Fair enough Peter, I got the wrong end of the stick with the Sulby/ Cronk-y-Voddy thing, but surely the principle still holds as it was also a lot bumpier than it is now? Really let meself down with that as I do actually know the couse fairly wellTo, correct myself, the 3 fatalities around the Cronk-y-Voddy and 11th milestone section were Drinkwater in '49, Ralph Rensen in '61 and Ian Ogden in '86. I agree that specific steps need to be made to protect spectators, but we must understand it will never be failsafe. If spectators can be killed at road races in the 1920s then they most probably will be in the future, whether it be at the TT or some Indy oval circuit in the States. Of course everything needs to be done to try. This in effect will mean more prohibited areas. There are certainly places on the course that aren't as yet prohibited that I've never watched from as I would not be comfortable there. But surely reducing accidents for the riders can only be good for the spectators too?

You're right, I'm not in the TT/MGP riders database- I don't even ride a bike as I've spent a fair bit of time in the past trying to stick guys back together after accidents which is probably why I'm such a chicken. I don't think that invalidates my opinion!! I am a road race fanatic and I absolutely bloody love the TT. Anyone, like yourself, who has ever raced there is a legend in my book. I may not be totally comfortable with some of the decisions made about the TT but if they ensure that one day I'll be able to sit on a sunny day on the Mountain with my grandchildren watching the bikes I'll be prepared to accept them. I think everyone on this site is basically singing from the same hymn sheet- we are all concerned about the future of the TT.

You're point about practice is an interesting one. Does anyone think that with all today's DVDs and Playstation games that it would be tempting for newcomers to be a bit overconfident too soon. As you say, there is no substitute for the real thing. I know every inch of that place (despite my faux pas!) but there's obviously no way I'd ever get round quick on 2 wheels!

I've also been very interested in all the risk assessment type posts. Part of my job is concerning blood transfusion and its regulation. Until we learnt from the "no blame" ethos of the airline industry things were going nowhere. Why would anyone fess up when they knew they could end up in court? Things are now reported centrally and anonymously and near misses are investigated to try and prevent the actual disasters happening. The change has been unbelievable. The coroner touched on a lot of relevant stuff but for me the major disappointment was the underlying atmosphere were he sought to blame specific individuals when clearly this was a system failure. Of course witnesses became defensive. I suspect there may be other marshals glad the accident didn't happen in their sector, as the same failing systems would probably have been uncovered? This is now the opportunity for concerns to be heard and acted upon. Marshals should feel if they have worries about near misses etc that they will be listened to and acted on.