Robbie B Posted July 19, 2009 Report Share Posted July 19, 2009 The joker could make for an interesting meeting, BUT ONLY if ALL teams are allowed to use one, when they want. To penalise a team (whoever they be) for leading the competition is COMPLETLY unfair, and for me made a joke of the result on the 2009 SWC final. I'm sure Australia would never had lost if they could had used a joker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuzieQ Posted July 19, 2009 Report Share Posted July 19, 2009 the SWC was today won by Poland but they had use of a joker but Australia were penalised by being in front and riding to win. Crump tried to beat the Pole in heat 22 which shot themselves in the foot Australia were the better team and should have won get rid of jokers polish home track as well so its a stupid rule QUOTE (Rob B @ Jul 19 2009, 02:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Both teams were daft today, Poland had couple of good chances to use joker earlier on when they went 6 points down twice, Crump should have known or been told no point beating kasprzak by 1 point as they could use joker. That was a terrible tactical move by Crump to Pass Kasper, they had the Poles beat until that point. Agree completley, Boyce as team manager should have made Crump aware of the consequences of beating the pole. Sorry the Aussies lost it with a lack of tactical awareness, letting the poles win it!! Crump rode to win, that is the object of the sport The thing is that I think both teams and riders were aware of the situation going into that heat, KK wanted to make a point and gated well but you could see he was slowing and kept looking round, you could also see that Jason was trying to play follow my leader at many points during the race! However, I think when it came to the crunch, the racer in Jason took over him and he passed and was pleased with the win, no doubt got back to the pits and had it all pointed out to him "again" and at that point had the "DOH!" moment! I want to know who was around when the racing order was drawn for Poland to get Yellow though so they had so many gate 1's at the end of the meeting! Was that really just the luck of the draw? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruno Posted July 19, 2009 Report Share Posted July 19, 2009 But they could not have replaced Protasiewicz with Hampel. good point Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anders Posted July 19, 2009 Report Share Posted July 19, 2009 I want to know who was around when the racing order was drawn for Poland to get Yellow though so they had so many gate 1's at the end of the meeting! Was that really just the luck of the draw? Gate 1 hadn't been that much of an advantage before the rain came, I rather suspect that the track conditions made Gate 1 more of an advantage in the later stages, so "luck of the draw" (in combination with the changed conditions) would seem a good reason why things turned out the way it did. Wins from gate positions, heats 1-19: Gate 1: 5 Gate 2: 4 Gate 3: 4 Gate 4: 6 Wins from gate positions, heats 20-25: Gate 1: 4 Gate 2: 0 Gate 3: 1 Gate 4: 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralMelchett Posted July 19, 2009 Report Share Posted July 19, 2009 (edited) I can remember the SWC qualifier at Owlerton in 2002. Team GB were ahead of the Aussies, they used a joker and subsequently won the meeting to get qualification straight through to the SWC final. Team GB then got eliminated in the race off. had the joker and the rain not curtailed the meeting at heat 20 team GB might have gone straight through to the final and the Aussies would not been World Team Champions that year. No sympathy whatsoever - swings and roundabouts spring to mind. If the rules are consistently left alone you will benefit sometimes and lose out on other occasions. To be fair to the Aussies they don't seem to have made a big deal out of it anyway. Edited July 19, 2009 by General Melchitt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Posted July 19, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 19, 2009 If he had rode to win the world cup, he would have finished second!!! wether you agree with that or not, that was what was needed to WIN the world cup. No I dont agree with coming 2nd, 3rd or last deliberately. it makes a farce of the sport and takes away exactly what each rider should try to do which is get ss many points as he can for his team In what other sport are you rewarded for doing badly ? Only the team doing best today, the Aussies, could not use the joker. Stupid and cost them a win. the idea of sport is to find who is the best. the best didn't get the title today as hampel took a joker and then a sub ride. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Posted July 19, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 19, 2009 I can remember the SWC qualifier at Owlerton in 2002. Team GB were ahead of the Aussies, they used a joker and subsequently won the meeting to get qualification straight through to the SWC final. Team GB then got eliminated in the race off. had the joker and the rain not curtailed the meeting at heat 20 team GB might have gone straight through to the final and the Aussies would not been World Team Champions that year. No sympathy whatsoever - swings and roundabouts spring to mind. If the rules are consistently left alone you will benefit sometimes and lose out on other occasions. To be fair to the Aussies they don't seem to have made a big deal out of it anyway. your right the aussies haven't made a fuss as rules are rules. the point of the thread is to say the rules are plain daft Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyderd Posted July 19, 2009 Report Share Posted July 19, 2009 The rules are unfair but only to the team that cant play their joker, and for that reason I would say that no team can play their Joker after heat 19, but are allowed to substitute 1 rider in 1 of the final 5 heats, but the points they score in that heat don't count double. There, more confusion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carrie Posted July 19, 2009 Report Share Posted July 19, 2009 There, more confusion. Why not keep it simple and let the team that can gain the most points win? If the rules made sense it might even encourage more people to watch the sport! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topaz325 Posted July 19, 2009 Report Share Posted July 19, 2009 Ok, but only if we can do away with the TR rule in British League Speedway (yeah i know this is FIM/BSI/SWC? rules). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topaz325 Posted July 19, 2009 Report Share Posted July 19, 2009 Agree completley, Boyce as team manager should have made Crump aware of the consequences of beating the pole. Sorry the Aussies lost it with a lack of tactical awareness, letting the poles win it!! Great ride by Gollob to win heat 25. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
essaitch Posted July 19, 2009 Report Share Posted July 19, 2009 Why not keep it simple and let the team that can gain the most points win? If the rules made sense it might even encourage more people to watch the sport! You really think it's THAT simple? Have you tried working out the scores in Rugby, Cricket etc? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carrie Posted July 19, 2009 Report Share Posted July 19, 2009 You really think it's THAT simple? Have you tried working out the scores in Rugby, Cricket etc? Yup, the rules for how the game is played might take a bit of reading, but can you imagine in rugby if the losing team was allowed to have their next try score double? or in the Ashes if the loosing team could nominate an over to count for double runs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Now Then Posted July 19, 2009 Report Share Posted July 19, 2009 Yup, the rules for how the game is played might take a bit of reading, but can you imagine in rugby if the losing team was allowed to have their next try score double? or in the Ashes if the loosing team could nominate an over to count for double runs? Exactly, I have said before no other TV sport changes it's scoring system half way through the match, imagine going to a football match, your team has scored 3 goals, the other team 2, but they win because, when they were 3 down, their first goal was allowed to count as 2!! Crazy, if you're losing you're losing. Regards to all, Alan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lupus Posted July 19, 2009 Report Share Posted July 19, 2009 What about the away goal rule?!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norbold Posted July 19, 2009 Report Share Posted July 19, 2009 Why not keep it simple and let the team that can gain the most points win? Now you're just being silly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisR Posted July 19, 2009 Report Share Posted July 19, 2009 What about the away goal rule?!!!! I presume you are referring to the oft quoted 'away goals count double'? They don't. The team that progresses in a cup tie in the case of a level score on aggregate is the one that has scored the most away goals. Slightly different. The fact remains that today a team was crowned World Champions after scoring fewer points on the track than the runners-up. That can't be right. It's no wonder speedway is not taken seriously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seb the Snail Posted July 19, 2009 Report Share Posted July 19, 2009 I can remember posting the same thing last year, and probably the one before that - jokers should have no part in a World Cup tournament. Why oh why can the authorities just not let the best team win? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lastword Posted July 19, 2009 Report Share Posted July 19, 2009 There is nothing to discuss, really. Any rule that benefits a losing team in order to make the event artificially closer than it actually is, is open to abuse by the teams taking part. Encouraging a team to lose points in order to manipulate the score brings a sport into disrepute. It is also an insult to the spectators who pay to see the best team win. If a sport has to artificially manipulate the scoring system in order to keep fans interest then it does not deserve the support of those fans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iris123 Posted July 19, 2009 Report Share Posted July 19, 2009 There is nothing to discuss, really. Any rule that benefits a losing team in order to make the event artificially closer than it actually is, is open to abuse by the teams taking part. Encouraging a team to lose points in order to manipulate the score brings a sport into disrepute. It is also an insult to the spectators who pay to see the best team win. If a sport has to artificially manipulate the scoring system in order to keep fans interest then it does not deserve the support of those fans. Speedway in a nutshell......... 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.