New Rule With Warnings In Sweden.

[Ghostwalker]

Swedish Motorcycle Racing Association, SVEMO has decided that a new system that is based on warnings of similar kind that we see in football will be implemented in Swedish league speedway. The new rules will be "activated" already on Monday.

 

The new system means that referees can warn a rider if the ref considers him to have performed a dangerous maneuver (unsportsmanlike conduct) the referee can/should give that rider a warning. IF the rider gets another warning in the same meeting he will be excluded from the rest of the meeting and also the next meeting.

 

If a rider from an earlier meeting has 1 warning and gets 1 or 2 in the next meeting he will be excluded from the next meeting as well. In the latter case the riders warnings will be removed after his excluded meetings.

 

This new rule is put into action as a result of the recent accident of Robin Johansson and the tragic accident where Kenny Olsson lost his life.

[Ghostwalker]

My personal opinion on this is both good and bad.

 

Its good that they try to deal with the dangerous riding that occasionally occur but

there's a big risk that the referees will take this a step too far. Where is the border between tough and rough?

 

I also think that the referees wont be consequent and some ref's might allow fairly dangerous stuff while others might give warnings for things that are ok.

 

What if a rider gets a good start from gate 4 and are in the lead when he closes in on the corner. What should he do try to take the inner line through the corner and risk getting a warning for dangerous riding or should he stay on the outside and try to keep the bike upright in the "dirt" which usually are to be find close to the fence?

 

In yesterdays meeting between Indianerna and Kaparna, Rafal Dobrocki took the lead and when he got to the first bend he had a good lead and as every other rider would have done he decided to "cut" and head for the inside line through the corner.

 

However the referee stop the heat and excluded RD for "dangerous riding". I did not see this meeting live but IMO that's sounds quite ridiculous shouldn't he be allowed to take the lead?

 

If like half of the riders in a meeting gets warned for trying to overtake and try to claim the lead in a normal way I think we would be better without this rule.

 

If they are to strict they will ruin the sport.

[Pollyanna]

My personal opinion on this is both good and bad.

 

Its good that they try to deal with the dangerous riding that occasionally occur  but

there's a big risk that the referees will take this a step too far. Where is the border between tough and rough?

 

I also think that the referees wont be consequent and some ref's might  allow fairly dangerous stuff while others might give warnings for things that are ok.

 

What if a rider gets a good start from gate 4 and are in the lead when he closes in on the corner. What should he do try to take the inner line through the corner and risk getting a warning for dangerous riding or should he stay on the outside and try to keep the bike upright in the "dirt" which usually are to be find close to the fence?

 

In yesterdays meeting between Indianerna and Kaparna, Rafal Dobrocki took the lead and when he got to the first bend he had a good lead and as every other rider would have done he decided to "cut" and head for the inside line through the

orner.

 

However the referee stop the heat and excluded RD for "dangerous riding". I did not see this meeting live but IMO that's sounds quite ridiculous shouldn't  he be allowed to take the lead?

 

If like half of the riders in a meeting gets warned for trying to overtake and try to claim the lead in a normal way I think we would be better without this rule.

 

If they are to strict they will ruin the sport.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Full of pitfalls, I would say! The trouble is....the referees! They all interpret the rules in their own way and what would constitute dangerous riding in one referee's eyes would be viewed differently in another one's eyes.

 

I agree...how can you exclude a rider for dangerous riding if he is in the lead, unless he knocked another rider out of the way to change his line?

 

I can see controversy over this!

[Trees]

Yes well done to Sweden for taking a immediate stand, hope the new ruling doesn't cause too much controversy, but, by the looks of it, it already has!

[rhidassa]

I think its a good idea in principle, but as you've said, the ref will be the problem.

 

You need a ref that really knows his stuff, and when/where to warn. Overtaking usually isnt the level of 'dangerous riding' that merits a warning - if they did that, they may as well not ride 4 laps, as it'd be pretty much judged from the gate anyway.

 

BUT if they do just do that when someone does a move that shows disregard for another riders safety blatantly, yes, give a warning. I fear that this will just give the refs too much power. Thats where football goes wrong.

[SCB]

Fantastic idea. I posted something similar on this forum a few years ago and it got a mention in the King's Lynn programme

[Tsunami]

Fantastic idea.  I posted something similar on this forum a few years ago and it got a mention in the King's Lynn programme

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Despite that I still think it is a good idea. How many times have you seen a rider try a manouver which was decidedly risky and only just pulls it off. If it hadn't come off both the rider in question and his opponent could have had a ride to the hospital. Same with football when say someone does a high tackle but the other player jumps up just in case. The intent was still there and only by the evasive action of the other player prevented a major injury.

The consistency of the refs and their judgements would be the reason why it would not work. Perhaps for a trial the refs could call the offending rider to the phone and warn him that he thought his riding was out of order and he would take action in future. The rider would know that he was being held accountable and was walking a tight rope. Worth a try.

 

Edited June 14, 2007 by Tsunami

[Philip Addison]

I don't trust referees enough to be able to make ' judgement calls ' on this. It's the craziest idea i think i have ever heard yet. Fans on here argue all the time about certain moves in a meeting whether it was ' fair ' or ' dangerous' a case in point was the move by Kyle Legault on James Cockle last thursday at Sheffield. Some fans thought it was dirty but some thought it was ok. James went for Kyle after the race. We even see it in the Sky matches and GP's, sometimes tv studio pundits will differ on a riders move on track. No i don't like it. Opens up a whole new can of worms. Another reason i dont like it is it interferes with the whole ethos of racing too much.

[Liverstam]

It's absolute nonsense and will only stoke major controversy and potentially ruin this season for all. Horrible decision by Svemo - as usual.

[TwoMinuteWarning]

Sounds like one of those situations where SVEMO are damned if they act to try and do something about the situation, and damned if they don't!

 

No doubt the "do nothing" brigade will win in the end.

[Ghostwalker]

there is also another factor and that is the reputation of a rider.

 

If we have two situation where the circumstances are exactly the same in the same meeting can we trust the referee to take the same decision both times regardless who the riders are?

 

Lets say we have two riders (x and Y) that are closing in on the corner.

X is on the Inside and Y is on the outside slightly behind X.

 

X slides the back of his bike out to prepare for the corner and hits Y and Y falls.

The questions is would the referee(s) judge different depending on who the riders are?

Lets say its X's fault.

 

If Nick Pedersen is X and Leigh Adams is Y I'm quite sure that the referee would exclude and possible also warn Nicki. However if it was the opposite, if Leigh is X and Nicki is Y what would the referee judge? Exclude Nicki which is consider by many to be "mr bad guy" or exclude "Mr nice guy" Leigh Adams?

 

Sounds like one of those situations where SVEMO are damned if they act to try and do something about the situation, and damned if they don't!

 

Yeah definitely. the press has written quite quite much about Kenny's and Robin's accidents and the safety in speedway. Some columnists who normally never ever even mentioned speedway suddenly become experts and have demands that the sport should be forbidden and all the other bla bla bla. sometimes it feels this new rule is just for silencing the press.

 

But we will find out in Tuesdays if the new rule is good or bad.

Edited June 15, 2007 by Ghostwalker