Jump to content
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man
woody2

TT 2018

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Gizo said:

I believe the riders themselves are implicit in this cover up. If I was a top rider I’d be asking all the questions what went wrong to the point that the report be published. If not, I don’t ride.

in not doing that the so called biker ‘community’ which ‘rally’s’ round its own, couldn’t give two shits about their community. But then I remember that when one of their own gets splattered across the road they carry on as if nothing has happened. Nothing to see here.

the whole shooting match from Callister/ Skelly to the Marshall stuck on the mountain and every person in between have all got blood on their hands and it’s about time this ghoul race stops. Because there doesn’t seem to be any culpability.

Hardly a coverup, it just doesn't suit your agenda not to know every single detail, even when it makes absolutely no difference to anyone outside of the organisation to know.  What do you really want to know and why? People such as you are very good at shouting things down but have no real skill in making things happen!   

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are reasons why we need to know what happened. There are reasons why we need to know who was responsible and why.

The old cliched excuse of 'lessons have been learnt' etc just isn't good enough here.

I'm very much a supporter of the TT and respected its organisers and all those involved for a number of decades, but a few years ago I started seeing people getting in on the organisation who I wasn't happy about. Too many incidents have happened that support my reasoning.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, gettafa said:

There are reasons why we need to know what happened. There are reasons why we need to know who was responsible and why.

There are enough facts in this thread to work out what happened and what level the person was who made the mistake and why, I think? Sometimes there is no why, it's simply a mistake. I think that the true reason people want to know who it was, is that they are hoping that it's someone who they don't like at the top, I think it's much simpler than that but nobody wants to believe that.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Max Power said:

I don't see how the car driver can be at fault really? He was faced with traffic coming at him on a one way road at a blind spot. 

Marshals on the same radio frequency have said they heard no instruction from race control to release the bikes in reverse direction. (On facebook yesterday)

The fact is that the organisers obviously know what the cause was and took immediate and follow up steps to ensure that is doesn't happen again. Anything else is now hindsight. 

Many things which happen and are procedural at the TT are unique due to the nature of the course and the event. This goes to prove that no matter what you do, you can't account for every eventuality.   

I know the races have their detractors both on here and throughout the island. I believe however that the organisation of events such as this hones our emergency service capability to a level which benefits us throughout the remainder of the year.

It does beg the question as to whether the riders and marshals should sit a test to show that they fully understand that process and what actions should be taken in the event of certain incidents/accidents. Shouldn't there be a default position, ie. red flag = get off your bike and head behind a barrier/wall whatever, until the travelling marshal arrives and instructs them what to do??

What is the default, Max?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, Max Power said:

There are enough facts in this thread to work out what happened and what level the person was who made the mistake and why, I think? Sometimes there is no why, it's simply a mistake. I think that the true reason people want to know who it was, is that they are hoping that it's someone who they don't like at the top, I think it's much simpler than that but nobody wants to believe that.  

There are a few people your post could relate to as being at the top.

Why don't they 'like' them? Maybe it is because they believe they are not suitable for the job.

It's a serious matter.

Edited by gettafa
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Andy Onchan said:

It does beg the question as to whether the riders and marshals should sit a test to show that they fully understand that process and what actions should be taken in the event of certain incidents/accidents. Shouldn't there be a default position, ie. red flag = get off your bike and head behind a barrier/wall whatever, until the travelling marshal arrives and instructs them what to do??

What is the default, Max?

As far as I'm aware, that is the default and that it is explained in rider briefings. 

2 minutes ago, gettafa said:

There are a few people your post could relate to as being at the top.

Why don't they 'like' them? Maybe it is because they believe they are not suitable for the job.

It's a serious matter.

You know what it's like on the IoM, it doesn't take very much for people to resent others, even if they have no idea whether or not they can do their job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Max Power said:

Hardly a coverup, it just doesn't suit your agenda not to know every single detail, even when it makes absolutely no difference to anyone outside of the organisation to know.  What do you really want to know and why? People such as you are very good at shouting things down but have no real skill in making things happen!   

Course it’s a cover up. How else do you explain the non published report which as a taxpayer I would like answers. Too many dodgy handshakes in this set up. Was it Moyle who knew all this and was hitting a brick wall when it came to the 26th milestone incident. Read the judgment. Nothing has changed and remarkablely it’s the same person involved again, just who Moyle said he shouldn’t be involved.  

And you right I don’t want to make things happen. #bantheTT

Edited by Gizo
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, buncha wankas said:

IMHO?  Who is the head 

Company secretary of the limited company I suppose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Max Power said:

There are enough facts in this thread to work out what happened and what level the person was who made the mistake and why, I think? Sometimes there is no why, it's simply a mistake. I think that the true reason people want to know who it was, is that they are hoping that it's someone who they don't like at the top, I think it's much simpler than that but nobody wants to believe that.  

100% wrong Max - there was a thoroughly avoidable incident and nobody is being held accountable.

It is not a case of blaming and shaming - it's wanting to know what went wrong, why and whom is responsible and what has been put in place to prevent it - simply put an adult way of looking at and being accountable and not further brushing it under the already lumpy carpet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

Because when you carry out an accident enquiry, surely you should use it to examine all aspects of what happened?  Not just the immediate and most important cause.  Sometimes other things may have made what happened less serious or might have caused problems in slightly different situations and changes could still be made.  Or the very process of investigation might uncover procedures that are incorrect or dangerous - even if they had no effect in this particular case.

Coroners often use inquest proceedings to highlight other issues that they feel should be addressed, even if they weren't the immediate cause of death.  Mercifully no inquest was needed here, but you would hope an enquiry on behalf of the organisers would be even more keen to establish where improvements could be made.  And of course publish the report, so people can see what lessons have actually been learnt and that the changes are implemented.

An investigation was carried out by the police to assess whether any offences were committed, and in preparation for a coroners court should anyone have consequently  died as a result.

An inquiry as to what happened was carried out by the organisers to establish what happened and what would prevent a recurrence. 

If either of those found that having police officers travelling in Course cars was inherently unsafe, then I am sure that would change the SOP. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Derek Flint said:

Company secretary of the limited company I suppose.

That doesn’t make sense, how can a private limited company have full responsibility and not accountable to the land owner...as in the tax payer otherwise known as the government on our behalf.

just asking for a disaster. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Mr Helmut Fromage said:

100% wrong Max - there was a thoroughly avoidable incident and nobody is being held accountable.

It is not a case of blaming and shaming - it's wanting to know what went wrong, why and whom is responsible and what has been put in place to prevent it - simply put an adult way of looking at and being accountable and not further brushing it under the already lumpy carpet.

Yes, all accidents are avoidable, in hindsight.

I'm not saying, and never have said that we shouldn't have seen a redacted version of a report of an investigation carried out by The Health and Safety at Work Inspectorate but it seems that there hasn't been one? The only report was produced by the ACU, who don't have to share it in the public domain and probably quite rightly as it would probably refer to people in different terms to an official report.    

We don't know if anyone is being held accountable? I don't think that an incident such as this would not have been reported under RIDDOR, the decision to accept the independent investigation's findings must have been made by The Health and Safety at Work Inspectorate? I don't know if all judgements made by them are available for public viewing? I imagine that the decision not to prosecute will have been made in view of the report's findings and the measures put in place to prevent a recurrence?

All questions I'm afraid but it seems that only prosecutions and notices are ever in the public domain?

http://www.hse.gov.uk/enforce/prosecutions.htm 

Edited by Max Power

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gizo said:

 as a taxpayer I would like answers.

Since when did paying taxes give you a right to information ?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, display name said:

Since when did paying taxes give you a right to information ?

They don't is the easy answer. It's just that this particular topic slots in nicely to his ban the TT rhetoric

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Neil Down said:

They don't is the easy answer.

Completely agree.  Almost as bad as football fans holding a season ticket to a club and acting like they've bought shares.  Strange ideas people have sometimes.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...