Copenhagon 2011

[BWitcher]

And who can forget his classic stay on when Nicholls rode into him on Monday .

 

Bit harder to 'slide off' on the straight

[DukesGreg]

Nicki Pedersen, fair enough, triple world champion and all that but, but sadly lacking in the sportsmanship and grace of his compatriots who went before him in bygone years.

 

Nielsen, Gundersen, Olsen, all multi winning champions, but showing grace, class and maturity that Pedersen couldn't even dream of. After winning the first Grand Prix of 2011, riding up to Gollob and holding 3 fingers up.. then 1.. stating 'you may be a champion, but I'm a triple champion' really is the sign of an immature man.

 

As for Harris falling off all the time on purpose. He knew Crump was loitering behind him, and didn't have the benefit of slow motion to make a decision to fall when Pedersen reared and clipped him. You get hit in speedway, taking the bend, and your balance is upturned and you're off. Look how Lindgren flipped on the first bend bunching, these guys are in the throws of an irregular centre of balance situation... clipped wrongly... you're off.

 

Harris shouldn't have been excluded... Pedersen should... if you're excluding anybody... as he was (albeit accidently)... the cause. Another example of the crazy rules of speedway, only 'all four riders' back for a restart during first corner incident, yet this incident, in many respects, with all four riders battling it out together was identical to a first bend clash. So Pedersen hit some drive or whatever, accidently (for sure) picked up drive, and the riders dominoed. Possible a rule-book review needed??

 

If Harris was inclined to purposefully do such things, admittedly, it would have been difficult at the British Final v. Nicholls. However, if this was the gameplan, surely he would have had time to slow down to a standstill, go near the fence, pull up and look up at the ref?? If Chris Harris was a type of rider who could not pass, then maybe, but how many times in his career have we seen Harris get the bit between his teeth and give it a go?? It's not like he's not capable.

 

Regarding the Lindback incident, Lindback had the drop, did go wide (a la Pedersen style it has to be said!!!!) and Nicki got dosed up with his own medicine.

 

Interesting seeing him say how unfair it is after his exclusion.. after being let off in the Harris clash. Oh woe is me!!!!

 

 

Still, a decent enough GP, good to see Gollob in full flow in his last few rides, superb dash down the back straight in the Final to round everyone in one foul swoop.. and a great effort from Mr. Crump to seal second, in what was a superb Final indeed.

 

 

 

There are a few of them now, challenging. It's gonna be a good one. I wouldn't back against Mr. Gollob now though. His best is yet to come, it's so far mirroring last year, a couple of changes of lead, and the cream is now settling at the top.

 

 

 

Could be back-to-back wins for him. When he's good.... he's flipping good!!

Edited June 12, 2011 by DukesGreg

[stevebrum]

Nicki Pedersen, fair enough, triple world champion and all that but, but sadly lacking in the sportsmanship and grace of his compatriots who went before him in bygone years.

 

 

Well said. The man is tactless and classless.

 

Any accident is never his fault (yea, i know they all say it, but it would appear nicki believes all calls should go his way!).

 

When he had the speed of 2 or 3 seasons ago he may have looked a much different rider and the `dirty` element of his game seemed to be very much a think of the past.

 

However he is true to form. He rides desperate at times and is happy to throw the bike at someone and then moan when its done back.

 

It would appear the riders know his dirty games are back on and are happy to dish it out - fair play to them i say.

 

As a multi champion he has never been a good advocate for the sport, He always threatens to kick of in front of the cameras when he doesnt get his own way.

 

At least the likes of greg and crumpy have some champions class about there demeanor - something that Nicki will never have as part of his game.

 

On his side however he does look to have a bit more speed to keep his game up for the season - but he doesnt look consistent enough to make the top 3, ill be happy with that.

[orion]

Bit harder to 'slide off' on the straight

 

 

And harder to stay on round a corner

[oscar]

OF course there was a commercial element to wild card choice - although don't forget Crump, Hampel and Sayfutdinov are also Red Bull sponsored - but what is wrong in looking long term, something we are unable to do in the UK. Four years ago Erik Gundersen, no bad judge, said that Mikkel would be the pick of a very fine harvest. Jason Crump singled him out for recommendation to Red Bull. Ole Olsen also thought him good enough to debut at Copenhagen and not be overawed or even out of his depth, which he certainly wasn't.

 

Having met and spoken to him for the first time over the weekend I can only lament that Britain still has no infrastructure to unearth and nurture raw talent such as this. And the Danish fans loved having him there, as did the media including Denmark's answer to the One Show which featured both Mikkel and Ole on prime television on Thursday. Which is something else we can be jealous of. The amount of time and effort being invested in the likes of Mikkel, and others of his ilk, will pay a rich dividend for Denmark in the future.

There has been much debate on this forum over the allocation of wild cards with the name "Darcy Ward" cropping up most.Commercial elements in my view should not come in to it,it indicates the wild card slot can be bought.I appreciate in some GP,S some home riders will struggle but you expect the big speedway nations to field a wild card that will at least threaten the semi finals.As good as young Mikkel might be I felt he hadn't earned his pick.Id bet Klindt,Madsen and Larsen will feel they have patiently waited their turn only to be overlooked for"commercial reasons".As to being on the pace,Mikkels score was the lowest of any wild card this year,this includes Kus and Balinski who are not of GP standard.

Edited June 12, 2011 by oscar

[ImpartialOne]

And harder to stay on round a corner

Especially when you throw the bike away.

[orion]

Especially when you throw the bike away.

 

 

Very True or get knocked off .

[superguest]

I thought Nicki should have been excluded, mostly because he was out of control and caused Harris to move out. I do think Harris dropped it - because he knew Pedersen would get away with it. I just don't like riders who barge their way through as oppposed actually passing a rider. I didn't like Nicholls move in the British Final.

 

In an earlier heat, Pedersen did a simular move on Hancock, but he chose to stay on. Thats the game Pedersen plays with his style of riding!

 

It was nice to see Antonio do a classic Pedersen move on Pedersen, losing control infront a rider trying to pass him.

 

All of this proves that compared to Gollob and Crump, Pedersen does not have the natural talent and relies on either fast gating or playing bumper cars with the opposition.

Edited June 12, 2011 by superguest

[george.m]

Where does it say in the rules that a rider is obliged to stay on when hit?

[ImpartialOne]

Where does it say in the rules that a rider is obliged to stay on when hit?

I don't think anybody is saying it does. But there are 5 types of fall:

 

Being knocked off/collision causing fall

Falling by mistake

Bailing out to avoid serious injury

Laying down to avoid a rider

Tactical slide off

 

Harris's was the latter.

[DukesGreg]

Loving the versions of 'falling' on this thread.

 

If you get hit, going into the first bend, from behind... YOU FALL!!!!

 

You don't debate it.. you don't worry about your points tally. You don't wonder about the effect on the meeting and exclusions.

 

You kiss your backside goodbye, and hope that the rider behind doesn't rip you a fresh one.

 

 

 

If a motorcyclist rode past you at 50mph, and you could kick him gently from the side, or behind near his wheel. He would fall over.

 

 

 

I'm fascinated by the 'different types of falling' nonsense on here.

 

 

 

We all, especially the riders, know that most innocuous and innocent looking of all falls can cause the most damage. Alan Wilkinson's, which we all know caused paralysis, was supposedly the most innocent looking of crashes. The most horrific can be nothing, the gentlest can maim.

 

 

To suggest that riders are 'taking a dive' in general out there is utterly ridiculous.

 

 

It's not the penalty box in football.

 

 

It's life or death speedway.

 

 

Let's keep it real.

[ImpartialOne]

It's not nonsense. Almost every rider and ex rider I've spoken to agrees Harris could have stayed on but tried to get a rerun.

[DukesGreg]

But he was leading Pedersen and Crump... and in the races which he led on that track... he rode well enough to win. It doesn't add up.

 

Why.. when in front of two riders LIKELY to beat you in a re-run (if truth be told), as Crump and Pedersen are multiple world champions, and better than Harris.. would you risk exclusion, by purposefully falling, then hope to OUTGATE them (yeah right.. it's Chris Harris), and beat them in a re-run?????

 

 

We've seen it in slo-mo now dozens of times. He was hit and fell off. In real-time.... it was an accident.

 

 

I just can't see, for the life of me.. why the world's worst gater (on a par with Josh Auty) would throw his bike into a crash when doing well against two speedway legends, who were breathing down his neck, in the hope that he would get a re-run against them.

 

Not a pop at anyone in any way, but in this particular race, it doesn't add up for me. He was in a better position v. Crump and Pedersen than he could have dreamed of before the tapes went up.

 

 

Just how I see it.. especially taking into account the riders involved. I'm sure Harris would have settled for being passed ONCE and therefore risking getting TWO points against such high class opposition. Falling, and getting a rerun, and risking getting NOTHING (his Grand Prix campaign so far is littered with last places) just doesn't make sense. The track was short enough, and slick enough, to see slower riders hang on to places anyway.. to me, he was good for second.

 

Pedersen clanged into him, once you've got the wobble and imbalance, you're gone. Ermolenko saying Pedersen clattered him, and was lucky to stay in, is good enough for me. Sam's no mug.

 

 

Genuinely my take on it anyway, but fair enough, different opinions all round.

 

 

 

Greg.

[Marmite]

It's not nonsense. Almost every rider and ex rider I've spoken to agrees Harris could have stayed on but tried to get a rerun.

 

Doesn't mean they and you are correct in your assumption of the incident. Only one person knows, that is Chris Harris and he claims he was helped on his way. He does not come across as the devious guy, or the type to make excuses. Look at Monday's incident, he had every right to blame Nichols, but he never, he blamed himself.

[ImpartialOne]

Doesn't mean they and you are correct in your assumption of the incident. Only one person knows, that is Chris Harris and he claims he was helped on his way. He does not come across as the devious guy, or the type to make excuses. Look at Monday's incident, he had every right to blame Nichols, but he never, he blamed himself.

Harris or any rider for that matter would not go on camera and admit to jumping off to get a rerun. It's part of it but they keep that to themselves. Riders rely on instinct in a race and have to make split second decisions. I'm not saying he was doing anything devious, but from a rider's point of view, when he was hit by Nicki and thrown off line he had to make a decision on instinct. The time between nicki hitting him and him falling off is the time it took for him to decide to get off. He wasn't knocked off because if he had there would be no time lapse.

 

In response to DukesGreg, of course no rider would drop the bike purposely if in front but at the time of his fall he wasn't in front and would have gone wide, allowing Crump through so in that split second he decided the only hope was to try and get a rerun.

Of course, had it gone his way he wouldn't have had Nicki to contend with.

Edited June 12, 2011 by ImpartialOne

[DukesGreg]

Doesn't mean they and you are correct in your assumption of the incident. Only one person knows, that is Chris Harris and he claims he was helped on his way. He does not come across as the devious guy, or the type to make excuses. Look at Monday's incident, he had every right to blame Nichols, but he never, he blamed himself.

 

 

Agreed.

 

I also think that falling purposefully in front of 3 oncoming riders in a cut and thrust race (nobody would be able to avoid him) would amount to virtual suicide.. not just injury was, but career wise.

 

Somebody like Chris Harris NEEDS to be riding GP's, and, as we know, he's a borderline case for repeat qualification next year.

 

Chris Harris isn't a top three rider.. he would settle for eighth now, I would imagine.. the way his GP campaign has started.

 

 

To drop it in front of 3 riders, risking injury and probable missed GP's (including his home one), getting behind on points (with people like Hancock gatecrashing the leader board, and others yet to get really going) would make finishing 8th a huge ask.

 

Once you're out of that GP top 8, you're reliant on qualification or good fortune to get a place. You want to ride there, but just as importantly in speedway, a sport where you're not paid enough for what you do, your SPONSORS really want you to ride the GP's.

 

 

Harris could have easily have finished 2nd in heat 9, picked up 9 points on the night, got a better Semi-Final grid, and blagged a place in the final, if he had stayed on board his bike, that would have been a very possible outcome.

 

 

 

Just checked it again Impartial... he was definately in front in my opinion... under NORMAL circumstances Pedersen WOULD have had the drop... but surely we all agree he was out of control????

 

And if Harris had stayed on... he would have drifted wide, INTO Crump's immediate line, what would have happened there is purely hypothetical.

 

 

At the point of Pedersen / Harris impact, Harris was leading, in my opinion. He was knocked out of line. The split-second he was hit, his bike could only have slid towards the fence with him on it. He was never going to make the turn.

 

 

Of course, in my opinion.

 

 

 

And that's why the sport is great. It's all ifs and buts.

 

 

Greg.

Edited June 12, 2011 by DukesGreg

[Marmite]

Harris or any rider for that matter would not go on camera and admit to jumping off to get a rerun. It's part of it but they keep that to themselves.

 

Well even if you are right, look at the way Harris responded on Camera. Harris rarely criticise other riders on camera, if at all, but he was furious with NP in the interview, and that was not the face of a man trying to cover for his own actions, he truly believed the push led him to fall.

[ImpartialOne]

Agreed.

 

I also think that falling purposefully in front of 3 oncoming riders in a cut and thrust race (nobody would be able to avoid him) would amount to virtual suicide.. not just injury was, but career wise.

 

Bobby Ott made a name for himself falling off on purpose and picking it back up without losing his place. You're being over dramatic here

 

Somebody like Chris Harris NEEDS to be riding GP's, and, as we know, he's a borderline case for repeat qualification next year.

 

Chris Harris isn't a top three rider.. he would settle for eighth now, I would imagine.. the way his GP campaign has started.

 

Agreed but irrelevant in this case

 

To drop it in front of 3 riders, risking injury and probable missed GP's (including his home one), getting behind on points (with people like Hancock gatecrashing the leader board, and others yet to get really going) would make finishing 8th a huge ask.

Not if he got a rerun

 

Once you're out of that GP top 8, you're reliant on qualification or good fortune to get a place. You want to ride there, but just as importantly in speedway, a sport where you're not paid enough for what you do, your SPONSORS really want you to ride the GP's.

None of this would be going through his mind in that split second

 

 

Harris could have easily have finished 2nd in heat 9, picked up 9 points on the night, got a better Semi-Final grid, and blagged a place in the final, if he had stayed on board his bike, that would have been a very possible outcome.

Easily? He was pushed out and would have gone to the back had he stayed on

 

Just checked it again Impartial... he was definately in front in my opinion... under NORMAL circumstances Pedersen WOULD have had the drop... but surely we all agree he was out of control????

No. He was down the straight but corrected it very well to be able to turn tight round the line from that position

 

And if Harris had stayed on... he would have drifted wide, INTO Crump's immediate line, what would have happened there is purely hypothetical.

But you just said he could easily have gotten second?

 

At the point of Pedersen / Harris impact, Harris was

leading, in my opinion. He was knocked out of line. The split-second he was hit, his bike could only have slid towards the fence with him on it. He was never going to make the turn.

He could have locked it up and corrected his line, but he would have lost points

 

 

Of course, in my opinion.

 

 

And that's why the sport is great. It's all ifs and buts.

 

Greg.

[stevebrum]

Loving the versions of 'falling' on this thread.

 

If you get hit, going into the first bend, from behind... YOU FALL!!!!

 

 

 

I'm fascinated by the 'different types of falling' nonsense on here.

 

 

 

 

Absolutely correct. Only some speedway fans will argue nonesense. (im amazed no one has started a `black and white helmet ` row. Is it really black? Surely thats more cream than white! ).

 

I pretty much read it the same way. A fall IS a fall. The fact there was clear contact meant that the rider being pushed/touched/knocked is likely to be put off balance. So a fall quite often is likely.

 

Who is at fault will ALWAYS be debated - dont think thats the issue.

 

Im sure riders DO make tactical falls tho - if they feel it is safe to do so.

 

With Crump so close there would appear madness to suggest Bomber made a tactical fall.

 

NP made contact and bomber fell. Without the contact there wouldnt have been a fall! Only the dirty Dane to blame if he chooses to ride that way.

 

 

It's not nonsense. Almost every rider and ex rider I've spoken to agrees Harris could have stayed on but tried to get a rerun.

 

Only Harris knows if it was tactical. His body language suggest he was aggrieved by it so i tend to agree with Bomber.

 

The problem i guess lies in `history`. If Pedersen has a history of barging thru or into riders and Bomber has a history of jumping off the bike (cant say ive noticed) then more often than not if they clash and Bomber falls then NP is likely to be excluded. And rightly so in my opinion.

When NP doesnt have the speed , as has been evidenced in the past few years, he reverts back to type and barges his way thru. He seems to have more exclusions as a result of that.

Therefore think there can be only one conclusion to reach!

 

On the subject of `tactical dive` Pedersen again showed how to do that perfectly when he lay it down when Lindback took his line

[topaz325]

PERSONALLY thought it was 50/50 and referee would be damned whatever he did. However, I watched the race on the TV monitor next to the scoreboard alongside Freddie Lindgren, who was out in the next heat. Instantaneously he called it "Harris out, he was still in control when Pedersen hit him but THEN lost it." Didn't change his mind one iota when watching the replays. Riders are pretty good judges about incidents that don't involve themselves but it remains a judgement call rather than one of absolute certainty.

 

I respect your opinion Phil but i disagree...