TT 2022 ??

[Gladys]

1 minute ago, Happier diner said:

 Analogy - a thing which is comparable to something else in significant respects

I'll name you 100 things that are different. You might be able to name half a dozen that are comparable 

let's start with one involves a mountain but the other doesn't.🤣

But that is not really the issue is it?  It is the highly dangerous nature of an activity which is permitted, participants are willing participants and each is something of a pinnacle in their chosen field, people make money or livings from both and each  has some kind of national, even international importance or recognition.  Those are the comparators. 

I am not arguing for or against the TT, because I haven't made my mind up on it as there are conflicting aspects.  

[Declan]

42 minutes ago, Max Power said:

What, because the coroner's department misidentified the body?

For what I wrote in the next post - the dreadful communication around this. But by “organisers” I mean IOMG and it’s agencies not necessarily just the Clark of Course or ACU so the coroner is part of that. 

[TheTeapot]

 

[HeliX]

9 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

Fair enough. We seem to be getting conflicting information though!

I'd say I would go along with Max.

My gut feeling is, I think if it was common knowledge they wouldn't have relied on it. 

Wasn't conflicting - I said "for arguments sake!"  

[Markduc]

18 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

 Analogy - a thing which is comparable to something else in significant respects

I'll name you 100 things that are different. You might be able to name half a dozen that are comparable 

let's start with one involves a mountain but the other doesn't.🤣

Not wishing to be picky, but that’s not true 

 

[Newbie]

2 hours ago, Declan said:

No it’s about the incorrect identification, the delay in recognising acknowledging the error, and the lack of empathy in the message where their error was finally admitted. 
 

The switched dog-tag is a contributory factor to the first but it’s not a free pass on the rest. 

I see what you are getting at, but the people who need to be informed as quickly as possible and in an empathetic way are the teams/families of the competitors involved. The public announcements that are put out by ACUE/IOMG are not being used to inform the teams and families. That is done in an entirely separate and private way. 

The public announcements are put out after agreement with the family (and in this case the Coroner) in order to inform the public. Why do the public need to be treated with empathy by the organisers? It is not the general public who are going through the trauma.

[The Voice of Reason]

43 minutes ago, Gladys said:

Presumably headed by a Sherpa or guide, who know the best path or course to take.  OK, its not a road, but there are established routes up Everest.

Plus of course you can’t just turn up at the bottom with your new walking boots and set off just like that. There’s all sorts of protocols to follow and monies to pay.
Anymore than you can just go to the starting line at the Grandstand with your motorcycle and say “can I go next please?”

 

[Annoymouse]

48 minutes ago, Newbie said:

Other methods of identifying competitors that have been suggested such as use of dental records or DNA analysis are either completely impractical

For all the reasons you’ve outlined above, why are dog tags considered a reliable form of ID? Shouldn’t they be have been used in conjunction with something else that would correctly identify them? Surely even their race licence would show a picture? Maybe it should list other identifying features like tattoos/scars/birthmarks, perhaps it should even have fingerprints on record?

Other than the fact the competitors were French I think that’s were the similarities end, they were quite different in appearance. Removing the ID issue we know who was listed as the passenger and who was the driver/rider, so is that not were photo/video evidence or spectator witness statements come into play and would it not throw an element of doubt on the dog tags ID straight away? The driver stays the driver and passenger stays the passenger.

I just can’t understand how people accept that swapped dog tags are an acceptable reason for misidentification, yes perhaps ID couldn’t be be confirmed quickly for all the reasons John Wright has mentioned previously but their should have been suspicions very early on and you certainly wouldn’t release any information until their has been secondary ID confirmation.

 

[HeliX]

5 minutes ago, Annoymouse said:

For all the reasons you’ve outlined above, why are dog tags considered a reliable form of ID? Shouldn’t they be have been used in conjunction with something else that would correctly identify them? Surely even their race licence would show a picture? Maybe it should list other identifying features like tattoos/scars/birthmarks, perhaps it should even have fingerprints on record?

Other than the fact the competitors were French I think that’s were the similarities end, they were quite different in appearance. Removing the ID issue we know who was listed as the passenger and who was the driver/rider, so is that not were photo/video evidence or spectator witness statements come into play and would it not throw an element of doubt on the dog tags ID straight away? The driver stays the driver and passenger stays the passenger.

I just can’t understand how people accept that swapped dog tags are an acceptable reason for misidentification, yes perhaps ID couldn’t be be confirmed quickly for all the reasons John Wright has mentioned previously but their should have been suspicions very early on and you certainly wouldn’t release any information until their has been secondary ID confirmation.

And if a person doesn't have tattoos/scars/birthmarks?

Perhaps people shouldn't swap the bit of identifying info they carry with someone else. Otherwise you might as well do away with it entirely. It shouldn't be on the organisers to have to start comparing photos of the competitors to the casualties when they're trying to treat them.

[Newbie]

4 minutes ago, Annoymouse said:

For all the reasons you’ve outlined above, why are dog tags considered a reliable form of ID? Shouldn’t they be have been used in conjunction with something else that would correctly identify them? Surely even their race licence would show a picture? Maybe it should list other identifying features like tattoos/scars/birthmarks, perhaps it should even have fingerprints on record?

Other than the fact the competitors were French I think that’s were the similarities end, they were quite different in appearance. Removing the ID issue we know who was listed as the passenger and who was the driver/rider, so is that not were photo/video evidence or spectator witness statements come into play and would it not throw an element of doubt on the dog tags ID straight away? The driver stays the driver and passenger stays the passenger.

I just can’t understand how people accept that swapped dog tags are an acceptable reason for misidentification, yes perhaps ID couldn’t be be confirmed quickly for all the reasons John Wright has mentioned previously but their should have been suspicions very early on and you certainly wouldn’t release any information until their has been secondary ID confirmation.

 

Dog tags have always been used in the past to confirm the ID of riders who are unable to be identified, and have always until now proved reliable. The dog tags were not located at the scene as they were inside the leathers in quite small, fairly well concealed pockets. They were subsequently recovered at the hospital. Prior to that, their photographs (obtained at the start of the event) were used to try to identify them. Suffice to say that after the incident, neither of them resembled those photographs. They were also checked for any identifying features but neither had any listed on their passports, and none were evident on them. They both had both of their names on their leathers. Once the dog tags were recovered (by separate people at separate locations) there was no reason not to believe the information they provided.

[Gladys]

3 minutes ago, Youaintseenme said:

I think most people are trying to avoid the gory details here, but for the hard of thinking how much help do you think a photo is when both riders helmets have come off?

It was their responsibility to wear the correct tags.  It is a very simple and fairly failsafe system if the people wearing them do the one very simple thing asked of them.

Harsh as it sounds, that is about the top and bottom of it. 

[milestone 11]

1 hour ago, Newbie said:

The importance of the identity tags is stressed to riders. The requirements are clear in the regulations, and all competitors must sign a declaration saying that they are familiar with the regulations. They have to attend a briefing, and there are specific briefings carried out in French. The tags also have to be presented by the competitors to the scrutineers during the technical inspection process. At some point you have to rely upon competitors doing the right thing.

The race organisers were completely unaware that sidecar riders/passengers may swap their ID tags. There have been posts here and elsewhere claiming that it was common knowledge. If it was common knowledge in the paddock why wasn't that information fed back to the Clerk of the Course by riders?

Dog tags have been used as a means of identifying competitors for many years and have always proved effective up until now. Other means of identifying riders such as RFID chips in helmets or ID sown in to leathers are likely to be no better. For instance, in this particular case neither competitor was found to have a helmet on after the incident. Riders also often have more than one set of leathers and more than one helmet. It is not inevitably the case that the leathers/helmet presented at scrutineering are the ones used in a race. It comes back to the point that at some stage the competitors have to be given some responsibility in all of this.

Other methods of identifying competitors that have been suggested such as use of dental records or DNA analysis are either completely impractical (as alluded to in John Wright's earlier post), or would result in significant delay in identification (in the case of DNA Analysis) which no doubt the organisers would then be criticised for.

It may well be that one of the recommendations to come out of this is that there needs to be more than one means of establishing the identity of an otherwise unidentifiable competitor, such as a dog tag AND identity permanently attached to their leathers, and if that is the case it will be a positive outcome from a situation that has few other positives. Even then, whilst that would reduce the risk of this happening again, it wouldn't eliminate it entirely. Given that this situation has never been encountered before, the suggestion that the race organisers should have somehow foreseen it and taken action earlier is, in my view, pushing it a bit.

 

Both helmets came off? That's an horrific detail. HJC, maybe this needs further investigation, even a withdrawal from competition, I'd thought sufficient lessons were learned with the GPA.

[Roger Mexico]

2 hours ago, HeliX said:

Was titling the post "TT organisers' huge mistake" when they clearly didn't have a clue who made any mistake reasonable? Or was it inflammatory bollocks from a shitrag?

Well announcing the death of the wrong competitor seems a fairly huge mistake to me and you can't deny it was done by the organisers.  Even if they weren't the cause of the error, it was still their mistake and they have responsibility for that mistake.  Something they seem totally unable to admit.

[HeliX]

4 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

Well announcing the death of the wrong competitor seems a fairly huge mistake to me and you can't deny it was done by the organisers.  Even if they weren't the cause of the error, it was still their mistake and they have responsibility for that mistake.  Something they seem totally unable to admit.

Oops, my mistake, the title was "TT organisers' huge error". Which does imply they made the error.

[Whiskey]

27 minutes ago, milestone 11 said:

Both helmets came off? That's an horrific detail. HJC, maybe this needs further investigation, even a withdrawal from competition, I'd thought sufficient lessons were learned with the GPA.

Helmets do come off. It’s not unusual.

Edited June 18, 2022 by Whiskey
Probably unnecessary