There are more questions than answers, and what this article/thread raises are further questions......
Why has he not completed a fitness test (BFT?) in the last 10 years (45-50) when he should have completed one up until the age of 50? A medical reason is one possibility.
If the Army stop fitness tests at 50, why do the RAF (and RN?) continue testing until 55? Perhaps because the RAF has a higher percentage of 50+ year olds?
No one appears to be doubting the generals ability, indeed everyone seems to praise it. However, as has already been stated, one of the basic principles of sound leadership is setting a good example.
It would appear, and I stress the word appear, that on the few (insufficient?) facts available the general is not setting a good example.
As has also been pointed out, this is in an area where the RAF is dismissing people for failing to meet an apparently arbitary level of fitness, so making the apparent double standard in this case seem even more outrageous.
For everyone saying he is good at his job, and doesn't need to be uberfit to be a general, someone else will say that he knows a mate who is good at their job, and doesn't need to be uberfit to do it, that is about to be thrown out of the RAF for failing a fitness test that the general has apparently avoided.
That is the heart of the problem.....