Guest Article - Charity or Farce? ...By David O’DwyerRunning and marathon running in particular have long been associated with raising money for charity. The Dublin Marathon has raised hundreds of millions of Punts and Euros since 1980 and the London Marathon has raised some £450 million since 1981. Simply completing a marathon however is no longer deemed enough of a challenge for some fund raisers in their stated aim to raise money for their chosen charity. Some sort of edge is required in order to make their marathon challenge stand out among the other participants. This has usually meant some sort of gimmick in order to give their effort some additional novelty. The imagination is the only limiting factor in choosing something from wheelbarrow pushing to running backwards. I can recall an old news clip from one of the early Dublin marathons, possibly from “Reeling in the Years” where someone ran with a ladder on their shoulder! I’m not sure how they fared.
For many dressing up in some form of costume will ensure they stand out from the crowd and get seen on TV. British media coverage of the London marathon and the Great North run is particularly fond of such gimmicks and they receive plenty of TV coverage. These costumes can range from a Super hero outfit to a deep water dive suit! The dressing up in a costume won’t do much for ones performance though, mind you the record for the fastest marathon time dressed as a superhero was set in the London Marathon in April of this year by David Stone(aka Superman) in a not too shabby 2.42.46. There were apparently 35 new Guinness World Records set in London this year and they ranged from Superman to a Panda and even a snail. There was also some guy juggling a football and another solving 100 rubiks cube puzzles as he made his way round the course.
Consider for a moment the issue of falling standards despite the increase in numbers participating. Is it a stretch to say that all of this pageantry is a contributing factor to the overall fall in standards? It would be crazy to suggest that running in a superhero costume is somehow causing the overall standard to fall however it is not crazy to suggest that David Stone could run even faster without his cape flailing in the wind behind him in the London marathon. Yes the aim of the individual is to raise money for charity and not necessarily to run a fast time but is the quality of the event somehow compromised? Or is it a perfect marrying of the two extremes? On the one hand you have elite athletes clocking 2.05 for the marathon and on the other you have Krusty the Clown cartwheeling around the course.
The money that is raised for charity is all very commendable and very much appreciated by the charities in question but is it appropriate to combine it with the elite marathon running? Big City marathons are unique in that they offer the opportunity for “joe public” to run in the same race as world class athletes. It is one of the few opportunities for mere mortals to toe the line with an Olympic Champion. Is it somehow taking away from the race as an athletic event when Haile Gebrselassie is attempting to set a world record while Postman Pat is taking part in the same race? Is dressing up in a costume somehow disrespecting the elites in the field? This is certainly one point of view but the flip side is that it enhances the whole event. It adds a carnival type atmosphere to the whole day and let’s be honest here it’s going to be easier to run the race without wearing a costume so you could argue that it is even harder to complete the marathon while dressed as Mickey Mouse.
This is no doubt an emotive subject and the knee jerk reaction will be where is the harm in it? There is nothing wrong with using marathon running as a method for raising money for charity and if anything it can be argued that it has helped to raise the profile of marathon running. However when you compare it with other sports there is no argument. There is no other sport that combines the sublime with the ridiculous. Would a Connemara Pony be allowed run in the Grand National, or how about completing the Tour de France on a BMX?
One idea that has not caught on is aiming to run the marathon in as fast a time as possible and getting the appropriate sponsorship money for that. Has anyone ever raised money by saying that they’ll run the marathon in a particular time and as a sponsor you give extra money if they beat that time? Now that sounds it would be harder to do than complete the marathon dressed in a Batman suit and cape.
Agree or disagree? Put forward your point of view by clicking on the comment link below...
19 comments:
Dave,
Not sure what the argument is here. There a many marathons run in Ireland every year but only Cork and Dublin get the huge levels of publicity. If serious marathon runners what to set good times and are not happy with the crowds there are plenty of other (cheaper) opportunities. At the end of the day Dublin and Cork are novelty events the reason we see elite athletes is because of the prize money (simple as that). Cork and Dublin get many people up from the couch to either achieve some personnel goal or do something for others. Never a bad thing. How they do it and what time they do it in should never be questioned. Elite running belongs to the select few and more power to them. The more mere mortals that do it for fitness, health etc the better.
Run for Fun.
Kevin.
Charity runners in costume are a complete pain in the bum! I was stuck behind a guy in a wedding dress once. I wanted to trip him so badly, he was tripping absolutely everyone behind him. They take away the credibility of the event and get in everyones' way. I think charity runs should be renamed Fun Runs and never billed as "mini marathons".
Re. last paragraph:
I was training for Dublin marathon a few years back, while my son was being treated in Crumlin hospital. I wanted to raise money for Crumlin and did not want to run in a silly uniform or costume. I rang Paddy Power and asked if I could run and place a bet on myself. As it was my first marathon I thought I might get a bet placed for finishing. I dealt with the novelty/charity bets department who initially expressed interest (as the winnings/money were to go directly to the childrens hospital). However they wanted/needed a previous time. I had no road racing record as such so they couldn't fix a bet with me. I haven't gone back to them since but I'd say for the right cause you could bet against your predicted time, if they have money in their marketing budget for charity etc.
Kevin think you should be careful there. I have ran cork and dublin and not for "fun" or to "get up off the couch" I have been running for years, but havent joined a club because i am joined another club in a different sport and the reason I Did dublin and Cork is because I felt slightly threathned by any other marathon because I felt frowned upon because I dont have a "club" jersey. I Feel welcome at Cork and dublin becasue you can be a "runner" and not have to be super fast.......
Good article, whether people agree or disagree, I think you offer a good alternative in your last paragraph. Instead of dressing up as a clown (literally) why not put the effort into a PB for charity.
I'm just curious about the 2nd comment. Were you pee'd off becuase the runner was wearing a costune (the wedding dress) or were you pee'd off because even in a wedding dress they still out ran you !!!! Live and let live.
I think the 2nd comment was already answered....."I was stuck behind a guy in a wedding dress once.....he was tripping absolutely everyone behind him."
I don't think there is a direct cause and effect relationship between charity runners and the fall in standards... however I believe there is a casual relationship because peoples perception of the sport of athletics and distance running has slightly changed...and the image of distance running achievements have been diminished... When the general public think of the sport of running their general perception of what achievement is, is basically someone completing a marathon is an achievement... The general public have no perception of a good time or performance... there is just a lack of awareness of true excellence in our sport because there is so much focus on the participation side. Most participants in the marathon will not have any awareness of the "elite" athletes in the race and the magnitude of their achievement if they run a certain time... not to mind the general public.
However the sport of athletics and distance running seems to gain very little in proportion to what all the charities gain from all these charity runners who come and use the sport to raise their money and are largely not seen again. What if half the money raised in races had to go back into the sport of athletics or even ten per cent? What if the Irish winners of the Dublin and Cork Marathons were to get a proportion of the entry fee of every runner rather than the meagre amounts paid out to our best athletes that would probably only keep them going for a month? The question in this article should not really be if the charity runners take away from the sport but rather, what do they put back into the sport that they are only too happy to use for their own benefit and that has been developed for the most part by volunteers? How much do you give back to the sport that you enjoy besides the entry fee that you pay or even the club membership fee that you pay??
the last paragraph is way off the mark.bit of a cheek assuming the general public are ignorant of what a good time is...i have ran a few marathons and of course i'm no flier but i take pride in my own personal acheivement and i take pleasure in watching the work and effort of elite runners. as for charity runners..best of luck to them..as for the weddding dress guy why not simply run past him ;-)
I happily ran past the wedding dress guy but his lack of consideration for everyone else in the run was appalling. Wedding dresses do not leave a small wake. This was in the half marathon of the Great Limerick Run. A lovely course and great atmosphere! Live and let live is all very well but some selfish arse wearing a three foot train is hardly living by the same principles. Having read the comments here I'm really surprised and the snakiness of fellow runners!
There are lots of marathons that need times to qualify
If it wasnt for the charity and recreational runners the elite athletes wouldn't get to run the Cork and Dublin marathons.Are the City Councils going to close the streets on a bank holiday for the handful of Irish athletes who can run sub 2:30? As for the 8th comment "what do they put back into the sport that they are happy to use for their own benefit" they are probably too busy raising money for cancer research, terminally ill children, the millions of hungry and homeless.
Shame on them for neglecting Irish long distance running.
The other big question is where the money raised goes to. When you see multiple charities for the same cause and CEOs of charities getting well over €100,000 a year, you start to get very careful.
Some recreational runners and charity runners seem to have an inferiority complex to automatically think that just because we are trying to promote the top end of the sport that we are also trying to get rid of the recreational/charity runners. My question is asking if its ok that the top Irish Runners get less and less respect for their efforts and the sport is degenerated to this level with so few serious runners making it through to the top level? We should all just stop running seriously and just everyone raise money for charities? The point is that the balance is gone the wrong way and it has gone away from a lack of respect for the sport and those who put so much into it. If there was no athletics or running, then these charities wouldn't be able to raise their money. I never said that there was anything wrong with raising money for charity or that the charity runners shouldn't be there... I just said what do they give back to the sport that they use to raise money??? Maybe the problem is really that the race organisers haven't set the races up to give back to the sport? Its not that the charities don't give anything back on purpose but the effort that volunteer people in the sport put in should be recognised and accordingly more money should go back into the sport and to promote it and its top level athletes. The better the sport does, the better the charities do. If the sport is allowed to degenerate any further, then the charities will suffer because the volunteers won't be there to help with organising these events anymore and the charities will have to pay more to organise events. Please don't assume that because we are trying to promote top level athletes bettering themselves in athletics then there is no room for the recreational runner. The two can go together fine but the original and true nature of the sport is that it is an athletics race and if you get rid of this, you take away the true essence of the event. If the charity runners weren't there, then the club runners still would be there in Dublin and in Cork marathons and yes they did close the streets for mostly club runners who could break 2:30 or even 3 hours. Thats how the first Dublin and Cork Marathons happened!! It just demonstrates my point even better that charity runners don't take an interest in the sport that they are taking part in. They don't realise that the pursuit of distance running performance is a noble pursuit in itself and that the top runners sacrifice an awful lot to pursue their sport and be positive role models. However again, it is not the fault of the charity runners but rather the way the organisers of the marathons publicise their events. Unfortunately the commercial marathons emphasis is on making money rather than on promoting athletics and an athletic event.
Well written, thought provoking article.
A few points:
Running is by its nature the most natural sport for anyone to take part in, whether you're a sub 2.30 or a sub 4.30 marathon runner. Along with triathlon, it is one of the few sports in which Joe Public can complete the same course as the elites, which in itself is one of the best and most unique aspects of these sports. Running is for everyone.
Whether or not they wear a costume should be irrelevant unless their costume lmitis other runners - the guy with the ladder or the 3 meter train on the wedding dress should never have been allowed. Stewards should stop these guys from running with their dangerous costumes in the same way that ear phone wearers in BHAA races do not get an official time.
There was a guy running in a Sonic the Hedgehog outfit for Cork to Cobh this year running for a hospice. I ran near him for a while (he was fast enough!) and not one runner who passed him was giving out, everyone was really supportive and there were a lot of club runners there.
I have run 3 marathons including Dublin and Cork and have never had a problem. I have also been a steward for Dublin and again, never had any issues.
To say that runners have no respect or appreciation of the finishing times of the elites is misleading. I don't know anyone who has completed a marathon who couldn't tell you what the winning time was or at least how far they were behind the winner.
The Dublin marathon receives huge sponsorship on the back of the numbers who run it, so if it wasn't for the charity runners or the recreational runners, the sponsorship would be much lower, so the sport does gain from its numbers. Also the entry fees can be high enough too €50 for Dublin and €45 to run in Clonakilty in a few weeks, where does that money go? (BTW - €45 for Clon is excessive in my opinion).
Athletics Ireland is a reasonably well funded organisation compared to the other governing bodies of its size and receives significant funding from the government. Participation is key to any NGBs base-funding (for development purposes, high performacne funding comes from another stream), so the more participation they can show, the more funding they get. Again big numbers in races support these figures. Are AI not responsible for the recreational athlete as well as the elite? The IRFU are responsible for the guy who plays the odd match on the Sunday as much as they are for the guy who plays for Ireland.
The decline in performance levels in Irish marathon running since the 90s has very little to do with the charity runner. Our lifestyles have changed - kids play computers, there are more sports available to them now from tennis to ultimate frisbee, athletics doesn't get the coverage it once did etc. Kids don't want to run marathons anymore, never to mind a mile. Very few people could name who the top marathon runner in the country is, yet there is not one kid in Munster who wouldn't recognise Paul O'Connell.
Personally I see no harm in the charity runner, as long as they don't affect those wanting to run good times, even if it's a good time from a personal point of view, not an elite athlete's point of view. The more the merrier which will increase sponsorship and money into the sport. I do have reservations about relay runners in the Cork marathon, but that's another argument.
We also need the media to step up and focus on the elite Irish runners, which might give kids something to follow and aspire to. When was the last time any of the Irish athlete's based in the US received some coverage in any paper other than in a small column by Ian O'Riordan in the times?
Finally on a sidenote, Ray D'Arcy ran Dublin a few years ago for charity and the money he got was based on his finishing time. Maybe if more people like him took the lead, it might help...
last comment is excellently written. knowing the person who wrote the very long anti participant piece, this is a drum they have beating for a while. their points are well meaning but are wrong. alot of runners in cork dodge racing against each other. the decline in athletic standards is hardly the fault of the casual runner rather down to mismanagement by the AAI. schools development is essential too. rugby cricket etc can get their act together
I welcome the costume runners in marathons. However, apart from the simplest of costumes (Elvis, Superman etc),I feel they should start at the back of the field especially in the bigger events (say over 1,000 runners). In that way the possibility of annoying other runners is minimised. As most marathons now have chip timing, starting at the back of the field won't effect their times. If they pass others out later in race, that's fine as if they're fast enough to pass, they're also fast enough to not get in the way. However, lets face it, a runner dressed as say a polar bear and peaking out through a furry mask is unlikely to pass many in a marathon. That's why I recommend the back of the field at the start for him / her. "Elvis" passed me at the 5 mile mark in Cork marathon 2008 and I reckon he finished in sub 3.30.
Didn't sonia o sullivan do something like that a few years back, for every minute under 3hrs for the marathon some bookie was to give a grand per minute to a charity [think IGDB]. think sonia ran 2-52, nice 8 g.
As someone who came to the sport of running late I know that one of the fears potential new entrants to the sport have is of being too slow and out of their depth. When you read some of the arrogant comments above and even the article itself it is little wonder. Although not my cup of tea it is as well to remember that without the charity runners and fun runners most of the races would not be financially viable and would not take place at all. These people have paid the same entrance fees as everyone else. If you have an issue with then don't bother paying the entrance fee and running the race.
Post a Comment