Firestorm Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 I think one of the points being made is that the refereeing was TERRIBLE! Any other heat that would have been stopped with an exclusion on any other track in the country - doesn't matter who the riders involved were. Its not a dig against Nichols per se, its just that it sends out mixed messages to riders about what is and what is not acceptable (or indeed legal) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Jasper Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 Makes interesting reading. The Coventry fans will insist there is no problem between the 2, possibly because they want the 2 to stay. But others have said the relationship between the 2 has been strained for a while and this could well be the straw that breaks the camels back. Nicholls to head south East? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Who are the others? people who watch them every other week on the tv..... Why should Scott be seen on tv jumping for joy when Bomber does well? it is an indidual competition..... As I said we see them every week and there seems to be no problem, they may or may not get on however as long as they continue to ride together like they have for the last 3 years bees fans will be happy. Rob are you sure Bomber would not try to pass somebody ? I mean we are talking about the Bomber who left Nicholls no option but to shut off on the straight? Both boys were racing hard.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philfromcov Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 its fair to say the ref was rubbish, some of the starts were shocking, the track was a disgrace too! bomber was unlucky in that decision, but what do expect scott to do? play tp the refs whisttle personally i thought it should been a count back on race wins, but dont think they had enough fingers! what would they have done if 5 were on the same score? yes it was a bad refs decision but all riders should be used to that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Bee Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 (edited) Rob are you sure Bomber would not try to pass somebody ? I mean we are talking about the Bomber who left Nicholls no option but to shut off on the straight? Both boys were racing hard.... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No we're talking about the Bomber who was no-where near Scott when he passed but Scott lifted Scott shut off out of choice to try and get back under Harris, not because Harris forced him to. Edited October 15, 2007 by Silver Bee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badge Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 Well, my first thought on seeing the incident from on the 1st bend was that Scott took Bomber out, and we were shocked that the red lights didn't come on.Bad bad decision (or non decision by the ref) However, what concerned me more, was the fact that with Bomber still down on the track Nicholls didn't even go check he was OK or did he want a lifty back or anything. And before any of you ask, yes I do know Nicholls. And I'm fairly certain he will not be at Ipswich next season, why on earth would Coventry want to get rid of, in all honesty, probably their most successful Captain. What I would like to add though, is why should it matter what nationality Scott Nicholls is, as regards to people seeing incidents differently. What I felt I saw was Scott, having been 3rd, Holta taking 2nd placed Bomber wide and allowing Scott through briefly to 2nd before Bomber re-passed Scott,...... going into the last lap, Scott then smacking into Bomber causing him to fall. And no exclusion.!! End of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wjm Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 It was a shocking decision by the referee and a move of utter desperation by Nicholls, team mate or not , he should hang his head in shame that he could do nothing else but just knock his fellow competitor of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 Chris is a sure starter for the GP next year, and the GP series was over many rounds not just Saturday so the finger cant be pointed at Scott for Chris not getting the points to automatically qualify. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diesel Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 Well I blame Subedei for Scott making such a desperate move. He probably reads the forum and couldn't stand the thought of another 12 months of being called a beggar (amongst other things) if he didn't qualify. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Instead he'll just be known as a cheat... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boss 2 Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 Was watching with my 11 year old son and we both sat with our jaws hitting the floor when the red lights failed to come on thought that when they didn't the ref would just exclude Nicholls and award Harris second, it was one of the most blatant examples of a rider knocking his opponent off that i have seen in over 40 years of watching. Nicholls was out of order and Harris has every right to be very angry- i certainly would not wish to continue 'working' with someone who had done that to me (but i'd have clocked him one for luck too!!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsunami Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 It was a shocking decision by the referee and a move of utter desperation by Nicholls, team mate or not , he should hang his head in shame that he could do nothing else but just knock his fellow competitor of. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Totally agree. I can't believe that there are some on here that are trying to defend Scott's action or think that it is justifiable. It was a desperate move by a man trying to qualify but it was crude and unfair. The ref should be taken off the circuit of GP refs for such a blatant miss of the incident. Most noticable, the number of riders that patted Chris as he walked throught the pits, it showed the other riders had a lot of sympathy for his situation. It certainly should be Holta and Chris through with Nicholls sweating on a wildcard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blazeaway Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 It was a shocking decision by the referee and a move of utter desperation by Nicholls, team mate or not , he should hang his head in shame that he could do nothing else but just knock his fellow competitor of. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Nonsense it was hard riding but not utter desperation. Plus we all know Bomber likes to bail out, just ask Hans.... Only joking about the second bit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f-s-p Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 Plus we all know Bomber likes to bail out, just ask Hans.... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I wouldn't joke about that. Glad you said it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barney Rabbit Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 the GP series was over many rounds not just Saturday so the finger cant be pointed at Scott for Chris not getting the points to automatically qualify. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Does the same not apply to Nicholls then? Surely he had had just as many rounds to get sufficient points to automatically qualify and shouldn't have needed to knock another rider off in a run-off to get the job done. So yes, the finger can be pointed at Scott for Chris not being an automatic starter in next year's GP. Anything that had happened prior to that run-off is irrelevant to the issue in question - Nicholls' move on Harris that ended up with one of them on the deck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wjm Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 Nonsense it was hard riding but not utter desperation. Plus we all know Bomber likes to bail out, just ask Hans.... Only joking about the second bit <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Of course it was, he took away Harris opportunity to race and turn the bend that isn't hard, its unfair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Know Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 I have said before and i will say again the bloke is a moody, bad loser no brain plum. Must admit i cant stand him and he brings nothing to the g.p. Will he be floating around outside the top 8 next year again, YES. Chris on the other hand is a good racer and a nice chap and i know he will be in next year Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPEEDY69 Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 Perhaps I saw a different race to others then. It appeared to me to be a mild nudge on the left side in the middle of the bend - many riders do not fall when receiving this type of contact which is very common on the first turn and was completely different to taking out a front/back wheel or t-boning. The real issue for me is why was a run-off held, especially considering the absolutely awful track where 'racing' was non-existent, with gate picks being blind. The WC is decided over many rounds, as well as qualification for next year, so some form of count back would have been the fairest way to do it (or a run-off on all the tracks!!!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subedei Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 But what form of countback? Ah yes, the type that favours your particular agenda to have both of your men qualify. The fairest means would surely have been a standard deviation of the results over the course of the year. This would give priority to the rider with the greatest consistency of scores over the GP season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPEEDY69 Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 (edited) But what form of countback? Ah yes, the type that favours your particular agenda to have both of your men qualify. The fairest means would surely have been a standard deviation of the results over the course of the year. This would give priority to the rider with the greatest consistency of scores over the GP season. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No agenda here I'm afraid. I'm not concerned how, as long as it was fair and known to all. Whoever was then included out of the three of them then I couldn't argue with it and neither could they. Edited October 15, 2007 by SPEEDY69 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subedei Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 No agenda here I'm afraid. I'm not concerned how, as long as it was fair and known to all. Whoever was then included out of the three of them then I couldn't argue with it and neither could they. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Then this was "fair and known to all", since it's been in the rule book all season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPEEDY69 Posted October 15, 2007 Report Share Posted October 15, 2007 Then this was "fair and known to all", since it's been in the rule book all season. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Touche! However I don't think it's fair as it depends which track is the last one on the calendar and also the way the gates were picked seemed made up on the night to me - mind you, I haven't read the rule book!! However, I think all three will be in the GPs next year and deserve to be and so the run-off was a little pointless in that sense. I know many didn't think Holta would get a nomination but I think, as Polish Champion, he should have, were it needed. 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.