Bryn Posted January 20, 2007 Report Share Posted January 20, 2007 Result phoned through by Gavin Elmes / Wendy Morris as follows: 1.Justin Sedgman / Dakota North (Vic) - 25 2. Sam Masters / Taylor Poole (NSW) - 20 3. Mason Campton / Alex Davies (NSW) - 19* 4. Clinton Dennis / Nick Morris (Qld) - 19* Alex Davies (gate 3) bt Clinton Dennis (gate 1) in a run off for third passing him on the very last bend. Bryn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandie Posted January 20, 2007 Report Share Posted January 20, 2007 Result phoned through by Gavin Elmes / Wendy Morris as follows: 1.Justin Sedgman / Dakota North (Vic) - 25 2. Sam Masters / Taylor Poole (NSW) - 20 3. Mason Campton / Alex Davies (NSW) - 19* 4. Clinton Dennis / Nick Morris (Qld) - 19* Alex Davies (gate 3) bt Clinton Dennis (gate 1) in a run off for third passing him on the very last bend. Bryn <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I love the way even the reults are phoned through as a 'pair'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigFatDave Posted January 21, 2007 Report Share Posted January 21, 2007 I love the way even the reults are phoned through as a 'pair'. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Teamwork. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trackman Posted January 21, 2007 Report Share Posted January 21, 2007 (edited) Teamwork. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I never seen Gavin standing still long enough to make a phone call....... Regards. Edited January 23, 2007 by Trackman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whowasthatberntpersson Posted January 24, 2007 Report Share Posted January 24, 2007 Poole/Masters v Sedgman/North Four evenly matched riders going for the same piece of track was quite a spectacle. I'm not 100% sure how many attempts were made to complete this race but I reckon it was four or five, they failed to make it past turn two at least three times. The referee finally excluded someone after Poole and North clashed when the race got past the first bend, but even that was a borderline decision with Poole falling after a nudge on the inside by North. Poole/Masters v Branford/Sissis Another much talked about race, from where I was standing Masters appeared to lock up in front of Branford, Branford ran into him, and the referee excluded Branford, the majority of those watching disagreed with the decision. In the re run Masters/Poole got the jump but the very talented 11 year old Sissis took chase and spectacularly passed both much to the delight of most of the crowd who saw it as justice as well as a brilliant piece of riding. Plenty of other great races including the Morris/Dennis v Davies/Campton heat, when Dennis got the jump forcing Davies wide which allowed Morris to dive underneath and lead, Morris won the race with Davies clinching second right on the line. The run off for third also saw a very close race with Dennis leading from gate 1, Davies never gave up and finally found a gap on the inside on the very last bend of the last lap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sir Lunchalot Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 Another much talked about race, from where I was standing Masters appeared to lock up in front of Branford, Branford ran into him, and the referee excluded Branford, the majority of those watching disagreed with the decision. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Actually WWTBP, I had a long discussion (actually it may have been an argument, where does it change ?) with Bryn over a pint or two of Old Speckled Hen about this very subject where the rider in front has a problem but does not fall and the rider behind collides with the slowing / slowed rider. Bryn was adamant that the onus is on the rider behind to avoid the rider in trouble. Originally I agreed with the the view that if the rider in front locks up badly then it's his fault but now I am prepared to accept that I was wrong and the rider behind is the one at fault, even if it is somewhat unfortunate. I also had the same conversation with another knowledgeable speedway person at about the same time and they said exactly the same thing as Bryn did so I'm now a believer in that the rider behind should beware. It one of those times where I now accept the rule even though at first my sense of fair play didn't think it was right. (I bet Bryn still thinks I'm having him on though) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whowasthatberntpersson Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 Hi Lunchy, I'm not sure if it should be a cut and thrust decision and I'm not sure what guidelines referees have to follow. Sure if the rider behind has time to avoid the rider in front who has locked up, however I'm certain their are cases when the rider in front is at fault. In this case young Robert Branford had absolutely nowhere to go and didn't deserve to be excluded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spiderweb Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 Different race meeting SA State Title: Rider A (Tom Hedley) in front drifts wide only 2 meters of the pole line turn 3 rider B sees an opening and does a slide job but picks up drive, front wheel in the air. Tom saw this front wheel heading for him backs off to avoid getting hit. Rider b out of control almost hits turn 4 fence but continues on to win Tom Hedly almost stops but recovers to finish last. Results stand 1 guess the motto of the story is dont back off LOL! ( if Tom had won that race he would have been in the final) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sir Lunchalot Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 Hi Lunchy, I'm not sure if it should be a cut and thrust decision and I'm not sure what guidelines referees have to follow. Sure if the rider behind has time to avoid the rider in front who has locked up, however I'm certain their are cases when the rider in front is at fault. In this case young Robert Branford had absolutely nowhere to go and didn't deserve to be excluded. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I used exactly the same argument as you did WWTBP but it didn't seem to cut much ice with the ones that knew the rule. Common sense told me that if the rider in front has a major problem and slows dramatically and the rider behind has absolutely nowhere to go then the rider in front should be excluded. Apparently the rule is cut and dried though and not one that makes a lot of sense to me but there you go !! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chopper Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 Dont want to get too involved in this conversation as it was my son who was involved but one thing that wasnt mentioned was that not only had the rider in front locked up, he was three quarters of the way to the ground and would have fallen anyway.What you have to ask yourself is what could the rider behind have done to avoid the accident , and if the answer is nothing, as in this case surely the rider at fault has to be the rider falling. Regards Darrell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trackman Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 Actually WWTBP, I had a long discussion (actually it may have been an argument, where does it change ?) with Bryn over a pint or two of Old Speckled Hen about this very subject where the rider in front has a problem but does not fall and the rider behind collides with the slowing / slowed rider. Bryn was adamant that the onus is on the rider behind to avoid the rider in trouble. Originally I agreed with the the view that if the rider in front locks up badly then it's his fault but now I am prepared to accept that I was wrong and the rider behind is the one at fault, even if it is somewhat unfortunate. I also had the same conversation with another knowledgeable speedway person at about the same time and they said exactly the same thing as Bryn did so I'm now a believer in that the rider behind should beware. It one of those times where I now accept the rule even though at first my sense of fair play didn't think it was right. (I bet Bryn still thinks I'm having him on though) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> What if the rider infront pulled a locker to bawlk the rider behind, but due to his lack of experience he did the move all wrong....... what if the rider infront changed his back wheel, but never had time to check the tyre pressure, what if the rider infront had a deflateing tyre? or he set his back wheel up facing the outside too much. or the back wheel came loose......... I could go on but I wont. Regards. PS. If the rider did pull a locker to bawlk the following rider and the move caused a crash, in my book thats dangerous riding.... if not dirty riding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trackman Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 I used exactly the same argument as you did WWTBP but it didn't seem to cut much ice with the ones that knew the rule. Apparently the rule is cut and dried though and not one that makes a lot of sense to me but there you go !! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Would the ones that knew the rule & made the rule be ex championship riders? Regards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ali C Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 Dont want to get too involved in this conversation as it was my son who was involved but one thing that wasnt mentioned was that not only had the rider in front locked up, he was three quarters of the way to the ground and would have fallen anyway.What you have to ask yourself is what could the rider behind have done to avoid the accident , and if the answer is nothing, as in this case surely the rider at fault has to be the rider falling. Regards Darrell <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Darrell did you race for Edinburgh sometime in the late 80's or early 90's? Greetings from a Monarchs fan! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chopper Posted January 26, 2007 Report Share Posted January 26, 2007 Darrell did you race for Edinburgh sometime in the late 80's or early 90's? Greetings from a Monarchs fan! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Hi there Ali, yes that was me.Ive been drawn back into the sport by my son even though i swore off the sport for nearly 15 yrs.Hes making good progress in the juniors, although he is a better rider than he showed in the titles, just had one of those nights, and was much better in the pairs.If he follows through with it he wont have the problems i had with work permits as his moms a pom.Do you still follow the sport?, i hear its moved tracks from when i was there. Regards Darrell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ali C Posted January 26, 2007 Report Share Posted January 26, 2007 Hi Darrell Yes we've now moved tracks to somewhere called Armadale which is half way between Edinburgh and Glasgow! Unfortunately I don't make it every week but I'll never stop supporting the Monarchs - I started going when I was three when Powderhall first opened! The likes of Mike Hunter are still working away at the club! Good to hear that your son is progressing well. It's frightening when I hear of all the sons of riders now coming through in the sport. Just makes me feel my age a tad! Regards Alison Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chopper Posted January 30, 2007 Report Share Posted January 30, 2007 Great to hear Mikes still involved i stayed with him while in edinburgh, pass on my best wishes. Regards Darrell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.