While some of the body of the report was quite personal I don't think any of his concluding recommendations are unmanagable. Generally, they seem like common sense. He also goes to lengths to point out that his gripe is with the upper hierarchy but not the men/women on the ground which will be reassuring to many.

He uses the metaphor about all this being like shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted. For some families this is sadly the case, but if the door is closed now then it might stop all the other horses from getting out.

I also go back to my previous point about the importance of communication which did play a major factor. It is of extreme importance that the marshalls around the course feel their views are important and are being heard, and that changes can be implemented on the basis of their recommendations.

The whole process of designating prohibited areas seems very long and drawn out. If a marshall during the TT/MGP feels a spectator is in a dangerous position but not in a prohibited area what can be done? If an incident occurs on first night of practice where a bike goes somewhere that isn't a prohibited area at the time, and the organisers want to make it prohibited, how long woukd this take?