetical would be:

Follow car with official, not CR, stops at a crash. Rider is disoriented and does not have recall for the crash but is attempting to remount and continue. Field is now long gone giving the rider no chance of returning to the field and endangering others.

Mike Murray
Sent from mobile device

> On Jan 6, 2016, at 06:22, Steven Beardsley via OBRA_Officials wrote:
>
> Brian, something like this is what I would suggest.
>
>> On Jan 5, 2016 4:59 PM, "Brian OBRA" wrote:
>> This is from USAC
>> Dangerous Rider. Any rider who appears to present a danger to the other competitors may be disqualified by the Chief Referee, either before, during, or after a race.
>>
>> Would that suffice as an addition to section 11?
>>
>> -Brian.
>>
>>> On Jan 5, 2016, at 6:33 AM, Seth May via OBRA_Officials wrote:
>>>
>>> Steven,
>>>
>>> I can certainly see moving parts of this to 7.6, but I don’t think 11.2 (or 11 in general) will work since I don’t believe this is conduct issue.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> When doing the new official workshops, one of my main emphasizes is that the first priorities of officials is Safety, followed by Fairness and Integrity. The rule book has a lot of tools for officials to managing fairness and integrity, but seems a bit light and vague on issues of safety. What is there is quite dispersed and is usually racer centric.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I would very much like to have a clear statement of how officials respond to rider safety issues and improve the tools they have for enforcing it. I’m not sure the current draft accomplishes those goals, but that’s why it’s a draft.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Seth
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Steven Beardsley [mailto:srbeards@gmail.com]
>>> Sent: Monday, January 04, 2016 4:50 PM
>>> To: T. Kenji Sugahara
>>> Cc: Seth May; Officials Obra
>>> Subject: Re: [OBRA Officials] Rule Proposal - Safety (draft)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The first part of this rule should all be covered by 7.6 and 11.2. I think that those existing rules could be updated to cover all of this.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 2:04 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara via OBRA_Officials wrote:
>>>
>>> Doh! I should read things in order.
>>>
>>> A couple changes I'd suggest- we don't want to create an affirmative
>>> duty to check everyone's equipment. The modified wording places the
>>> onus on the rider and gives the official discretion.
>>>
>>> During the race- don't want to commit with "will". May gives a little
>>> more discretion. Remove significant impact because most often time an
>>> official won't be able to find out whether a person had a "significant
>>> impact." Visible cracking is only way to make an objective
>>> determination. Added "obvious symptoms" but that can be left out.
>>>
>>> 3.6 Safety
>>>
>>> 3.6.1 Prior to race start
>>>
>>> Any rider whose equipment is unsafe shall not start an event unless
>>> the equipment is made safe and demonstrated to be safe to a race
>>> official.
>>>
>>> Riders who pose an inordinate danger to themselves or others shall not
>>> start an event.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 3.6.2 During racing
>>>
>>> In the case of incidents during a race, the race official may remove a
>>> rider from the event if
>>>
>>> · They perceive the rider unfit to continue
>>>
>>> · They perceive the rider to be an inordinate danger to
>>> themselves or other riders
>>>
>>> · They perceive rider’s equipment is no longer safe
>>>
>>> The race official will remove a rider if the rider's helmet has
>>> visible cracking or has obvious symptoms of a head injury.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Seth May via OBRA_Officials
>>>
>>> wrote:
>>> > Here is my draft proposal for a general Safety rule. I’ve tucked it under
>>> > “3. Officials”, but may be more appropriate elsewhere, or as its own
>>> > heading.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > 3.6 Safety
>>> >
>>> > 3.6.1 Prior to race start
>>> >
>>> > Any rider whose equipment is observed to be unsafe will not be allowed to
>>> > start an event unless the equipment is made safe and demonstrated to be safe
>>> > to a race official.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Riders who pose an inordinate danger to themselves or others will not be
>>> > allowed to start an event.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > 3.6.2 During racing
>>> >
>>> > In the case of incidents during a race, the race official will remove a
>>> > rider from the event if
>>> >
>>> > · They deem the rider unfit to continue
>>> >
>>> > · They deem the rider to be an inordinate danger to themselves or
>>> > other riders
>>> >
>>> > · The rider’s equipment is no longer safe
>>> >
>>> > · The riders helmet has suffered a significant impact or has visible
>>> > cracking
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Please send me feedback.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Thanks
>>> >
>>> > Seth
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > From: OBRA_Officials [mailto:obra_officials-bounces@list.obra.org] On Behalf
>>> > Of Mike Murray via OBRA_Officials
>>> > Sent: Monday, January 04, 2016 10:17 AM
>>> > To: obra_officials@list.obra.org
>>> > Subject: Re: [OBRA Officials] Rules question - Pulling Riders for
>>> > concussions
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Although it is certainly true that concussions are a serious issue and a
>>> > bigger deal than what used to be thought, I think that the pendulum is
>>> > swinging in the opposite direction creating fear of head injury in excess of
>>> > what is needed. I shouldn't complain as I benefit from this a bit. It is
>>> > pretty much a daily event for people to come into our clinic at the ski area
>>> > concerned that they might have a concussion despite giving a very clear
>>> > description of the injury and not having any concussion symptoms.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > In this vein, second impact syndrome is certainly a serious problem but this
>>> > is mostly an issue for contact sports and the 50% and 100% are probably
>>> > overstated. I am not aware of a single episode of second impact syndrome in
>>> > a bike racer in OR in the past 35 years. Actually concussions, though not
>>> > unheard of, are fairly uncommon. Many riders have had concussions but the
>>> > number seen by the OBRA first aid providers each year is small. There have
>>> > been a few cases where concussed riders have continued but in the vast
>>> > majority of cases riders with head injuries pull themselves from the race.
>>> > The issue for contact sports is return to play shortly or even immediately
>>> > after head injuries. Generally this is not an issue in bike racing.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > I agree that the formal rule support for removing a rider due to injury,
>>> > which shouldn't really be limited to head injury, is weak. Practically this
>>> > is not generally a problem as I cannot think of a single case where an
>>> > injured rider was asked to withdraw and then complained. I do remember an
>>> > episode of just the opposite. A rider that had an unremarkable slow speed
>>> > fall at the start of a race complained he was not stopped when he later
>>> > didn't have any recall for most of the race. We had to point out to him that
>>> > he had behaved entirely normally during the race and that performing
>>> > concussion screening in all fallen riders would practically result in all
>>> > fallen riders being removed from competition as the time it would take to do
>>> > the screen would keep them from getting back in.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > I would suggest that someone propose a rule that would address removal of a
>>> > rider identified with not only head injuries but also other injuries and
>>> > mechanical problems that would prohibit continuing safely. The rule should
>>> > not mandate that officials do any type of examination but should be
>>> > permissive to allow removal of unsafe riders.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Mike Murray
>>> >
>>> > Sent from mobile device
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Jan 4, 2016, at 07:12, Seth May via OBRA_Officials
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> > All,
>>> >
>>> > At our new official training workshop, we have training on concussions.
>>> > Athletes who experience a second impact after an initial concussion have
>>> > nearly a 50% mortality rate and almost a 100% disability rate. To allow a
>>> > rider who may have a concussion to continue to participate is irresponsible.
>>> > Based on the training, it seems clear and appropriate that officials should
>>> > pull riders suspected of having a concussion even if the rider does not want
>>> > to be pulled.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Judgments of this nature must often be made by Assistant Referees since, in
>>> > most cases, it will be impossibly to consult with the CR prior to making the
>>> > call. It is also an irreversible call (removal from competition), since the
>>> > rider cannot appeal the decision prior to it being enforced. Although this
>>> > is not a penalty and is really a rider safety issue, it will feel like a
>>> > penalty a racer who disagree with being pulled.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > From reviewing the rules, I’m not sure that pulling riders for theirs and
>>> > others safety (as opposed to a rule violation) is well supported.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Here is my summary of what I’ve found:
>>> >
>>> > · 3.5.1 Chief Referee (Duties)
>>> >
>>> > make the final decision in any case or appeal not specifically covered by
>>> > these rules. Any such decision is beyond appeal.
>>> >
>>> > if necessary, alter the conditions of any race in the interest of safety,
>>> > including cancellation of a race if necessary.
>>> >
>>> > Note: pretty vague and only applies to the CR, not ARs
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > · 15.1.2 General Rules (Road Racing)
>>> >
>>> > Any rider who is out of contention may be asked to withdraw by the Chief
>>> > Referee.
>>> >
>>> > Note: The rider might not always be out of contention, and it will often be
>>> > an AR. Only applies to road events.
>>> >
>>> > Also 15.4.4 Riders out of contention (Criteriums)
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > · 15.7.2 Immediate disqualification (Road Racing Penalties)
>>> >
>>> > A Chief Referee may empower referees to immediately disqualify riders during
>>> > racing.
>>> >
>>> > Note: This is not a penalty, it is a rider safety issue. Only applies to
>>> > road events.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Am I missing something obvious in the rules that would allow pulling riders
>>> > in these situations?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Thanks
>>> >
>>> > Seth
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > OBRA_Officials mailing list
>>> > OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
>>> > http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > OBRA_Officials mailing list
>>> > OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
>>> > http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Kenji Sugahara
>>> Executive Director
>>> Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
>>> Phone: 503-278-5550
>>> http://www.obra.org
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OBRA_Officials mailing list
>>> OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
>>> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OBRA_Officials mailing list
>>> OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
>>> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA_Officials mailing list
> OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials


Steven Beardsley

2016-01-06

Brian, something like this is what I would suggest.
On Jan 5, 2016 4:59 PM, "Brian OBRA" wrote:

> This is from USAC
>
> Dangerous Rider. Any rider who appears to present a danger to the other
> competitors may be disqualified by the Chief Referee, either before,
> during, or after a race.
> Would that suffice as an addition to section 11?
>
> -Brian.
>
> On Jan 5, 2016, at 6:33 AM, Seth May via OBRA_Officials <
> obra_officials@list.obra.org> wrote:
>
> Steven,
>
> I can certainly see moving parts of this to 7.6, but I don’t think 11.2
> (or 11 in general) will work since I don’t believe this is conduct issue.
>
>
>
> When doing the new official workshops, one of my main emphasizes is that
> the first priorities of officials is Safety, followed by Fairness and
> Integrity. The rule book has a lot of tools for officials to managing
> fairness and integrity, but seems a bit light and vague on issues of
> safety. What is there is quite dispersed and is usually racer centric.
>
>
>
> I would very much like to have a clear statement of how *officials*
> respond to rider safety issues and improve the tools they have for
> enforcing it. I’m not sure the current draft accomplishes those goals, but
> that’s why it’s a draft.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Seth
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Steven Beardsley [mailto:srbeards@gmail.com ]
> *Sent:* Monday, January 04, 2016 4:50 PM
> *To:* T. Kenji Sugahara
> *Cc:* Seth May; Officials Obra
> *Subject:* Re: [OBRA Officials] Rule Proposal - Safety (draft)
>
>
>
> The first part of this rule should all be covered by 7.6 and 11.2. I think
> that those existing rules could be updated to cover all of this.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 2:04 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara via OBRA_Officials <
> obra_officials@list.obra.org> wrote:
>
> Doh! I should read things in order.
>
> A couple changes I'd suggest- we don't want to create an affirmative
> duty to check everyone's equipment. The modified wording places the
> onus on the rider and gives the official discretion.
>
> During the race- don't want to commit with "will". May gives a little
> more discretion. Remove significant impact because most often time an
> official won't be able to find out whether a person had a "significant
> impact." Visible cracking is only way to make an objective
> determination. Added "obvious symptoms" but that can be left out.
>
> 3.6 Safety
>
> 3.6.1 Prior to race start
>
> Any rider whose equipment is unsafe shall not start an event unless
> the equipment is made safe and demonstrated to be safe to a race
> official.
>
> Riders who pose an inordinate danger to themselves or others shall not
> start an event.
>
>
>
> 3.6.2 During racing
>
> In the case of incidents during a race, the race official may remove a
> rider from the event if
>
> · They perceive the rider unfit to continue
>
> · They perceive the rider to be an inordinate danger to
> themselves or other riders
>
> · They perceive rider’s equipment is no longer safe
>
> The race official will remove a rider if the rider's helmet has
> visible cracking or has obvious symptoms of a head injury.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Seth May via OBRA_Officials
>
> wrote:
> > Here is my draft proposal for a general Safety rule. I’ve tucked it under
> > “3. Officials”, but may be more appropriate elsewhere, or as its own
> > heading.
> >
> >
> >
> > 3.6 Safety
> >
> > 3.6.1 Prior to race start
> >
> > Any rider whose equipment is observed to be unsafe will not be allowed to
> > start an event unless the equipment is made safe and demonstrated to be
> safe
> > to a race official.
> >
> >
> >
> > Riders who pose an inordinate danger to themselves or others will not be
> > allowed to start an event.
> >
> >
> >
> > 3.6.2 During racing
> >
> > In the case of incidents during a race, the race official will remove a
> > rider from the event if
> >
> > · They deem the rider unfit to continue
> >
> > · They deem the rider to be an inordinate danger to themselves or
> > other riders
> >
> > · The rider’s equipment is no longer safe
> >
> > · The riders helmet has suffered a significant impact or has
> visible
> > cracking
> >
> >
> >
> > Please send me feedback.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Seth
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > From: OBRA_Officials [mailto:obra_officials-bounces@list.obra.org] On
> Behalf
> > Of Mike Murray via OBRA_Officials
> > Sent: Monday, January 04, 2016 10:17 AM
> > To: obra_officials@list.obra.org
> > Subject: Re: [OBRA Officials] Rules question - Pulling Riders for
> > concussions
> >
> >
> >
> > Although it is certainly true that concussions are a serious issue and a
> > bigger deal than what used to be thought, I think that the pendulum is
> > swinging in the opposite direction creating fear of head injury in
> excess of
> > what is needed. I shouldn't complain as I benefit from this a bit. It is
> > pretty much a daily event for people to come into our clinic at the ski
> area
> > concerned that they might have a concussion despite giving a very clear
> > description of the injury and not having any concussion symptoms.
> >
> >
> >
> > In this vein, second impact syndrome is certainly a serious problem but
> this
> > is mostly an issue for contact sports and the 50% and 100% are probably
> > overstated. I am not aware of a single episode of second impact syndrome
> in
> > a bike racer in OR in the past 35 years. Actually concussions, though not
> > unheard of, are fairly uncommon. Many riders have had concussions but the
> > number seen by the OBRA first aid providers each year is small. There
> have
> > been a few cases where concussed riders have continued but in the vast
> > majority of cases riders with head injuries pull themselves from the
> race.
> > The issue for contact sports is return to play shortly or even
> immediately
> > after head injuries. Generally this is not an issue in bike racing.
> >
> >
> >
> > I agree that the formal rule support for removing a rider due to injury,
> > which shouldn't really be limited to head injury, is weak. Practically
> this
> > is not generally a problem as I cannot think of a single case where an
> > injured rider was asked to withdraw and then complained. I do remember an
> > episode of just the opposite. A rider that had an unremarkable slow speed
> > fall at the start of a race complained he was not stopped when he later
> > didn't have any recall for most of the race. We had to point out to him
> that
> > he had behaved entirely normally during the race and that performing
> > concussion screening in all fallen riders would practically result in all
> > fallen riders being removed from competition as the time it would take
> to do
> > the screen would keep them from getting back in.
> >
> >
> >
> > I would suggest that someone propose a rule that would address removal
> of a
> > rider identified with not only head injuries but also other injuries and
> > mechanical problems that would prohibit continuing safely. The rule
> should
> > not mandate that officials do any type of examination but should be
> > permissive to allow removal of unsafe riders.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Mike Murray
> >
> > Sent from mobile device
> >
> >
> > On Jan 4, 2016, at 07:12, Seth May via OBRA_Officials
> > wrote:
> >
> > All,
> >
> > At our new official training workshop, we have training on concussions.
> > Athletes who experience a second impact after an initial concussion have
> > nearly a 50% mortality rate and almost a 100% disability rate. To allow a
> > rider who may have a concussion to continue to participate is
> irresponsible.
> > Based on the training, it seems clear and appropriate that officials
> should
> > pull riders suspected of having a concussion even if the rider does not
> want
> > to be pulled.
> >
> >
> >
> > Judgments of this nature must often be made by Assistant Referees since,
> in
> > most cases, it will be impossibly to consult with the CR prior to making
> the
> > call. It is also an irreversible call (removal from competition), since
> the
> > rider cannot appeal the decision prior to it being enforced. Although
> this
> > is not a penalty and is really a rider safety issue, it will feel like a
> > penalty a racer who disagree with being pulled.
> >
> >
> >
> > From reviewing the rules, I’m not sure that pulling riders for theirs and
> > others safety (as opposed to a rule violation) is well supported.
> >
> >
> >
> > Here is my summary of what I’ve found:
> >
> > · 3.5.1 Chief Referee (Duties)
> >
> > make the final decision in any case or appeal not specifically covered by
> > these rules. Any such decision is beyond appeal.
> >
> > if necessary, alter the conditions of any race in the interest of safety,
> > including cancellation of a race if necessary.
> >
> > Note: pretty vague and only applies to the CR, not ARs
> >
> >
> >
> > · 15.1.2 General Rules (Road Racing)
> >
> > Any rider who is out of contention may be asked to withdraw by the Chief
> > Referee.
> >
> > Note: The rider might not always be out of contention, and it will often
> be
> > an AR. Only applies to road events.
> >
> > Also 15.4.4 Riders out of contention (Criteriums)
> >
> >
> >
> > · 15.7.2 Immediate disqualification (Road Racing Penalties)
> >
> > A Chief Referee may empower referees to immediately disqualify riders
> during
> > racing.
> >
> > Note: This is not a penalty, it is a rider safety issue. Only applies to
> > road events.
> >
> >
> >
> > Am I missing something obvious in the rules that would allow pulling
> riders
> > in these situations?
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Seth
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > OBRA_Officials mailing list
> > OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
> > http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > OBRA_Officials mailing list
> > OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
> > http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
> >
>
>
> --
> Kenji Sugahara
> Executive Director
> Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
> Phone: 503-278-5550
> http://www.obra.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA_Officials mailing list
> OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA_Officials mailing list
> OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
>
>


I suggest incorporating something like the USAC paragraph, supplemented by training on how this might be applied in case of a crash.

I fully support the goal of increased rider safety, and appreciate Seth for bringing this up and making a recommendation.

But, I am paranoid about having too many explicit (or implicit, I guess) expectations placed on the officials regarding safety. It could open the door to liability issues.

Thanks,
Ron

> On Jan 5, 2016, at 5:00 PM, Brian OBRA via OBRA_Officials wrote:
>
> This is from USAC
> Dangerous Rider. Any rider who appears to present a danger to the other competitors may be disqualified by the Chief Referee, either before, during, or after a race.
>
> Would that suffice as an addition to section 11?
>
> -Brian.
>
>> On Jan 5, 2016, at 6:33 AM, Seth May via OBRA_Officials wrote:
>>
>> Steven,
>> I can certainly see moving parts of this to 7.6, but I don’t think 11.2 (or 11 in general) will work since I don’t believe this is conduct issue.
>>
>> When doing the new official workshops, one of my main emphasizes is that the first priorities of officials is Safety, followed by Fairness and Integrity. The rule book has a lot of tools for officials to managing fairness and integrity, but seems a bit light and vague on issues of safety. What is there is quite dispersed and is usually racer centric.
>>
>> I would very much like to have a clear statement of how officials respond to rider safety issues and improve the tools they have for enforcing it. I’m not sure the current draft accomplishes those goals, but that’s why it’s a draft.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Seth
>>
>>
>> From: Steven Beardsley [mailto:srbeards@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Monday, January 04, 2016 4:50 PM
>> To: T. Kenji Sugahara
>> Cc: Seth May; Officials Obra
>> Subject: Re: [OBRA Officials] Rule Proposal - Safety (draft)
>>
>> The first part of this rule should all be covered by 7.6 and 11.2. I think that those existing rules could be updated to cover all of this.
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 2:04 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara via OBRA_Officials wrote:
>> Doh! I should read things in order.
>>
>> A couple changes I'd suggest- we don't want to create an affirmative
>> duty to check everyone's equipment. The modified wording places the
>> onus on the rider and gives the official discretion.
>>
>> During the race- don't want to commit with "will". May gives a little
>> more discretion. Remove significant impact because most often time an
>> official won't be able to find out whether a person had a "significant
>> impact." Visible cracking is only way to make an objective
>> determination. Added "obvious symptoms" but that can be left out.
>>
>> 3.6 Safety
>>
>> 3.6.1 Prior to race start
>>
>> Any rider whose equipment is unsafe shall not start an event unless
>> the equipment is made safe and demonstrated to be safe to a race
>> official.
>>
>> Riders who pose an inordinate danger to themselves or others shall not
>> start an event.
>>
>>
>>
>> 3.6.2 During racing
>>
>> In the case of incidents during a race, the race official may remove a
>> rider from the event if
>>
>> · They perceive the rider unfit to continue
>>
>> · They perceive the rider to be an inordinate danger to
>> themselves or other riders
>>
>> · They perceive rider’s equipment is no longer safe
>>
>> The race official will remove a rider if the rider's helmet has
>> visible cracking or has obvious symptoms of a head injury.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Seth May via OBRA_Officials
>> wrote:
>> > Here is my draft proposal for a general Safety rule. I’ve tucked it under
>> > “3. Officials”, but may be more appropriate elsewhere, or as its own
>> > heading.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > 3.6 Safety
>> >
>> > 3.6.1 Prior to race start
>> >
>> > Any rider whose equipment is observed to be unsafe will not be allowed to
>> > start an event unless the equipment is made safe and demonstrated to be safe
>> > to a race official.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Riders who pose an inordinate danger to themselves or others will not be
>> > allowed to start an event.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > 3.6.2 During racing
>> >
>> > In the case of incidents during a race, the race official will remove a
>> > rider from the event if
>> >
>> > · They deem the rider unfit to continue
>> >
>> > · They deem the rider to be an inordinate danger to themselves or
>> > other riders
>> >
>> > · The rider’s equipment is no longer safe
>> >
>> > · The riders helmet has suffered a significant impact or has visible
>> > cracking
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Please send me feedback.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Thanks
>> >
>> > Seth
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > From: OBRA_Officials [mailto:obra_officials-bounces@list.obra.org] On Behalf
>> > Of Mike Murray via OBRA_Officials
>> > Sent: Monday, January 04, 2016 10:17 AM
>> > To: obra_officials@list.obra.org
>> > Subject: Re: [OBRA Officials] Rules question - Pulling Riders for
>> > concussions
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Although it is certainly true that concussions are a serious issue and a
>> > bigger deal than what used to be thought, I think that the pendulum is
>> > swinging in the opposite direction creating fear of head injury in excess of
>> > what is needed. I shouldn't complain as I benefit from this a bit. It is
>> > pretty much a daily event for people to come into our clinic at the ski area
>> > concerned that they might have a concussion despite giving a very clear
>> > description of the injury and not having any concussion symptoms.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > In this vein, second impact syndrome is certainly a serious problem but this
>> > is mostly an issue for contact sports and the 50% and 100% are probably
>> > overstated. I am not aware of a single episode of second impact syndrome in
>> > a bike racer in OR in the past 35 years. Actually concussions, though not
>> > unheard of, are fairly uncommon. Many riders have had concussions but the
>> > number seen by the OBRA first aid providers each year is small. There have
>> > been a few cases where concussed riders have continued but in the vast
>> > majority of cases riders with head injuries pull themselves from the race.
>> > The issue for contact sports is return to play shortly or even immediately
>> > after head injuries. Generally this is not an issue in bike racing.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > I agree that the formal rule support for removing a rider due to injury,
>> > which shouldn't really be limited to head injury, is weak. Practically this
>> > is not generally a problem as I cannot think of a single case where an
>> > injured rider was asked to withdraw and then complained. I do remember an
>> > episode of just the opposite. A rider that had an unremarkable slow speed
>> > fall at the start of a race complained he was not stopped when he later
>> > didn't have any recall for most of the race. We had to point out to him that
>> > he had behaved entirely normally during the race and that performing
>> > concussion screening in all fallen riders would practically result in all
>> > fallen riders being removed from competition as the time it would take to do
>> > the screen would keep them from getting back in.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > I would suggest that someone propose a rule that would address removal of a
>> > rider identified with not only head injuries but also other injuries and
>> > mechanical problems that would prohibit continuing safely. The rule should
>> > not mandate that officials do any type of examination but should be
>> > permissive to allow removal of unsafe riders.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Mike Murray
>> >
>> > Sent from mobile device
>> >
>> >
>> > On Jan 4, 2016, at 07:12, Seth May via OBRA_Officials
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > All,
>> >
>> > At our new official training workshop, we have training on concussions.
>> > Athletes who experience a second impact after an initial concussion have
>> > nearly a 50% mortality rate and almost a 100% disability rate. To allow a
>> > rider who may have a concussion to continue to participate is irresponsible.
>> > Based on the training, it seems clear and appropriate that officials should
>> > pull riders suspected of having a concussion even if the rider does not want
>> > to be pulled.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Judgments of this nature must often be made by Assistant Referees since, in
>> > most cases, it will be impossibly to consult with the CR prior to making the
>> > call. It is also an irreversible call (removal from competition), since the
>> > rider cannot appeal the decision prior to it being enforced. Although this
>> > is not a penalty and is really a rider safety issue, it will feel like a
>> > penalty a racer who disagree with being pulled.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > From reviewing the rules, I’m not sure that pulling riders for theirs and
>> > others safety (as opposed to a rule violation) is well supported.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Here is my summary of what I’ve found:
>> >
>> > · 3.5.1 Chief Referee (Duties)
>> >
>> > make the final decision in any case or appeal not specifically covered by
>> > these rules. Any such decision is beyond appeal.
>> >
>> > if necessary, alter the conditions of any race in the interest of safety,
>> > including cancellation of a race if necessary.
>> >
>> > Note: pretty vague and only applies to the CR, not ARs
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > · 15.1.2 General Rules (Road Racing)
>> >
>> > Any rider who is out of contention may be asked to withdraw by the Chief
>> > Referee.
>> >
>> > Note: The rider might not always be out of contention, and it will often be
>> > an AR. Only applies to road events.
>> >
>> > Also 15.4.4 Riders out of contention (Criteriums)
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > · 15.7.2 Immediate disqualification (Road Racing Penalties)
>> >
>> > A Chief Referee may empower referees to immediately disqualify riders during
>> > racing.
>> >
>> > Note: This is not a penalty, it is a rider safety issue. Only applies to
>> > road events.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Am I missing something obvious in the rules that would allow pulling riders
>> > in these situations?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Thanks
>> >
>> > Seth
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > OBRA_Officials mailing list
>> > OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
>> > http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > OBRA_Officials mailing list
>> > OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
>> > http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Kenji Sugahara
>> Executive Director
>> Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
>> Phone: 503-278-5550
>> http://www.obra.org
>> _______________________________________________
>> OBRA_Officials mailing list
>> OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
>> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OBRA_Officials mailing list
>> OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
>> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA_Officials mailing list
> OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials


Brian OBRA

2016-01-06

This is from USAC
Dangerous Rider. Any rider who appears to present a danger to the other competitors may be disqualified by the Chief Referee, either before, during, or after a race.

Would that suffice as an addition to section 11?

-Brian.

> On Jan 5, 2016, at 6:33 AM, Seth May via OBRA_Officials wrote:
>
> Steven,
> I can certainly see moving parts of this to 7.6, but I don’t think 11.2 (or 11 in general) will work since I don’t believe this is conduct issue.
>
> When doing the new official workshops, one of my main emphasizes is that the first priorities of officials is Safety, followed by Fairness and Integrity. The rule book has a lot of tools for officials to managing fairness and integrity, but seems a bit light and vague on issues of safety. What is there is quite dispersed and is usually racer centric.
>
> I would very much like to have a clear statement of how officials respond to rider safety issues and improve the tools they have for enforcing it. I’m not sure the current draft accomplishes those goals, but that’s why it’s a draft.
>
> Thanks
> Seth
>
>
> From: Steven Beardsley [mailto:srbeards@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 04, 2016 4:50 PM
> To: T. Kenji Sugahara
> Cc: Seth May; Officials Obra
> Subject: Re: [OBRA Officials] Rule Proposal - Safety (draft)
>
> The first part of this rule should all be covered by 7.6 and 11.2. I think that those existing rules could be updated to cover all of this.
>
> On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 2:04 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara via OBRA_Officials wrote:
> Doh! I should read things in order.
>
> A couple changes I'd suggest- we don't want to create an affirmative
> duty to check everyone's equipment. The modified wording places the
> onus on the rider and gives the official discretion.
>
> During the race- don't want to commit with "will". May gives a little
> more discretion. Remove significant impact because most often time an
> official won't be able to find out whether a person had a "significant
> impact." Visible cracking is only way to make an objective
> determination. Added "obvious symptoms" but that can be left out.
>
> 3.6 Safety
>
> 3.6.1 Prior to race start
>
> Any rider whose equipment is unsafe shall not start an event unless
> the equipment is made safe and demonstrated to be safe to a race
> official.
>
> Riders who pose an inordinate danger to themselves or others shall not
> start an event.
>
>
>
> 3.6.2 During racing
>
> In the case of incidents during a race, the race official may remove a
> rider from the event if
>
> · They perceive the rider unfit to continue
>
> · They perceive the rider to be an inordinate danger to
> themselves or other riders
>
> · They perceive rider’s equipment is no longer safe
>
> The race official will remove a rider if the rider's helmet has
> visible cracking or has obvious symptoms of a head injury.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Seth May via OBRA_Officials
> wrote:
> > Here is my draft proposal for a general Safety rule. I’ve tucked it under
> > “3. Officials”, but may be more appropriate elsewhere, or as its own
> > heading.
> >
> >
> >
> > 3.6 Safety
> >
> > 3.6.1 Prior to race start
> >
> > Any rider whose equipment is observed to be unsafe will not be allowed to
> > start an event unless the equipment is made safe and demonstrated to be safe
> > to a race official.
> >
> >
> >
> > Riders who pose an inordinate danger to themselves or others will not be
> > allowed to start an event.
> >
> >
> >
> > 3.6.2 During racing
> >
> > In the case of incidents during a race, the race official will remove a
> > rider from the event if
> >
> > · They deem the rider unfit to continue
> >
> > · They deem the rider to be an inordinate danger to themselves or
> > other riders
> >
> > · The rider’s equipment is no longer safe
> >
> > · The riders helmet has suffered a significant impact or has visible
> > cracking
> >
> >
> >
> > Please send me feedback.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Seth
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > From: OBRA_Officials [mailto:obra_officials-bounces@list.obra.org] On Behalf
> > Of Mike Murray via OBRA_Officials
> > Sent: Monday, January 04, 2016 10:17 AM
> > To: obra_officials@list.obra.org
> > Subject: Re: [OBRA Officials] Rules question - Pulling Riders for
> > concussions
> >
> >
> >
> > Although it is certainly true that concussions are a serious issue and a
> > bigger deal than what used to be thought, I think that the pendulum is
> > swinging in the opposite direction creating fear of head injury in excess of
> > what is needed. I shouldn't complain as I benefit from this a bit. It is
> > pretty much a daily event for people to come into our clinic at the ski area
> > concerned that they might have a concussion despite giving a very clear
> > description of the injury and not having any concussion symptoms.
> >
> >
> >
> > In this vein, second impact syndrome is certainly a serious problem but this
> > is mostly an issue for contact sports and the 50% and 100% are probably
> > overstated. I am not aware of a single episode of second impact syndrome in
> > a bike racer in OR in the past 35 years. Actually concussions, though not
> > unheard of, are fairly uncommon. Many riders have had concussions but the
> > number seen by the OBRA first aid providers each year is small. There have
> > been a few cases where concussed riders have continued but in the vast
> > majority of cases riders with head injuries pull themselves from the race.
> > The issue for contact sports is return to play shortly or even immediately
> > after head injuries. Generally this is not an issue in bike racing.
> >
> >
> >
> > I agree that the formal rule support for removing a rider due to injury,
> > which shouldn't really be limited to head injury, is weak. Practically this
> > is not generally a problem as I cannot think of a single case where an
> > injured rider was asked to withdraw and then complained. I do remember an
> > episode of just the opposite. A rider that had an unremarkable slow speed
> > fall at the start of a race complained he was not stopped when he later
> > didn't have any recall for most of the race. We had to point out to him that
> > he had behaved entirely normally during the race and that performing
> > concussion screening in all fallen riders would practically result in all
> > fallen riders being removed from competition as the time it would take to do
> > the screen would keep them from getting back in.
> >
> >
> >
> > I would suggest that someone propose a rule that would address removal of a
> > rider identified with not only head injuries but also other injuries and
> > mechanical problems that would prohibit continuing safely. The rule should
> > not mandate that officials do any type of examination but should be
> > permissive to allow removal of unsafe riders.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Mike Murray
> >
> > Sent from mobile device
> >
> >
> > On Jan 4, 2016, at 07:12, Seth May via OBRA_Officials
> > wrote:
> >
> > All,
> >
> > At our new official training workshop, we have training on concussions.
> > Athletes who experience a second impact after an initial concussion have
> > nearly a 50% mortality rate and almost a 100% disability rate. To allow a
> > rider who may have a concussion to continue to participate is irresponsible.
> > Based on the training, it seems clear and appropriate that officials should
> > pull riders suspected of having a concussion even if the rider does not want
> > to be pulled.
> >
> >
> >
> > Judgments of this nature must often be made by Assistant Referees since, in
> > most cases, it will be impossibly to consult with the CR prior to making the
> > call. It is also an irreversible call (removal from competition), since the
> > rider cannot appeal the decision prior to it being enforced. Although this
> > is not a penalty and is really a rider safety issue, it will feel like a
> > penalty a racer who disagree with being pulled.
> >
> >
> >
> > From reviewing the rules, I’m not sure that pulling riders for theirs and
> > others safety (as opposed to a rule violation) is well supported.
> >
> >
> >
> > Here is my summary of what I’ve found:
> >
> > · 3.5.1 Chief Referee (Duties)
> >
> > make the final decision in any case or appeal not specifically covered by
> > these rules. Any such decision is beyond appeal.
> >
> > if necessary, alter the conditions of any race in the interest of safety,
> > including cancellation of a race if necessary.
> >
> > Note: pretty vague and only applies to the CR, not ARs
> >
> >
> >
> > · 15.1.2 General Rules (Road Racing)
> >
> > Any rider who is out of contention may be asked to withdraw by the Chief
> > Referee.
> >
> > Note: The rider might not always be out of contention, and it will often be
> > an AR. Only applies to road events.
> >
> > Also 15.4.4 Riders out of contention (Criteriums)
> >
> >
> >
> > · 15.7.2 Immediate disqualification (Road Racing Penalties)
> >
> > A Chief Referee may empower referees to immediately disqualify riders during
> > racing.
> >
> > Note: This is not a penalty, it is a rider safety issue. Only applies to
> > road events.
> >
> >
> >
> > Am I missing something obvious in the rules that would allow pulling riders
> > in these situations?
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Seth
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > OBRA_Officials mailing list
> > OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
> > http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > OBRA_Officials mailing list
> > OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
> > http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Kenji Sugahara
> Executive Director
> Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
> Phone: 503-278-5550
> http://www.obra.org
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA_Officials mailing list
> OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
>
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA_Officials mailing list
> OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials


Mike Ripley

2016-01-05

Seth

Excuse my side bar

I think you are onto something that has been hard for OBRA to wrap inside
of rules to a certain degree and having rules creates opportunity for
failure in a subjective world when the ref's are not EMT's or doctors for
90% of the events.

I know some 10 years ago I attempted and failed to place a bit of etiquette
related to trail safety and mountain biking. While my request was most
definitely outside of the rule book and shut down, I wanted it represented
to educate so many riders that come into our sport through OBRA.

I am not sure what the answer is, but I appreciate the safety concern.

Would a suggestion of adding an addendum to safety be added to the rule
book, or possibly some guidelines that maybe another group like the BTA has
crafted to be placed outside of the rule book to guide new members on our
website.

I've had 3 concussions, one in which candi Yarded me off the course in
1999, or better said I woke up in time to miss drag my torn up face off the
course before the next cx wave hit me.

Finding the hospital in Washington was the tough part, the easiest part was
if you say you blacked out, you get better service

Mike

On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 6:33 AM, Seth May via OBRA_Officials <
obra_officials@list.obra.org> wrote:

> Steven,
>
> I can certainly see moving parts of this to 7.6, but I don’t think 11.2
> (or 11 in general) will work since I don’t believe this is conduct issue.
>
>
>
> When doing the new official workshops, one of my main emphasizes is that
> the first priorities of officials is Safety, followed by Fairness and
> Integrity. The rule book has a lot of tools for officials to managing
> fairness and integrity, but seems a bit light and vague on issues of
> safety. What is there is quite dispersed and is usually racer centric.
>
>
>
> I would very much like to have a clear statement of how *officials*
> respond to rider safety issues and improve the tools they have for
> enforcing it. I’m not sure the current draft accomplishes those goals, but
> that’s why it’s a draft.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Seth
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Steven Beardsley [mailto:srbeards@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Monday, January 04, 2016 4:50 PM
> *To:* T. Kenji Sugahara
> *Cc:* Seth May; Officials Obra
> *Subject:* Re: [OBRA Officials] Rule Proposal - Safety (draft)
>
>
>
> The first part of this rule should all be covered by 7.6 and 11.2. I think
> that those existing rules could be updated to cover all of this.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 2:04 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara via OBRA_Officials <
> obra_officials@list.obra.org> wrote:
>
> Doh! I should read things in order.
>
> A couple changes I'd suggest- we don't want to create an affirmative
> duty to check everyone's equipment. The modified wording places the
> onus on the rider and gives the official discretion.
>
> During the race- don't want to commit with "will". May gives a little
> more discretion. Remove significant impact because most often time an
> official won't be able to find out whether a person had a "significant
> impact." Visible cracking is only way to make an objective
> determination. Added "obvious symptoms" but that can be left out.
>
> 3.6 Safety
>
> 3.6.1 Prior to race start
>
> Any rider whose equipment is unsafe shall not start an event unless
> the equipment is made safe and demonstrated to be safe to a race
> official.
>
> Riders who pose an inordinate danger to themselves or others shall not
> start an event.
>
>
>
> 3.6.2 During racing
>
> In the case of incidents during a race, the race official may remove a
> rider from the event if
>
> · They perceive the rider unfit to continue
>
> · They perceive the rider to be an inordinate danger to
> themselves or other riders
>
> · They perceive rider’s equipment is no longer safe
>
> The race official will remove a rider if the rider's helmet has
> visible cracking or has obvious symptoms of a head injury.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Seth May via OBRA_Officials
>
> wrote:
> > Here is my draft proposal for a general Safety rule. I’ve tucked it under
> > “3. Officials”, but may be more appropriate elsewhere, or as its own
> > heading.
> >
> >
> >
> > 3.6 Safety
> >
> > 3.6.1 Prior to race start
> >
> > Any rider whose equipment is observed to be unsafe will not be allowed to
> > start an event unless the equipment is made safe and demonstrated to be
> safe
> > to a race official.
> >
> >
> >
> > Riders who pose an inordinate danger to themselves or others will not be
> > allowed to start an event.
> >
> >
> >
> > 3.6.2 During racing
> >
> > In the case of incidents during a race, the race official will remove a
> > rider from the event if
> >
> > · They deem the rider unfit to continue
> >
> > · They deem the rider to be an inordinate danger to themselves or
> > other riders
> >
> > · The rider’s equipment is no longer safe
> >
> > · The riders helmet has suffered a significant impact or has
> visible
> > cracking
> >
> >
> >
> > Please send me feedback.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Seth
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > From: OBRA_Officials [mailto:obra_officials-bounces@list.obra.org] On
> Behalf
> > Of Mike Murray via OBRA_Officials
> > Sent: Monday, January 04, 2016 10:17 AM
> > To: obra_officials@list.obra.org
> > Subject: Re: [OBRA Officials] Rules question - Pulling Riders for
> > concussions
> >
> >
> >
> > Although it is certainly true that concussions are a serious issue and a
> > bigger deal than what used to be thought, I think that the pendulum is
> > swinging in the opposite direction creating fear of head injury in
> excess of
> > what is needed. I shouldn't complain as I benefit from this a bit. It is
> > pretty much a daily event for people to come into our clinic at the ski
> area
> > concerned that they might have a concussion despite giving a very clear
> > description of the injury and not having any concussion symptoms.
> >
> >
> >
> > In this vein, second impact syndrome is certainly a serious problem but
> this
> > is mostly an issue for contact sports and the 50% and 100% are probably
> > overstated. I am not aware of a single episode of second impact syndrome
> in
> > a bike racer in OR in the past 35 years. Actually concussions, though not
> > unheard of, are fairly uncommon. Many riders have had concussions but the
> > number seen by the OBRA first aid providers each year is small. There
> have
> > been a few cases where concussed riders have continued but in the vast
> > majority of cases riders with head injuries pull themselves from the
> race.
> > The issue for contact sports is return to play shortly or even
> immediately
> > after head injuries. Generally this is not an issue in bike racing.
> >
> >
> >
> > I agree that the formal rule support for removing a rider due to injury,
> > which shouldn't really be limited to head injury, is weak. Practically
> this
> > is not generally a problem as I cannot think of a single case where an
> > injured rider was asked to withdraw and then complained. I do remember an
> > episode of just the opposite. A rider that had an unremarkable slow speed
> > fall at the start of a race complained he was not stopped when he later
> > didn't have any recall for most of the race. We had to point out to him
> that
> > he had behaved entirely normally during the race and that performing
> > concussion screening in all fallen riders would practically result in all
> > fallen riders being removed from competition as the time it would take
> to do
> > the screen would keep them from getting back in.
> >
> >
> >
> > I would suggest that someone propose a rule that would address removal
> of a
> > rider identified with not only head injuries but also other injuries and
> > mechanical problems that would prohibit continuing safely. The rule
> should
> > not mandate that officials do any type of examination but should be
> > permissive to allow removal of unsafe riders.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Mike Murray
> >
> > Sent from mobile device
> >
> >
> > On Jan 4, 2016, at 07:12, Seth May via OBRA_Officials
> > wrote:
> >
> > All,
> >
> > At our new official training workshop, we have training on concussions.
> > Athletes who experience a second impact after an initial concussion have
> > nearly a 50% mortality rate and almost a 100% disability rate. To allow a
> > rider who may have a concussion to continue to participate is
> irresponsible.
> > Based on the training, it seems clear and appropriate that officials
> should
> > pull riders suspected of having a concussion even if the rider does not
> want
> > to be pulled.
> >
> >
> >
> > Judgments of this nature must often be made by Assistant Referees since,
> in
> > most cases, it will be impossibly to consult with the CR prior to making
> the
> > call. It is also an irreversible call (removal from competition), since
> the
> > rider cannot appeal the decision prior to it being enforced. Although
> this
> > is not a penalty and is really a rider safety issue, it will feel like a
> > penalty a racer who disagree with being pulled.
> >
> >
> >
> > From reviewing the rules, I’m not sure that pulling riders for theirs and
> > others safety (as opposed to a rule violation) is well supported.
> >
> >
> >
> > Here is my summary of what I’ve found:
> >
> > · 3.5.1 Chief Referee (Duties)
> >
> > make the final decision in any case or appeal not specifically covered by
> > these rules. Any such decision is beyond appeal.
> >
> > if necessary, alter the conditions of any race in the interest of safety,
> > including cancellation of a race if necessary.
> >
> > Note: pretty vague and only applies to the CR, not ARs
> >
> >
> >
> > · 15.1.2 General Rules (Road Racing)
> >
> > Any rider who is out of contention may be asked to withdraw by the Chief
> > Referee.
> >
> > Note: The rider might not always be out of contention, and it will often
> be
> > an AR. Only applies to road events.
> >
> > Also 15.4.4 Riders out of contention (Criteriums)
> >
> >
> >
> > · 15.7.2 Immediate disqualification (Road Racing Penalties)
> >
> > A Chief Referee may empower referees to immediately disqualify riders
> during
> > racing.
> >
> > Note: This is not a penalty, it is a rider safety issue. Only applies to
> > road events.
> >
> >
> >
> > Am I missing something obvious in the rules that would allow pulling
> riders
> > in these situations?
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Seth
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > OBRA_Officials mailing list
> > OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
> > http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > OBRA_Officials mailing list
> > OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
> > http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
> >
>
>
> --
> Kenji Sugahara
> Executive Director
> Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
> Phone: 503-278-5550
> http://www.obra.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA_Officials mailing list
> OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA_Officials mailing list
> OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
>
>

--
Mike Ripley
Mudslinger Events LLC DBA Oregon Trail Runs
www.mudslingerevents.com
www.oregontriplecrown.com
www.oregontrailruns.com

Twitter@ripleyoutdoors
PO BOX 87
Monroe, OR. 97456
541-225-7946


Seth May

2016-01-05

Steven,

I can certainly see moving parts of this to 7.6, but I don’t think 11.2 (or 11 in general) will work since I don’t believe this is conduct issue.

When doing the new official workshops, one of my main emphasizes is that the first priorities of officials is Safety, followed by Fairness and Integrity. The rule book has a lot of tools for officials to managing fairness and integrity, but seems a bit light and vague on issues of safety. What is there is quite dispersed and is usually racer centric.

I would very much like to have a clear statement of how officials respond to rider safety issues and improve the tools they have for enforcing it. I’m not sure the current draft accomplishes those goals, but that’s why it’s a draft.

Thanks

Seth

From: Steven Beardsley [mailto:srbeards@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, January 04, 2016 4:50 PM
To: T. Kenji Sugahara
Cc: Seth May; Officials Obra
Subject: Re: [OBRA Officials] Rule Proposal - Safety (draft)

The first part of this rule should all be covered by 7.6 and 11.2. I think that those existing rules could be updated to cover all of this.

On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 2:04 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara via OBRA_Officials wrote:

Doh! I should read things in order.

A couple changes I'd suggest- we don't want to create an affirmative
duty to check everyone's equipment. The modified wording places the
onus on the rider and gives the official discretion.

During the race- don't want to commit with "will". May gives a little
more discretion. Remove significant impact because most often time an
official won't be able to find out whether a person had a "significant
impact." Visible cracking is only way to make an objective
determination. Added "obvious symptoms" but that can be left out.

3.6 Safety

3.6.1 Prior to race start

Any rider whose equipment is unsafe shall not start an event unless
the equipment is made safe and demonstrated to be safe to a race
official.

Riders who pose an inordinate danger to themselves or others shall not
start an event.

3.6.2 During racing

In the case of incidents during a race, the race official may remove a
rider from the event if

· They perceive the rider unfit to continue

· They perceive the rider to be an inordinate danger to
themselves or other riders

· They perceive rider’s equipment is no longer safe

The race official will remove a rider if the rider's helmet has
visible cracking or has obvious symptoms of a head injury.

On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Seth May via OBRA_Officials

wrote:
> Here is my draft proposal for a general Safety rule. I’ve tucked it under
> “3. Officials”, but may be more appropriate elsewhere, or as its own
> heading.
>
>
>
> 3.6 Safety
>
> 3.6.1 Prior to race start
>
> Any rider whose equipment is observed to be unsafe will not be allowed to
> start an event unless the equipment is made safe and demonstrated to be safe
> to a race official.
>
>
>
> Riders who pose an inordinate danger to themselves or others will not be
> allowed to start an event.
>
>
>
> 3.6.2 During racing
>
> In the case of incidents during a race, the race official will remove a
> rider from the event if
>
> · They deem the rider unfit to continue
>
> · They deem the rider to be an inordinate danger to themselves or
> other riders
>
> · The rider’s equipment is no longer safe
>
> · The riders helmet has suffered a significant impact or has visible
> cracking
>
>
>
> Please send me feedback.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Seth
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: OBRA_Officials [mailto:obra_officials-bounces@list.obra.org] On Behalf
> Of Mike Murray via OBRA_Officials
> Sent: Monday, January 04, 2016 10:17 AM
> To: obra_officials@list.obra.org
> Subject: Re: [OBRA Officials] Rules question - Pulling Riders for
> concussions
>
>
>
> Although it is certainly true that concussions are a serious issue and a
> bigger deal than what used to be thought, I think that the pendulum is
> swinging in the opposite direction creating fear of head injury in excess of
> what is needed. I shouldn't complain as I benefit from this a bit. It is
> pretty much a daily event for people to come into our clinic at the ski area
> concerned that they might have a concussion despite giving a very clear
> description of the injury and not having any concussion symptoms.
>
>
>
> In this vein, second impact syndrome is certainly a serious problem but this
> is mostly an issue for contact sports and the 50% and 100% are probably
> overstated. I am not aware of a single episode of second impact syndrome in
> a bike racer in OR in the past 35 years. Actually concussions, though not
> unheard of, are fairly uncommon. Many riders have had concussions but the
> number seen by the OBRA first aid providers each year is small. There have
> been a few cases where concussed riders have continued but in the vast
> majority of cases riders with head injuries pull themselves from the race.
> The issue for contact sports is return to play shortly or even immediately
> after head injuries. Generally this is not an issue in bike racing.
>
>
>
> I agree that the formal rule support for removing a rider due to injury,
> which shouldn't really be limited to head injury, is weak. Practically this
> is not generally a problem as I cannot think of a single case where an
> injured rider was asked to withdraw and then complained. I do remember an
> episode of just the opposite. A rider that had an unremarkable slow speed
> fall at the start of a race complained he was not stopped when he later
> didn't have any recall for most of the race. We had to point out to him that
> he had behaved entirely normally during the race and that performing
> concussion screening in all fallen riders would practically result in all
> fallen riders being removed from competition as the time it would take to do
> the screen would keep them from getting back in.
>
>
>
> I would suggest that someone propose a rule that would address removal of a
> rider identified with not only head injuries but also other injuries and
> mechanical problems that would prohibit continuing safely. The rule should
> not mandate that officials do any type of examination but should be
> permissive to allow removal of unsafe riders.
>
>
>
>
>
> Mike Murray
>
> Sent from mobile device
>
>
> On Jan 4, 2016, at 07:12, Seth May via OBRA_Officials
> wrote:
>
> All,
>
> At our new official training workshop, we have training on concussions.
> Athletes who experience a second impact after an initial concussion have
> nearly a 50% mortality rate and almost a 100% disability rate. To allow a
> rider who may have a concussion to continue to participate is irresponsible.
> Based on the training, it seems clear and appropriate that officials should
> pull riders suspected of having a concussion even if the rider does not want
> to be pulled.
>
>
>
> Judgments of this nature must often be made by Assistant Referees since, in
> most cases, it will be impossibly to consult with the CR prior to making the
> call. It is also an irreversible call (removal from competition), since the
> rider cannot appeal the decision prior to it being enforced. Although this
> is not a penalty and is really a rider safety issue, it will feel like a
> penalty a racer who disagree with being pulled.
>
>
>
> From reviewing the rules, I’m not sure that pulling riders for theirs and
> others safety (as opposed to a rule violation) is well supported.
>
>
>
> Here is my summary of what I’ve found:
>
> · 3.5.1 Chief Referee (Duties)
>
> make the final decision in any case or appeal not specifically covered by
> these rules. Any such decision is beyond appeal.
>
> if necessary, alter the conditions of any race in the interest of safety,
> including cancellation of a race if necessary.
>
> Note: pretty vague and only applies to the CR, not ARs
>
>
>
> · 15.1.2 General Rules (Road Racing)
>
> Any rider who is out of contention may be asked to withdraw by the Chief
> Referee.
>
> Note: The rider might not always be out of contention, and it will often be
> an AR. Only applies to road events.
>
> Also 15.4.4 Riders out of contention (Criteriums)
>
>
>
> · 15.7.2 Immediate disqualification (Road Racing Penalties)
>
> A Chief Referee may empower referees to immediately disqualify riders during
> racing.
>
> Note: This is not a penalty, it is a rider safety issue. Only applies to
> road events.
>
>
>
> Am I missing something obvious in the rules that would allow pulling riders
> in these situations?
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Seth
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA_Officials mailing list
> OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA_Officials mailing list
> OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
>

--
Kenji Sugahara
Executive Director
Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
Phone: 503-278-5550
http://www.obra.org

_______________________________________________
OBRA_Officials mailing list
OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials


T. Kenji Sugahara

2016-01-05

Could you provide updated language?

On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 4:49 PM, Steven Beardsley wrote:
> The first part of this rule should all be covered by 7.6 and 11.2. I think
> that those existing rules could be updated to cover all of this.
>
> On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 2:04 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara via OBRA_Officials
> wrote:
>>
>> Doh! I should read things in order.
>>
>> A couple changes I'd suggest- we don't want to create an affirmative
>> duty to check everyone's equipment. The modified wording places the
>> onus on the rider and gives the official discretion.
>>
>> During the race- don't want to commit with "will". May gives a little
>> more discretion. Remove significant impact because most often time an
>> official won't be able to find out whether a person had a "significant
>> impact." Visible cracking is only way to make an objective
>> determination. Added "obvious symptoms" but that can be left out.
>>
>> 3.6 Safety
>>
>> 3.6.1 Prior to race start
>>
>> Any rider whose equipment is unsafe shall not start an event unless
>> the equipment is made safe and demonstrated to be safe to a race
>> official.
>>
>> Riders who pose an inordinate danger to themselves or others shall not
>> start an event.
>>
>>
>>
>> 3.6.2 During racing
>>
>> In the case of incidents during a race, the race official may remove a
>> rider from the event if
>>
>> �� They perceive the rider unfit to continue
>>
>> �� They perceive the rider to be an inordinate danger to
>> themselves or other riders
>>
>> �� They perceive rider���s equipment is no longer safe
>>
>> The race official will remove a rider if the rider's helmet has
>> visible cracking or has obvious symptoms of a head injury.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Seth May via OBRA_Officials
>> wrote:
>> > Here is my draft proposal for a general Safety rule. I���ve tucked it
>> > under
>> > ���3. Officials���, but may be more appropriate elsewhere, or as its own
>> > heading.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > 3.6 Safety
>> >
>> > 3.6.1 Prior to race start
>> >
>> > Any rider whose equipment is observed to be unsafe will not be allowed
>> > to
>> > start an event unless the equipment is made safe and demonstrated to be
>> > safe
>> > to a race official.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Riders who pose an inordinate danger to themselves or others will not be
>> > allowed to start an event.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > 3.6.2 During racing
>> >
>> > In the case of incidents during a race, the race official will remove a
>> > rider from the event if
>> >
>> > �� They deem the rider unfit to continue
>> >
>> > �� They deem the rider to be an inordinate danger to themselves
>> > or
>> > other riders
>> >
>> > �� The rider���s equipment is no longer safe
>> >
>> > �� The riders helmet has suffered a significant impact or has
>> > visible
>> > cracking
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Please send me feedback.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Thanks
>> >
>> > Seth
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > From: OBRA_Officials [mailto:obra_officials-bounces@list.obra.org] On
>> > Behalf
>> > Of Mike Murray via OBRA_Officials
>> > Sent: Monday, January 04, 2016 10:17 AM
>> > To: obra_officials@list.obra.org
>> > Subject: Re: [OBRA Officials] Rules question - Pulling Riders for
>> > concussions
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Although it is certainly true that concussions are a serious issue and a
>> > bigger deal than what used to be thought, I think that the pendulum is
>> > swinging in the opposite direction creating fear of head injury in
>> > excess of
>> > what is needed. I shouldn't complain as I benefit from this a bit. It is
>> > pretty much a daily event for people to come into our clinic at the ski
>> > area
>> > concerned that they might have a concussion despite giving a very clear
>> > description of the injury and not having any concussion symptoms.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > In this vein, second impact syndrome is certainly a serious problem but
>> > this
>> > is mostly an issue for contact sports and the 50% and 100% are probably
>> > overstated. I am not aware of a single episode of second impact syndrome
>> > in
>> > a bike racer in OR in the past 35 years. Actually concussions, though
>> > not
>> > unheard of, are fairly uncommon. Many riders have had concussions but
>> > the
>> > number seen by the OBRA first aid providers each year is small. There
>> > have
>> > been a few cases where concussed riders have continued but in the vast
>> > majority of cases riders with head injuries pull themselves from the
>> > race.
>> > The issue for contact sports is return to play shortly or even
>> > immediately
>> > after head injuries. Generally this is not an issue in bike racing.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > I agree that the formal rule support for removing a rider due to injury,
>> > which shouldn't really be limited to head injury, is weak. Practically
>> > this
>> > is not generally a problem as I cannot think of a single case where an
>> > injured rider was asked to withdraw and then complained. I do remember
>> > an
>> > episode of just the opposite. A rider that had an unremarkable slow
>> > speed
>> > fall at the start of a race complained he was not stopped when he later
>> > didn't have any recall for most of the race. We had to point out to him
>> > that
>> > he had behaved entirely normally during the race and that performing
>> > concussion screening in all fallen riders would practically result in
>> > all
>> > fallen riders being removed from competition as the time it would take
>> > to do
>> > the screen would keep them from getting back in.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > I would suggest that someone propose a rule that would address removal
>> > of a
>> > rider identified with not only head injuries but also other injuries and
>> > mechanical problems that would prohibit continuing safely. The rule
>> > should
>> > not mandate that officials do any type of examination but should be
>> > permissive to allow removal of unsafe riders.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Mike Murray
>> >
>> > Sent from mobile device
>> >
>> >
>> > On Jan 4, 2016, at 07:12, Seth May via OBRA_Officials
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > All,
>> >
>> > At our new official training workshop, we have training on concussions.
>> > Athletes who experience a second impact after an initial concussion have
>> > nearly a 50% mortality rate and almost a 100% disability rate. To allow
>> > a
>> > rider who may have a concussion to continue to participate is
>> > irresponsible.
>> > Based on the training, it seems clear and appropriate that officials
>> > should
>> > pull riders suspected of having a concussion even if the rider does not
>> > want
>> > to be pulled.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Judgments of this nature must often be made by Assistant Referees since,
>> > in
>> > most cases, it will be impossibly to consult with the CR prior to making
>> > the
>> > call. It is also an irreversible call (removal from competition), since
>> > the
>> > rider cannot appeal the decision prior to it being enforced. Although
>> > this
>> > is not a penalty and is really a rider safety issue, it will feel like a
>> > penalty a racer who disagree with being pulled.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > From reviewing the rules, I���m not sure that pulling riders for theirs
>> > and
>> > others safety (as opposed to a rule violation) is well supported.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Here is my summary of what I���ve found:
>> >
>> > �� 3.5.1 Chief Referee (Duties)
>> >
>> > make the final decision in any case or appeal not specifically covered
>> > by
>> > these rules. Any such decision is beyond appeal.
>> >
>> > if necessary, alter the conditions of any race in the interest of
>> > safety,
>> > including cancellation of a race if necessary.
>> >
>> > Note: pretty vague and only applies to the CR, not ARs
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > �� 15.1.2 General Rules (Road Racing)
>> >
>> > Any rider who is out of contention may be asked to withdraw by the Chief
>> > Referee.
>> >
>> > Note: The rider might not always be out of contention, and it will often
>> > be
>> > an AR. Only applies to road events.
>> >
>> > Also 15.4.4 Riders out of contention (Criteriums)
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > �� 15.7.2 Immediate disqualification (Road Racing Penalties)
>> >
>> > A Chief Referee may empower referees to immediately disqualify riders
>> > during
>> > racing.
>> >
>> > Note: This is not a penalty, it is a rider safety issue. Only applies to
>> > road events.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Am I missing something obvious in the rules that would allow pulling
>> > riders
>> > in these situations?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Thanks
>> >
>> > Seth
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > OBRA_Officials mailing list
>> > OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
>> > http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > OBRA_Officials mailing list
>> > OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
>> > http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Kenji Sugahara
>> Executive Director
>> Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
>> Phone: 503-278-5550
>> http://www.obra.org
>> _______________________________________________
>> OBRA_Officials mailing list
>> OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
>> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
>
>

--
Kenji Sugahara
Executive Director
Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
Phone: 503-278-5550
http://www.obra.org


Steven Beardsley

2016-01-05

The first part of this rule should all be covered by 7.6 and 11.2. I think
that those existing rules could be updated to cover all of this.

On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 2:04 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara via OBRA_Officials <
obra_officials@list.obra.org> wrote:

> Doh! I should read things in order.
>
> A couple changes I'd suggest- we don't want to create an affirmative
> duty to check everyone's equipment. The modified wording places the
> onus on the rider and gives the official discretion.
>
> During the race- don't want to commit with "will". May gives a little
> more discretion. Remove significant impact because most often time an
> official won't be able to find out whether a person had a "significant
> impact." Visible cracking is only way to make an objective
> determination. Added "obvious symptoms" but that can be left out.
>
> 3.6 Safety
>
> 3.6.1 Prior to race start
>
> Any rider whose equipment is unsafe shall not start an event unless
> the equipment is made safe and demonstrated to be safe to a race
> official.
>
> Riders who pose an inordinate danger to themselves or others shall not
> start an event.
>
>
>
> 3.6.2 During racing
>
> In the case of incidents during a race, the race official may remove a
> rider from the event if
>
> · They perceive the rider unfit to continue
>
> · They perceive the rider to be an inordinate danger to
> themselves or other riders
>
> · They perceive rider’s equipment is no longer safe
>
> The race official will remove a rider if the rider's helmet has
> visible cracking or has obvious symptoms of a head injury.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Seth May via OBRA_Officials
> wrote:
> > Here is my draft proposal for a general Safety rule. I’ve tucked it under
> > “3. Officials”, but may be more appropriate elsewhere, or as its own
> > heading.
> >
> >
> >
> > 3.6 Safety
> >
> > 3.6.1 Prior to race start
> >
> > Any rider whose equipment is observed to be unsafe will not be allowed to
> > start an event unless the equipment is made safe and demonstrated to be
> safe
> > to a race official.
> >
> >
> >
> > Riders who pose an inordinate danger to themselves or others will not be
> > allowed to start an event.
> >
> >
> >
> > 3.6.2 During racing
> >
> > In the case of incidents during a race, the race official will remove a
> > rider from the event if
> >
> > · They deem the rider unfit to continue
> >
> > · They deem the rider to be an inordinate danger to themselves or
> > other riders
> >
> > · The rider’s equipment is no longer safe
> >
> > · The riders helmet has suffered a significant impact or has
> visible
> > cracking
> >
> >
> >
> > Please send me feedback.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Seth
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > From: OBRA_Officials [mailto:obra_officials-bounces@list.obra.org] On
> Behalf
> > Of Mike Murray via OBRA_Officials
> > Sent: Monday, January 04, 2016 10:17 AM
> > To: obra_officials@list.obra.org
> > Subject: Re: [OBRA Officials] Rules question - Pulling Riders for
> > concussions
> >
> >
> >
> > Although it is certainly true that concussions are a serious issue and a
> > bigger deal than what used to be thought, I think that the pendulum is
> > swinging in the opposite direction creating fear of head injury in
> excess of
> > what is needed. I shouldn't complain as I benefit from this a bit. It is
> > pretty much a daily event for people to come into our clinic at the ski
> area
> > concerned that they might have a concussion despite giving a very clear
> > description of the injury and not having any concussion symptoms.
> >
> >
> >
> > In this vein, second impact syndrome is certainly a serious problem but
> this
> > is mostly an issue for contact sports and the 50% and 100% are probably
> > overstated. I am not aware of a single episode of second impact syndrome
> in
> > a bike racer in OR in the past 35 years. Actually concussions, though not
> > unheard of, are fairly uncommon. Many riders have had concussions but the
> > number seen by the OBRA first aid providers each year is small. There
> have
> > been a few cases where concussed riders have continued but in the vast
> > majority of cases riders with head injuries pull themselves from the
> race.
> > The issue for contact sports is return to play shortly or even
> immediately
> > after head injuries. Generally this is not an issue in bike racing.
> >
> >
> >
> > I agree that the formal rule support for removing a rider due to injury,
> > which shouldn't really be limited to head injury, is weak. Practically
> this
> > is not generally a problem as I cannot think of a single case where an
> > injured rider was asked to withdraw and then complained. I do remember an
> > episode of just the opposite. A rider that had an unremarkable slow speed
> > fall at the start of a race complained he was not stopped when he later
> > didn't have any recall for most of the race. We had to point out to him
> that
> > he had behaved entirely normally during the race and that performing
> > concussion screening in all fallen riders would practically result in all
> > fallen riders being removed from competition as the time it would take
> to do
> > the screen would keep them from getting back in.
> >
> >
> >
> > I would suggest that someone propose a rule that would address removal
> of a
> > rider identified with not only head injuries but also other injuries and
> > mechanical problems that would prohibit continuing safely. The rule
> should
> > not mandate that officials do any type of examination but should be
> > permissive to allow removal of unsafe riders.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Mike Murray
> >
> > Sent from mobile device
> >
> >
> > On Jan 4, 2016, at 07:12, Seth May via OBRA_Officials
> > wrote:
> >
> > All,
> >
> > At our new official training workshop, we have training on concussions.
> > Athletes who experience a second impact after an initial concussion have
> > nearly a 50% mortality rate and almost a 100% disability rate. To allow a
> > rider who may have a concussion to continue to participate is
> irresponsible.
> > Based on the training, it seems clear and appropriate that officials
> should
> > pull riders suspected of having a concussion even if the rider does not
> want
> > to be pulled.
> >
> >
> >
> > Judgments of this nature must often be made by Assistant Referees since,
> in
> > most cases, it will be impossibly to consult with the CR prior to making
> the
> > call. It is also an irreversible call (removal from competition), since
> the
> > rider cannot appeal the decision prior to it being enforced. Although
> this
> > is not a penalty and is really a rider safety issue, it will feel like a
> > penalty a racer who disagree with being pulled.
> >
> >
> >
> > From reviewing the rules, I’m not sure that pulling riders for theirs and
> > others safety (as opposed to a rule violation) is well supported.
> >
> >
> >
> > Here is my summary of what I’ve found:
> >
> > · 3.5.1 Chief Referee (Duties)
> >
> > make the final decision in any case or appeal not specifically covered by
> > these rules. Any such decision is beyond appeal.
> >
> > if necessary, alter the conditions of any race in the interest of safety,
> > including cancellation of a race if necessary.
> >
> > Note: pretty vague and only applies to the CR, not ARs
> >
> >
> >
> > · 15.1.2 General Rules (Road Racing)
> >
> > Any rider who is out of contention may be asked to withdraw by the Chief
> > Referee.
> >
> > Note: The rider might not always be out of contention, and it will often
> be
> > an AR. Only applies to road events.
> >
> > Also 15.4.4 Riders out of contention (Criteriums)
> >
> >
> >
> > · 15.7.2 Immediate disqualification (Road Racing Penalties)
> >
> > A Chief Referee may empower referees to immediately disqualify riders
> during
> > racing.
> >
> > Note: This is not a penalty, it is a rider safety issue. Only applies to
> > road events.
> >
> >
> >
> > Am I missing something obvious in the rules that would allow pulling
> riders
> > in these situations?
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Seth
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > OBRA_Officials mailing list
> > OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
> > http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > OBRA_Officials mailing list
> > OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
> > http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Kenji Sugahara
> Executive Director
> Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
> Phone: 503-278-5550
> http://www.obra.org
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA_Officials mailing list
> OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
>


T. Kenji Sugahara

2016-01-05

one other quick change.

The race official will remove a rider if the rider's helmet has
visible cracking or has obvious symptoms of a head injury.

to:

The race official will remove a rider if the rider's helmet has
visible cracking or the rider has obvious symptoms of a head injury.

helmets do not sustain head injuries.

On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 3:33 PM, Seth May wrote:
> Thanks, Kenji. Those changes work for me.
>
> Thanks
> Seth
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: T. Kenji Sugahara [mailto:kenji@obra.org]
> Sent: Monday, January 04, 2016 2:04 PM
> To: Seth May
> Cc: Officials Obra
> Subject: Re: [OBRA Officials] Rule Proposal - Safety (draft)
>
> Doh! I should read things in order.
>
> A couple changes I'd suggest- we don't want to create an affirmative duty to check everyone's equipment. The modified wording places the onus on the rider and gives the official discretion.
>
> During the race- don't want to commit with "will". May gives a little more discretion. Remove significant impact because most often time an official won't be able to find out whether a person had a "significant impact." Visible cracking is only way to make an objective determination. Added "obvious symptoms" but that can be left out.
>
> 3.6 Safety
>
> 3.6.1 Prior to race start
>
> Any rider whose equipment is unsafe shall not start an event unless the equipment is made safe and demonstrated to be safe to a race official.
>
> Riders who pose an inordinate danger to themselves or others shall not start an event.
>
>
>
> 3.6.2 During racing
>
> In the case of incidents during a race, the race official may remove a rider from the event if
>
> �� They perceive the rider unfit to continue
>
> �� They perceive the rider to be an inordinate danger to
> themselves or other riders
>
> �� They perceive rider���s equipment is no longer safe
>
> The race official will remove a rider if the rider's helmet has visible cracking or has obvious symptoms of a head injury.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Seth May via OBRA_Officials wrote:
>> Here is my draft proposal for a general Safety rule. I���ve tucked it
>> under ���3. Officials���, but may be more appropriate elsewhere, or as its
>> own heading.
>>
>>
>>
>> 3.6 Safety
>>
>> 3.6.1 Prior to race start
>>
>> Any rider whose equipment is observed to be unsafe will not be allowed
>> to start an event unless the equipment is made safe and demonstrated
>> to be safe to a race official.
>>
>>
>>
>> Riders who pose an inordinate danger to themselves or others will not
>> be allowed to start an event.
>>
>>
>>
>> 3.6.2 During racing
>>
>> In the case of incidents during a race, the race official will remove
>> a rider from the event if
>>
>> �� They deem the rider unfit to continue
>>
>> �� They deem the rider to be an inordinate danger to themselves or
>> other riders
>>
>> �� The rider���s equipment is no longer safe
>>
>> �� The riders helmet has suffered a significant impact or has visible
>> cracking
>>
>>
>>
>> Please send me feedback.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Seth
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From: OBRA_Officials [mailto:obra_officials-bounces@list.obra.org] On
>> Behalf Of Mike Murray via OBRA_Officials
>> Sent: Monday, January 04, 2016 10:17 AM
>> To: obra_officials@list.obra.org
>> Subject: Re: [OBRA Officials] Rules question - Pulling Riders for
>> concussions
>>
>>
>>
>> Although it is certainly true that concussions are a serious issue and
>> a bigger deal than what used to be thought, I think that the pendulum
>> is swinging in the opposite direction creating fear of head injury in
>> excess of what is needed. I shouldn't complain as I benefit from this
>> a bit. It is pretty much a daily event for people to come into our
>> clinic at the ski area concerned that they might have a concussion
>> despite giving a very clear description of the injury and not having any concussion symptoms.
>>
>>
>>
>> In this vein, second impact syndrome is certainly a serious problem
>> but this is mostly an issue for contact sports and the 50% and 100%
>> are probably overstated. I am not aware of a single episode of second
>> impact syndrome in a bike racer in OR in the past 35 years. Actually
>> concussions, though not unheard of, are fairly uncommon. Many riders
>> have had concussions but the number seen by the OBRA first aid
>> providers each year is small. There have been a few cases where
>> concussed riders have continued but in the vast majority of cases riders with head injuries pull themselves from the race.
>> The issue for contact sports is return to play shortly or even
>> immediately after head injuries. Generally this is not an issue in bike racing.
>>
>>
>>
>> I agree that the formal rule support for removing a rider due to
>> injury, which shouldn't really be limited to head injury, is weak.
>> Practically this is not generally a problem as I cannot think of a
>> single case where an injured rider was asked to withdraw and then
>> complained. I do remember an episode of just the opposite. A rider
>> that had an unremarkable slow speed fall at the start of a race
>> complained he was not stopped when he later didn't have any recall for
>> most of the race. We had to point out to him that he had behaved
>> entirely normally during the race and that performing concussion
>> screening in all fallen riders would practically result in all fallen
>> riders being removed from competition as the time it would take to do the screen would keep them from getting back in.
>>
>>
>>
>> I would suggest that someone propose a rule that would address removal
>> of a rider identified with not only head injuries but also other
>> injuries and mechanical problems that would prohibit continuing
>> safely. The rule should not mandate that officials do any type of
>> examination but should be permissive to allow removal of unsafe riders.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Mike Murray
>>
>> Sent from mobile device
>>
>>
>> On Jan 4, 2016, at 07:12, Seth May via OBRA_Officials
>> wrote:
>>
>> All,
>>
>> At our new official training workshop, we have training on concussions.
>> Athletes who experience a second impact after an initial concussion
>> have nearly a 50% mortality rate and almost a 100% disability rate. To
>> allow a rider who may have a concussion to continue to participate is irresponsible.
>> Based on the training, it seems clear and appropriate that officials
>> should pull riders suspected of having a concussion even if the rider
>> does not want to be pulled.
>>
>>
>>
>> Judgments of this nature must often be made by Assistant Referees
>> since, in most cases, it will be impossibly to consult with the CR
>> prior to making the call. It is also an irreversible call (removal
>> from competition), since the rider cannot appeal the decision prior to
>> it being enforced. Although this is not a penalty and is really a
>> rider safety issue, it will feel like a penalty a racer who disagree with being pulled.
>>
>>
>>
>> From reviewing the rules, I���m not sure that pulling riders for theirs
>> and others safety (as opposed to a rule violation) is well supported.
>>
>>
>>
>> Here is my summary of what I���ve found:
>>
>> �� 3.5.1 Chief Referee (Duties)
>>
>> make the final decision in any case or appeal not specifically covered
>> by these rules. Any such decision is beyond appeal.
>>
>> if necessary, alter the conditions of any race in the interest of
>> safety, including cancellation of a race if necessary.
>>
>> Note: pretty vague and only applies to the CR, not ARs
>>
>>
>>
>> �� 15.1.2 General Rules (Road Racing)
>>
>> Any rider who is out of contention may be asked to withdraw by the
>> Chief Referee.
>>
>> Note: The rider might not always be out of contention, and it will
>> often be an AR. Only applies to road events.
>>
>> Also 15.4.4 Riders out of contention (Criteriums)
>>
>>
>>
>> �� 15.7.2 Immediate disqualification (Road Racing Penalties)
>>
>> A Chief Referee may empower referees to immediately disqualify riders
>> during racing.
>>
>> Note: This is not a penalty, it is a rider safety issue. Only applies
>> to road events.
>>
>>
>>
>> Am I missing something obvious in the rules that would allow pulling
>> riders in these situations?
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Seth
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OBRA_Officials mailing list
>> OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
>> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OBRA_Officials mailing list
>> OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
>> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Kenji Sugahara
> Executive Director
> Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
> Phone: 503-278-5550
> http://www.obra.org
>

--
Kenji Sugahara
Executive Director
Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
Phone: 503-278-5550
http://www.obra.org


Seth May

2016-01-04

Thanks, Kenji. Those changes work for me.

Thanks
Seth

-----Original Message-----
From: T. Kenji Sugahara [mailto:kenji@obra.org]
Sent: Monday, January 04, 2016 2:04 PM
To: Seth May
Cc: Officials Obra
Subject: Re: [OBRA Officials] Rule Proposal - Safety (draft)

Doh! I should read things in order.

A couple changes I'd suggest- we don't want to create an affirmative duty to check everyone's equipment. The modified wording places the onus on the rider and gives the official discretion.

During the race- don't want to commit with "will". May gives a little more discretion. Remove significant impact because most often time an official won't be able to find out whether a person had a "significant impact." Visible cracking is only way to make an objective determination. Added "obvious symptoms" but that can be left out.

3.6 Safety

3.6.1 Prior to race start

Any rider whose equipment is unsafe shall not start an event unless the equipment is made safe and demonstrated to be safe to a race official.

Riders who pose an inordinate danger to themselves or others shall not start an event.

3.6.2 During racing

In the case of incidents during a race, the race official may remove a rider from the event if

�� They perceive the rider unfit to continue

�� They perceive the rider to be an inordinate danger to
themselves or other riders

�� They perceive rider���s equipment is no longer safe

The race official will remove a rider if the rider's helmet has visible cracking or has obvious symptoms of a head injury.

On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Seth May via OBRA_Officials wrote:
> Here is my draft proposal for a general Safety rule. I���ve tucked it
> under ���3. Officials���, but may be more appropriate elsewhere, or as its
> own heading.
>
>
>
> 3.6 Safety
>
> 3.6.1 Prior to race start
>
> Any rider whose equipment is observed to be unsafe will not be allowed
> to start an event unless the equipment is made safe and demonstrated
> to be safe to a race official.
>
>
>
> Riders who pose an inordinate danger to themselves or others will not
> be allowed to start an event.
>
>
>
> 3.6.2 During racing
>
> In the case of incidents during a race, the race official will remove
> a rider from the event if
>
> �� They deem the rider unfit to continue
>
> �� They deem the rider to be an inordinate danger to themselves or
> other riders
>
> �� The rider���s equipment is no longer safe
>
> �� The riders helmet has suffered a significant impact or has visible
> cracking
>
>
>
> Please send me feedback.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Seth
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: OBRA_Officials [mailto:obra_officials-bounces@list.obra.org] On
> Behalf Of Mike Murray via OBRA_Officials
> Sent: Monday, January 04, 2016 10:17 AM
> To: obra_officials@list.obra.org
> Subject: Re: [OBRA Officials] Rules question - Pulling Riders for
> concussions
>
>
>
> Although it is certainly true that concussions are a serious issue and
> a bigger deal than what used to be thought, I think that the pendulum
> is swinging in the opposite direction creating fear of head injury in
> excess of what is needed. I shouldn't complain as I benefit from this
> a bit. It is pretty much a daily event for people to come into our
> clinic at the ski area concerned that they might have a concussion
> despite giving a very clear description of the injury and not having any concussion symptoms.
>
>
>
> In this vein, second impact syndrome is certainly a serious problem
> but this is mostly an issue for contact sports and the 50% and 100%
> are probably overstated. I am not aware of a single episode of second
> impact syndrome in a bike racer in OR in the past 35 years. Actually
> concussions, though not unheard of, are fairly uncommon. Many riders
> have had concussions but the number seen by the OBRA first aid
> providers each year is small. There have been a few cases where
> concussed riders have continued but in the vast majority of cases riders with head injuries pull themselves from the race.
> The issue for contact sports is return to play shortly or even
> immediately after head injuries. Generally this is not an issue in bike racing.
>
>
>
> I agree that the formal rule support for removing a rider due to
> injury, which shouldn't really be limited to head injury, is weak.
> Practically this is not generally a problem as I cannot think of a
> single case where an injured rider was asked to withdraw and then
> complained. I do remember an episode of just the opposite. A rider
> that had an unremarkable slow speed fall at the start of a race
> complained he was not stopped when he later didn't have any recall for
> most of the race. We had to point out to him that he had behaved
> entirely normally during the race and that performing concussion
> screening in all fallen riders would practically result in all fallen
> riders being removed from competition as the time it would take to do the screen would keep them from getting back in.
>
>
>
> I would suggest that someone propose a rule that would address removal
> of a rider identified with not only head injuries but also other
> injuries and mechanical problems that would prohibit continuing
> safely. The rule should not mandate that officials do any type of
> examination but should be permissive to allow removal of unsafe riders.
>
>
>
>
>
> Mike Murray
>
> Sent from mobile device
>
>
> On Jan 4, 2016, at 07:12, Seth May via OBRA_Officials
> wrote:
>
> All,
>
> At our new official training workshop, we have training on concussions.
> Athletes who experience a second impact after an initial concussion
> have nearly a 50% mortality rate and almost a 100% disability rate. To
> allow a rider who may have a concussion to continue to participate is irresponsible.
> Based on the training, it seems clear and appropriate that officials
> should pull riders suspected of having a concussion even if the rider
> does not want to be pulled.
>
>
>
> Judgments of this nature must often be made by Assistant Referees
> since, in most cases, it will be impossibly to consult with the CR
> prior to making the call. It is also an irreversible call (removal
> from competition), since the rider cannot appeal the decision prior to
> it being enforced. Although this is not a penalty and is really a
> rider safety issue, it will feel like a penalty a racer who disagree with being pulled.
>
>
>
> From reviewing the rules, I���m not sure that pulling riders for theirs
> and others safety (as opposed to a rule violation) is well supported.
>
>
>
> Here is my summary of what I���ve found:
>
> �� 3.5.1 Chief Referee (Duties)
>
> make the final decision in any case or appeal not specifically covered
> by these rules. Any such decision is beyond appeal.
>
> if necessary, alter the conditions of any race in the interest of
> safety, including cancellation of a race if necessary.
>
> Note: pretty vague and only applies to the CR, not ARs
>
>
>
> �� 15.1.2 General Rules (Road Racing)
>
> Any rider who is out of contention may be asked to withdraw by the
> Chief Referee.
>
> Note: The rider might not always be out of contention, and it will
> often be an AR. Only applies to road events.
>
> Also 15.4.4 Riders out of contention (Criteriums)
>
>
>
> �� 15.7.2 Immediate disqualification (Road Racing Penalties)
>
> A Chief Referee may empower referees to immediately disqualify riders
> during racing.
>
> Note: This is not a penalty, it is a rider safety issue. Only applies
> to road events.
>
>
>
> Am I missing something obvious in the rules that would allow pulling
> riders in these situations?
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Seth
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA_Officials mailing list
> OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA_Officials mailing list
> OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
>

--
Kenji Sugahara
Executive Director
Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
Phone: 503-278-5550
http://www.obra.org


T. Kenji Sugahara

2016-01-04

Doh! I should read things in order.

A couple changes I'd suggest- we don't want to create an affirmative
duty to check everyone's equipment. The modified wording places the
onus on the rider and gives the official discretion.

During the race- don't want to commit with "will". May gives a little
more discretion. Remove significant impact because most often time an
official won't be able to find out whether a person had a "significant
impact." Visible cracking is only way to make an objective
determination. Added "obvious symptoms" but that can be left out.

3.6 Safety

3.6.1 Prior to race start

Any rider whose equipment is unsafe shall not start an event unless
the equipment is made safe and demonstrated to be safe to a race
official.

Riders who pose an inordinate danger to themselves or others shall not
start an event.

3.6.2 During racing

In the case of incidents during a race, the race official may remove a
rider from the event if

�� They perceive the rider unfit to continue

�� They perceive the rider to be an inordinate danger to
themselves or other riders

�� They perceive rider���s equipment is no longer safe

The race official will remove a rider if the rider's helmet has
visible cracking or has obvious symptoms of a head injury.

On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Seth May via OBRA_Officials
wrote:
> Here is my draft proposal for a general Safety rule. I���ve tucked it under
> ���3. Officials���, but may be more appropriate elsewhere, or as its own
> heading.
>
>
>
> 3.6 Safety
>
> 3.6.1 Prior to race start
>
> Any rider whose equipment is observed to be unsafe will not be allowed to
> start an event unless the equipment is made safe and demonstrated to be safe
> to a race official.
>
>
>
> Riders who pose an inordinate danger to themselves or others will not be
> allowed to start an event.
>
>
>
> 3.6.2 During racing
>
> In the case of incidents during a race, the race official will remove a
> rider from the event if
>
> �� They deem the rider unfit to continue
>
> �� They deem the rider to be an inordinate danger to themselves or
> other riders
>
> �� The rider���s equipment is no longer safe
>
> �� The riders helmet has suffered a significant impact or has visible
> cracking
>
>
>
> Please send me feedback.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Seth
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: OBRA_Officials [mailto:obra_officials-bounces@list.obra.org] On Behalf
> Of Mike Murray via OBRA_Officials
> Sent: Monday, January 04, 2016 10:17 AM
> To: obra_officials@list.obra.org
> Subject: Re: [OBRA Officials] Rules question - Pulling Riders for
> concussions
>
>
>
> Although it is certainly true that concussions are a serious issue and a
> bigger deal than what used to be thought, I think that the pendulum is
> swinging in the opposite direction creating fear of head injury in excess of
> what is needed. I shouldn't complain as I benefit from this a bit. It is
> pretty much a daily event for people to come into our clinic at the ski area
> concerned that they might have a concussion despite giving a very clear
> description of the injury and not having any concussion symptoms.
>
>
>
> In this vein, second impact syndrome is certainly a serious problem but this
> is mostly an issue for contact sports and the 50% and 100% are probably
> overstated. I am not aware of a single episode of second impact syndrome in
> a bike racer in OR in the past 35 years. Actually concussions, though not
> unheard of, are fairly uncommon. Many riders have had concussions but the
> number seen by the OBRA first aid providers each year is small. There have
> been a few cases where concussed riders have continued but in the vast
> majority of cases riders with head injuries pull themselves from the race.
> The issue for contact sports is return to play shortly or even immediately
> after head injuries. Generally this is not an issue in bike racing.
>
>
>
> I agree that the formal rule support for removing a rider due to injury,
> which shouldn't really be limited to head injury, is weak. Practically this
> is not generally a problem as I cannot think of a single case where an
> injured rider was asked to withdraw and then complained. I do remember an
> episode of just the opposite. A rider that had an unremarkable slow speed
> fall at the start of a race complained he was not stopped when he later
> didn't have any recall for most of the race. We had to point out to him that
> he had behaved entirely normally during the race and that performing
> concussion screening in all fallen riders would practically result in all
> fallen riders being removed from competition as the time it would take to do
> the screen would keep them from getting back in.
>
>
>
> I would suggest that someone propose a rule that would address removal of a
> rider identified with not only head injuries but also other injuries and
> mechanical problems that would prohibit continuing safely. The rule should
> not mandate that officials do any type of examination but should be
> permissive to allow removal of unsafe riders.
>
>
>
>
>
> Mike Murray
>
> Sent from mobile device
>
>
> On Jan 4, 2016, at 07:12, Seth May via OBRA_Officials
> wrote:
>
> All,
>
> At our new official training workshop, we have training on concussions.
> Athletes who experience a second impact after an initial concussion have
> nearly a 50% mortality rate and almost a 100% disability rate. To allow a
> rider who may have a concussion to continue to participate is irresponsible.
> Based on the training, it seems clear and appropriate that officials should
> pull riders suspected of having a concussion even if the rider does not want
> to be pulled.
>
>
>
> Judgments of this nature must often be made by Assistant Referees since, in
> most cases, it will be impossibly to consult with the CR prior to making the
> call. It is also an irreversible call (removal from competition), since the
> rider cannot appeal the decision prior to it being enforced. Although this
> is not a penalty and is really a rider safety issue, it will feel like a
> penalty a racer who disagree with being pulled.
>
>
>
> From reviewing the rules, I���m not sure that pulling riders for theirs and
> others safety (as opposed to a rule violation) is well supported.
>
>
>
> Here is my summary of what I���ve found:
>
> �� 3.5.1 Chief Referee (Duties)
>
> make the final decision in any case or appeal not specifically covered by
> these rules. Any such decision is beyond appeal.
>
> if necessary, alter the conditions of any race in the interest of safety,
> including cancellation of a race if necessary.
>
> Note: pretty vague and only applies to the CR, not ARs
>
>
>
> �� 15.1.2 General Rules (Road Racing)
>
> Any rider who is out of contention may be asked to withdraw by the Chief
> Referee.
>
> Note: The rider might not always be out of contention, and it will often be
> an AR. Only applies to road events.
>
> Also 15.4.4 Riders out of contention (Criteriums)
>
>
>
> �� 15.7.2 Immediate disqualification (Road Racing Penalties)
>
> A Chief Referee may empower referees to immediately disqualify riders during
> racing.
>
> Note: This is not a penalty, it is a rider safety issue. Only applies to
> road events.
>
>
>
> Am I missing something obvious in the rules that would allow pulling riders
> in these situations?
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Seth
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA_Officials mailing list
> OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA_Officials mailing list
> OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials
>

--
Kenji Sugahara
Executive Director
Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
Phone: 503-278-5550
http://www.obra.org


Seth May

2016-01-04

Here is my draft proposal for a general Safety rule. I’ve tucked it under “3. Officials”, but may be more appropriate elsewhere, or as its own heading.

3.6 Safety

3.6.1 Prior to race start

Any rider whose equipment is observed to be unsafe will not be allowed to start an event unless the equipment is made safe and demonstrated to be safe to a race official.

Riders who pose an inordinate danger to themselves or others will not be allowed to start an event.

3.6.2 During racing

In the case of incidents during a race, the race official will remove a rider from the event if

· They deem the rider unfit to continue

· They deem the rider to be an inordinate danger to themselves or other riders

· The rider’s equipment is no longer safe

· The riders helmet has suffered a significant impact or has visible cracking

Please send me feedback.

Thanks

Seth

From: OBRA_Officials [mailto:obra_officials-bounces@list.obra.org] On Behalf Of Mike Murray via OBRA_Officials
Sent: Monday, January 04, 2016 10:17 AM
To: obra_officials@list.obra.org
Subject: Re: [OBRA Officials] Rules question - Pulling Riders for concussions

Although it is certainly true that concussions are a serious issue and a bigger deal than what used to be thought, I think that the pendulum is swinging in the opposite direction creating fear of head injury in excess of what is needed. I shouldn't complain as I benefit from this a bit. It is pretty much a daily event for people to come into our clinic at the ski area concerned that they might have a concussion despite giving a very clear description of the injury and not having any concussion symptoms.

In this vein, second impact syndrome is certainly a serious problem but this is mostly an issue for contact sports and the 50% and 100% are probably overstated. I am not aware of a single episode of second impact syndrome in a bike racer in OR in the past 35 years. Actually concussions, though not unheard of, are fairly uncommon. Many riders have had concussions but the number seen by the OBRA first aid providers each year is small. There have been a few cases where concussed riders have continued but in the vast majority of cases riders with head injuries pull themselves from the race. The issue for contact sports is return to play shortly or even immediately after head injuries. Generally this is not an issue in bike racing.

I agree that the formal rule support for removing a rider due to injury, which shouldn't really be limited to head injury, is weak. Practically this is not generally a problem as I cannot think of a single case where an injured rider was asked to withdraw and then complained. I do remember an episode of just the opposite. A rider that had an unremarkable slow speed fall at the start of a race complained he was not stopped when he later didn't have any recall for most of the race. We had to point out to him that he had behaved entirely normally during the race and that performing concussion screening in all fallen riders would practically result in all fallen riders being removed from competition as the time it would take to do the screen would keep them from getting back in.

I would suggest that someone propose a rule that would address removal of a rider identified with not only head injuries but also other injuries and mechanical problems that would prohibit continuing safely. The rule should not mandate that officials do any type of examination but should be permissive to allow removal of unsafe riders.

Mike Murray

Sent from mobile device

On Jan 4, 2016, at 07:12, Seth May via OBRA_Officials wrote:

All,

At our new official training workshop, we have training on concussions. Athletes who experience a second impact after an initial concussion have nearly a 50% mortality rate and almost a 100% disability rate. To allow a rider who may have a concussion to continue to participate is irresponsible. Based on the training, it seems clear and appropriate that officials should pull riders suspected of having a concussion even if the rider does not want to be pulled.

Judgments of this nature must often be made by Assistant Referees since, in most cases, it will be impossibly to consult with the CR prior to making the call. It is also an irreversible call (removal from competition), since the rider cannot appeal the decision prior to it being enforced. Although this is not a penalty and is really a rider safety issue, it will feel like a penalty a racer who disagree with being pulled.

>From reviewing the rules, I’m not sure that pulling riders for theirs and others safety (as opposed to a rule violation) is well supported.

Here is my summary of what I’ve found:

· 3.5.1 Chief Referee (Duties)

make the final decision in any case or appeal not specifically covered by these rules. Any such decision is beyond appeal.

if necessary, alter the conditions of any race in the interest of safety, including cancellation of a race if necessary.

Note: pretty vague and only applies to the CR, not ARs

· 15.1.2 General Rules (Road Racing)

Any rider who is out of contention may be asked to withdraw by the Chief Referee.

Note: The rider might not always be out of contention, and it will often be an AR. Only applies to road events.

Also 15.4.4 Riders out of contention (Criteriums)

· 15.7.2 Immediate disqualification (Road Racing Penalties)

A Chief Referee may empower referees to immediately disqualify riders during racing.

Note: This is not a penalty, it is a rider safety issue. Only applies to road events.

Am I missing something obvious in the rules that would allow pulling riders in these situations?

Thanks

Seth

_______________________________________________
OBRA_Officials mailing list
OBRA_Officials@list.obra.org
http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra_officials