Thursday, 7 October 2010

Proposed Rule Change to Scottish Cyclocross - Course Width

News reaches us that a proposal has been put forward by the Scottish Cycling Board to the Scottish Cycling AGM (Saturday the 6th November 2010) to make changes to rules which will apply to the Scottish Cyclocross series.

The changes which are being proposed are to regulate the width of cyclocross courses so that a Cat B or C course must be 2 metres wide and a Cat A course must be 3 metres wide. Very few, if any, of the current selection of courses which form part of the Scottish Cyclocross Series would meet these requirements, therefore we may be in a position of not being able to use them and having to find new venues / organisers for the 2011 series.

This proposal will be put to the vote at the SC AGM in November. We would urge you to think carefully about how you vote on this topic because it will have a serious impact on the shape of the Scottish Cyclocross Series going forward.

28 comments:

Colin said...

I take it you need to be an SC member to vote? Could we get a petition signed at the next few SCX rounds prior to the meeting to gain support against such a rule change?

Anonymous said...

Dont suppose we could just put the tape out 2m wide through the bushes either side of the single track?

When and where is the AGM, and also who is eligible to vote and does this require us to try to get people to go en mass to secure our great tracks!!

p.s great day at Meadow mill on sun many thanks to organisers.

Anonymous said...

So this is the campaign to ban singletrack then?
What a load of tosh.

Anonymous said...

Who would even think of such a stupid idea...someone who does not ride Scottish CX!?!?
Even if you made the course 2 or 3 meters wide, everyone would still take the same rough lines and ride the worn bit of track as its faster, so there is no point in this rule! Do they think we will all say cheers and ride 5 abreast all happy???? Idiots!!! Shane L.

crosser nut said...

If you are a club member then get in touch with your secretary. You have until Monday to object to this proposal on the proper forms.

Chris B said...

On Sunday, spinning through the trees at the back of the course, whacking my head on the bushes and generally fishtailing all over the place was brilliant. Why take away the fun of some quality singletrack.

I don't think a narrow course impeded the front runners either (of which I am not one), as plenty of warning was given.

These guys wouldn't know New York from New Year...

jac said...

This is the link to the SC announcement about the AGM:

http://new.britishcycling.org.uk/search/article/sc-20100707-scottish-cycling-news-AGM-Date-Announced

Anonymous said...

What if your are a scottish cycling licence holder and but not a club member? how do you protest?

crosser nut said...

I think the best way would be to email your objection to either the rule committee at SC or the events co-ordinator, Ruth Volley.

There will be a petition on Sunday at Plean that individual members can sign

Anonymous said...

From my understanding this is not an SC rule change but a rule that has been introduced by BC, SC have to follow suit in 2011. If this is the case be nice with your complaints to SC as it probably isn't their fault.

Other rule changes I've heard about; feeding has been banned this year, you can carry your own food/drink but not get any handed to you. Also pits are mandatory at all events.

Any truth in these?

Anonymous said...

Grant Thomson - Plean organiser: -

As far as i am aware pits are mandatory already? As is the 2m course width.

It already has it in the BC Cyclo-cross handbook for 2010-2011.

I'm sure common sense will prevail and it will all be a storm in a teacup

Anonymous said...

BC rules are indeed in place, but SCX runs under SC rules, so changes need to be voted through at SC AGM.

We should be moving to adopt these rules at events of a certain level, but not across board. in one fell swoop which wull mean that a number of safe and well liked venues MAY no longer be deemed suitable.

I'm not aware of SCX or any of the organising clubs being consulted in the change before it apoeared in AGM papers.

I would be interested to know how many commisaires flagged course concerns / problems in recent years as alluded to in the SC board's proposal.

Anonymous said...

Alternatively,

If it does come down to the worst case scenario, the same races could always be organised next season under The League International banner - they won't have such stringent rules if (a big 'if) BC take it to the letter.

Either way, I don't think it'll make the slightest difference - the races will always be there, whether it's BC/SCU or TLI.

See you Sunday!

Grant T

Anonymous said...

As has been said this is to adopt the current BC / UCI rules and to address concerns about safety.

If you want influence or have a say in the governing body proposals you need to be a member of an affiliated club and have a BC/SC membership. A petition or emails to Ruth Volly are a nice idea to let her know peoples views and have no way of being seen as representative of the membership because they are not. This is an example of why cyclists should be members of clubs who can affiliate to Scottish Cycling if they want to influence and promote the sport.

It has a resemblance to a kind of democracy which holds people accountable by those who are involved.

Any way here are the abridged proposals, the full papers are with your club secretary, ask them about it and all the other proposals.

**********************************

To adopt all BC Cyclo-cross rule changes, with amendments made to incorporate the Scottish competition.
Below refers to BC rule book,


9.1 Additional wording, after existing sentence. "In Premier, A and B category races the minimum width of the course shall be 3 metres. In lower category races, where this cannot be achieved for the entire course, the minimum width shall be 2 metres. In all races the course shall incorporate a racing line sufficiently broad to allow safe overtaking." Additional wording to be added to page 74 rule 12.9.1

Note: 3 metres is the UCI minimum width. While recognising that some lower category races may struggle to achieve this, the use of narrow courses, incorporating MTB style “single-track” is causing safety concerns which must be addressed. There is also the issue of lapped riders being hampered by tail enders in these sections.

10.1 Add after the second sentence: "Any rider passing the exit of the pit area must continue on the course until reaching the next pit area." Page 75 rule 12.10.1 Additional wording to be inserted after first sentence.
Note: When the UCI rules for pits were included in the BC rules, the first sentence of the second paragraph of UCI rule 5.1.039 was missed. Now that pits are used at all Regional races, this is required to prevent riders cutting off the course to the nearest pit, or going backwards on the course to the pit which is dangerous to other riders.

Anonymous said...

Many of our courses have single track which does restrict racing, causes bottle necks and can be dangerous if riders attempt to overtake. I doubt BC or SC are bringing these rules in just to upset Scottish riders or organisers, they are doing it from a safety perspective which many seem to want to ignore.

If SCX rebel against the proposed rules would they expect Commissaires to attend and officiate knowing they have been trained to BC technical regulations? This would mean the Comm is turning a blind eye to the regulations to allow an event to proceed whether it is under the BC/SC/TLI banner. I believe this would mean the end of Comms at SCX and back to the old days when a bunch of guys just rode around a circuit with no real organisation and certainly no medals for the series from SC.

Maybe this is what SCX want, to be 100% in charge of their own series and future.

jac said...

Thank you all for all the feedback and comments above, it gives a really useful insight into the mood of the cross racers.

The SCX have used this forum / website to notify racers of a possible rule change which would impact the courses which they currently race on.

The decisions as to whether or not this rule change is adopted doesn't lie with the SCX (although, as racers, we also have our own feelings about it). The series we have helped in setting up has been set up for the riders, so we try to make sure that the selection of courses and venues meets what the riders want.

If the overall message we get from riders is that they want this rule change to go ahead and that they want courses to change then we will respect that and work with organisers to make that happen. However, equally if the message is that riders do not want this change to go ahead we will respect this too.

The aim of the SCX is to keep the riders happy and get bums on saddles, so we try to make sure that the selection of courses does this and we would like to be guided by the riders on what they want. Please continue to voice your views here (or where ever else you think appropriate), but bear in mind that the way to really make your voice heard is to attend and vote at the SC AGM - whichever way you vote, it is worth voting.

Thanks,
Jac

martysavalas said...

No-one is ignoring rider safety over this and I would seriously question whether a course with singletrack is inherently unsafe.

I'm not sure rebelling is the correct word to use here. As others have pointed out, Scottish Cycling is a democratic organisation and SCX are merely making riders aware of the proposed changes to the rules, so that they can either object in line with SC rules or ask their club representative vote against the change at the AGM.

The races on the Scottish calendar are held under Scottish Cycling rules, so no-one is being asked to turn a "blind eye" here.

I do agree, however, that the series is better run under Scottish Cycling rules and that it would be a backwards step to have the series run as it was in the days before the Scottish Cyclocross Association was set up.

Anonymous said...

I appreciate the safety angle despite my earlier comments. The race format and mix of track was what got me hooked as a newcomer last season, and now BC member. I'm sure a balance can be struck..

Great organisation all round. Here's to Plean tomorrow.

Chris

SCX-KING said...

AGM - you can find all the information here (http://new.britishcycling.org.uk/scotland/article/sc-20101008-Update--Scottish-Cycling-AGM)

and also the forms here (http://new.britishcycling.org.uk/scotland/article/sc-news-scottish-cycling-agm)

Alternativley i would advise phoning Sine Munro or Ruth Volley with the concerns. If there are arguments against the change then it best letting your voices be heard as a compromise 'could' be made. We will see what happens. Josh

Anonymous said...

The proposals are to bring Scottish Cycling rules in to line with British Cycling rules which reflect the UCI rules.

The current position is a compromise that is an anomaly that needs to be corrected.

There is no scope for compromise in the proposals.

martysavalas said...

Thanks for the link Josh - there's a formal process to follow here, so best to follow that rather than contacting SC staff directly on this.

Anonymous said...

With reference to an earlier post about Commissaires. As the Comms are supposed to be working to BC technical regs would they not have to refuse permission to any organiser if an event has a circuit with route less than 2 metre wide? That then leaves the situation of an event with no Comms and/or the event taking place without authorisation. What happens if a rider or spectator is injured?

Sounds like it could get very messy, I hope for all concerned it gets resolved.

anon said...

c

anon said...

cyclocross in scotland is about as grass roots as cycling gets.it seems to me that bc/scu want to start getting their collective noses in the through just because cross has "suddenly" become popular.
more rules this will only serve to drive riders away from sanitised courses.( we have already lost our oldest established race this season due to commissar bungling)
one look at the bc cross rules and youll see plenty that were not implicated at meadowmill.
bc/scu cannot cherry pick which rules the like.
in short... cross for the riders

Anonymous said...

"we have already lost our oldest established race this season due to commissar bungling"

Can you explain???

Anonymous said...

Thanks Marty, your right there is a formal process to follow as stated on the Scottish cycling website without any need to call staff members. Ta. Josh

SCXCommittee said...

Quick update: we understand that the proposed CX rule changes have been removed from the AGM agenda. We'll provide more info when we have it.

Whilst I'm on - we currently allow anonymous posting on the comments pages. However, please include your name in your post (even if you don't have a suitable login) and think carefully about what you write.

We will revoke the ability to make anonymous comments or moderate comments before they're allowed appear if we have to.

Anonymous said...

This would mean the Comm is turning a blind eye to the regulations...
Happy to turn a blind eye where it suits though. Seen a lot of people in black racing recently in direct contravention of Scottish Cycling rule 1.17.3.

Looking forward to other UCI rules being adopted. Particularly the one that saw a racer in the US refused a start as she was wearing knee warmers and commissaire decided that it wasn't cold enough...