I had the pleasure(?) of partaking in the Munich marathon on the weekend. At one point roughly 2/3 the way through two lanes of a major road had been closed and traffic was restricted, thereby creating some serious traffic jams. At this point a couple of motorists wound their windows down and delivered tirades to the order of 'thankyou you arseholes for inconveniencing the entire city so you can run your stupid 42km'. They were corpulent middle-aged men driving BMW SUVs or similar so one can imagine the rather er....robust response from the running pack on the other side of the temporary fencing.
It was late in the race and I was too tired to think anything sensible but looking back the encounter has made me realise (understand) that these marathons - and other road running races - require a large use of public resources (police, medical etc) as well as serious inconvenience to the 99% that do not participate in such things. The road closures alone are significantly more extensive and longer than those required for, say, a protest or a parade etc. This point is even more relevant with running races; in theory they could just be held on forest tracks and paths where no road closures are necessary.
To my question, is it really necessary to hold running races like marathons in the middle of cities at significant inconvenience to the majority who do not run? You wouldn't close down half a city for a say hockey tournament for example, so why do we runners get special treatment, especially when there's a viable alternative. Are we just selfish, narcissistic pr..cks?