The Ref Is A Clown.

[Leg Trailer]

There is already more than one ref ready to supervise the meeting but more than one for the meeting itself would surely only breed disputre amongst themselves and prolong a meeting?

 

Anyway, this particular ref was the reserve because the original referee (whose name shall remain anonymous) was eerrr..... withdrawn. Anyone else hear this news or am I the only one? I'm not prepared to spill the beans on the whole story if nobody else knows because it ain't good for the ref involved.

[Bernie]

Ref was a little on the wrong side. However TR did what he had to do and get the race stopped. The question did he slow to invite Floppy to come down the inside line and take the opportunity of falling off just infront of us. We were top tier in the BT bit by the starting gate all on our todd.

 

Crumpy a little harshly dealt with.

 

I enjoyed the meet except wrong winner.

[Splatty]

im not sure it would take a genius to work out who you are talking about leg trailer

[pirate paul]

He tried to ride it out, and it was nobody’s fault that everyone had moved out and out leaving no room.

All four back.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The rule only applies to the first bend. The ref cannot put all four back when the incident happens on the second bend exit. He had to exclude somebody for the stoppage and as Crump went down without being touched it was he who had to go. Probably the only decision he got right all night though

[Gemini]

The referee was appalling but rumour on the street is that he stepped in at the last minute to replace the original referee who was, lets us just say, excluded from the meet. Shall not elaborate any further as what I heard could be quite libellous if incorrect.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Surely can't be correct? Marek Wojaczek was the referee printed in the G.P. programme and he was the one who was in charge of the meeting wasn't he? I seem to recall his name being mentioned more than once during the Sky broadcast.

[arthur cross]

I'm sure it's been mentioned loads of times on other threads before, but for pirate paul's benefit (and anyone else) there is no such rule as "first bend bunching" when judging whether it should be all-4-riders back or an exclusion.

 

"First bend bunching" has become the handy term for describing these situations, which has led to so many fans understandably thinking it's an actual rule.

 

What the referee has to decide is whether any early bunching in a race has created an "unsatisfactory start, all 4 back" situation or a "rider X excluded for being the cause of the stoppage" situation.

 

It doesn't matter whether the bunching is on the first bend, the second bend or halfway down the back straight if the riders are still sorting themselves out ... although it's an extremely rare situation, it can even happen that two or three riders remain spread evenly across the track all the way into the 3rd bend and if one of them then falls unluckily it can still be deemed an "unsatisfactory start, all 4 back" well over half-a-lap into the race!

[Subedei]

"First bend bunching" has become the handy term for describing these situations, which has led to so many fans understandably thinking it's an actual rule.

 

And not only fans. It's a mindset British referees seem to have fallen into over the years.

[Steve Shovlar]

The eclusion of Crump when he fell after trying to go around Hancock was completely correct. he could have shut off, but went for the blast around the outside and there was no room when he got there.

 

Exclusion of Crump was the only correct decision to be made. Crump was off the pace all night and got more and more frantic as the heats went by. In the end he tried to go up the inside when there also wasn't the room, and ended up bringing down two riders for another justifyable decision. The fact that he didn't even check to see if either rider was OK stinks and although never high in my expectations, he has plummetted to new depths, and that's without his gutter outbursts on Sky. Fine him and ban him from a couple of GP's to teach him a lesson in manners.

[Subedei]

I thought Crump's first 2 exclusions were dubious. But I have to agree with you that Crump was off the pace all night (but don't let ouch catch you saying that, or you'll be in a 2 day argument, like I have been in the Crump thread). In fact all the Jawa runners seemed well off the pace. It was GMs all the way. Crump and Adams were pedestrian. I think that while Crump was not happy with the referee, a part of his behaviour was frustration at his own performance. At least I hope it was.

Because if he's just blaming the referee, he's deluding himself.

Edited June 14, 2005 by Subedei