. t .
Page 33
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Meeting the Critics les
THE organizers of the Lorry Driver of the Year competition deserve the warmest congratulations for their wholehearted attempt to produce a competition which the competitors want—and not one which (as sometimes happens with such functions) organizers think the competitors want. As The Commercial Motor reported last week, they have made drastic changes in the vehicle classifications—in answer, say the organizers, to many complaints—and in the process banned all vehicles below about li tons unladen weight and completely reorganized the articulated vehicles' section This, incidentally, has the effect of banning such old favourites as the "Queen Mary" type of vehicle and some pole trailers.
In addition, the executive committee is to consider using unladen weight as a basis for classification, instead of (or in conjunction with) lengths as at present. They have tackled the old, old problem of eliminating centres declaring overall winners. Instead of having no• declared policy., the executive now is to seek approval so long as the centres use a mathematical or run-off basis (as in the National Final). This year's final is also to have a very considerable eye-appeal for the public, by the way of added attractions.
It must be a matter of some regret that the bounds of the contest have been narrowed further. Ideally, it should be open to all (a class for every driver, as has been caustically suggested in the past). Obviously, there are powerful physical limitations on the number of vehicles which can be handled at either a centre or the national final in the time available. But there are already many vehicles which, for perfectly sound reasons, are banned from entering for this contest. Now more have been added. Admittedly the drivers concerned are not "lorry drivers" in the true haulage sense of the word (although their licence entitles them to be), and admittedly there are thoroughly valid reasons in the organizers' minds for the bans, but the wisdom of dealing with everything by exclusion is doubtful. , The way to greater interest might well lie in tightening up to ensure true "lorry driver" entry; it might also lie to some extent in encouraging as many people as possible to improve their driving skill when in charge of a commercial vehicle—by encouraging, rather than turning down, entries and if necessary adding classes to cope with unfairness within a class (as undoubtedly existed with small vans).
The differentiation, in the artic classes, between flats and vans and tankers mist meet with universal approval, as must the more appropriate, 4-ton unladen weight limit for the tractive units. This should greatly improve the interest among semi-trailer operators and drivers and provide these classes with a more equitable basis for competition.
For too long, the question of eliminating centres naming their own local overall winner has been avoided. At last, and with commendable sense, the organizers have grasped the nettle and, if—as they surely must be—their recommendations are approved, a suitable basis will have been found.. Naturally, to stimulate interest, local centres want a local winner. Equally natural is the comment that to decide the winner on a straight points basis is manifestly u,nfair to the heavy drivers.
Anyway, it is easy to criticize, but very difficult to organize adequately and please everyone. The organizers have always done a splendid job. Now they have honestly faced their critics and attempted the impossible —to please everyone. In face of this magnificent effort any criticism must seem out of place. Faults there may still be (though they are not readily apparent), but full marks to the organizers for so realistically tackling a very difficult task.