SCOTLAND1314 Posted July 30, 2011 Report Share Posted July 30, 2011 Looks like you enjoyed it pal and that's all that matters! Not seeing as much of you on here this year, same can be said of a few Embra regulars, I do miss the banter! Yes not on than often. Partly due to heavy work load. Which has partly interrupted my attendance at The Dale and elsewhere. Partly due to being a bit bored of the tired old Dodgy burger, trick track and back biting. I prefer to look on the positive and I've learned that on here that can be a very rare resource. A debate that starts out to be constructive usually ends in some or most of the above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
george.m Posted July 30, 2011 Report Share Posted July 30, 2011 Yes not on than often. Partly due to heavy work load. Which has partly interrupted my attendance at The Dale and elsewhere. Partly due to being a bit bored of the tired old Dodgy burger, trick track and back biting. I prefer to look on the positive and I've learned that on here that can be a very rare resource. A debate that starts out to be constructive usually ends in some or most of the above. Yes it debates can go that way though I'm as guilty as most of that! Have noticed a difference in the last year on here, the one aspect I don't like is the "acting of the poster, not the post" which is more common now. Perhaps if you came on with your usual quality of posting things might change somewhat! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotchopper Posted July 31, 2011 Report Share Posted July 31, 2011 What an awful meeting. Awful?? Really, i think you've got blinkers on. It wasn't the finest field assembled and it certainly wasn't a classic but it was much better than you suggest. Rory was certainly head and shoulders above the rest which made the result inevitable but there were a few good races. Your recollection of the semifinal is wrong tully was clearly ahead of wethers for a lap or two after an excellent first lap and had the opportunity to move out, decided to stay low and stormy was able to power passed on the faster outside line. Wolberts double pass in heat 8 was excellent as well. Not a huge amount of passing but there were some close races especially with complain and simota. The meeting was also ran very well and very slick.. All 22 races ran inside 2 hours with the track in decent nick. I'm not claiming it to be the best but it was a Good night out all round and it dismiss it like that is simply not good enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lioness Posted July 31, 2011 Report Share Posted July 31, 2011 well sorry that you dont find my opinon 'good enough' but tough - I am as entitled to it as everyone else as at least Davy H has the courtesy to realise! If you check you will also see it was actually me who was first to say it was well run! It was not imo a good meeting, I have seen far better at Armadale and neither myself or my friends from Belle Vue were particularly entertained by the majority of processional heats with no passing line evident - Sam Simota was evidence of that, he tried like a bear to find one in at least 3 of his races where he was quicker than the rider in front but there was nothing to be found except by the exceptional talent of Kevin Wolbert. the number of riders being caught out by bend 2 - even if they managed to stay on the bike - was not good either imo I already said right at the start Wolbert was excellent and entertaining in heat 8, if my memory on the semi is wrong well then so be it - I call it how I see it and we all make mistakes. So thats 2 heats out of 22. Sorry but that to me doesnt count as value for money or entertaining Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCOTLAND1314 Posted July 31, 2011 Report Share Posted July 31, 2011 well sorry that you dont find my opinon 'good enough' but tough - I am as entitled to it as everyone else as at least Davy H has the courtesy to realise! If you check you will also see it was actually me who was first to say it was well run! It was not imo a good meeting, I have seen far better at Armadale and neither myself or my friends from Belle Vue were particularly entertained by the majority of processional heats with no passing line evident - Sam Simota was evidence of that, he tried like a bear to find one in at least 3 of his races where he was quicker than the rider in front but there was nothing to be found except by the exceptional talent of Kevin Wolbert. the number of riders being caught out by bend 2 - even if they managed to stay on the bike - was not good either imo I already said right at the start Wolbert was excellent and entertaining in heat 8, if my memory on the semi is wrong well then so be it - I call it how I see it and we all make mistakes. So thats 2 heats out of 22. Sorry but that to me doesnt count as value for money or entertaining I guess Chops is merely suggesting 'awful' isn't a true reflection of the racing. No one is claiming it was a thrill-a-minute, decent I would say. It is also interesting your recollection of Sam Simota, I actually mark some of the notable passes in my programme and I've checked. Heat 7 he passes Wethers, Heat 11 he passes Alden and Howarth and Heat 19 he passes Complin. If your definition of awful is a couple of passes and a dodgy bend, well I'd be interested to hear what you thought of the first couple of meetings at the new Ashfield. I'm guessing you wouldn't describe them as awful. (Rhetorical question) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lioness Posted July 31, 2011 Report Share Posted July 31, 2011 If your definition of awful is a couple of passes and a dodgy bend, well I'd be interested to hear what you thought of the first couple of meetings at the new Ashfield. I'm guessing you wouldn't describe them as awful. (Rhetorical question) Read for yourself - its on my site under the individual meetings. For the record today wasnt exactly one for the purists either. Sorry I didnt treat the question as rhetorical, I felt it deserved comment. I try and be objective, I know I can fail but I do try. one thing I do get bugged by though - saying another meeting or handful of meetings were better/worse doesn't really have any bearing on how this one was! two bads dont make a good (unfortunately!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCOTLAND1314 Posted July 31, 2011 Report Share Posted July 31, 2011 (edited) Read for yourself - its on my site under the individual meetings. For the record today wasnt exactly one for the purists either. Sorry I didnt treat the question as rhetorical, I felt it deserved comment. I try and be objective, I know I can fail but I do try. one thing I do get bugged by though - saying another meeting or handful of meetings were better/worse doesn't really have any bearing on how this one was! two bads dont make a good (unfortunately!) Re today's meeting by your rule of thumb i.e. the 'awful' rule of thumb, I thought you would be describing today's offering as awful. I note you haven't. However, as you've admitted on another thread you are 'un-impartial', so this admission has helped me (and hopefully others) take your damning condemnation of other tracks other than your own with a pinch of salt or perhaps regard them in another more serious light altogether. Re the bold bit above, I'm sorry I don't understand the point you are making, please expand. And for clarity on the 'objective' front you failed IMO. PS just skim read the reports on the site and as I suspected you didn't employ your own 'awful' rule of thumb. Edited July 31, 2011 by SCOTLAND1314 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lioness Posted July 31, 2011 Report Share Posted July 31, 2011 I dunno what you are reading as I havent put my report up yet! Typical Monarch not getting the facts right before engaging mouth As to the bold bit its simple - meeting 'b' being poor does not have any relevance to meeting 'a' being poor. Meetings are mutually exclusive. Meeting 'a' does not suddenly become any better simply because another meeting is also bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulco Posted August 1, 2011 Report Share Posted August 1, 2011 Re today's meeting by your rule of thumb i.e. the 'awful' rule of thumb, I thought you would be describing today's offering as awful. I note you haven't. However, as you've admitted on another thread you are 'un-impartial', so this admission has helped me (and hopefully others) take your damning condemnation of other tracks other than your own with a pinch of salt or perhaps regard them in another more serious light altogether. Re the bold bit above, I'm sorry I don't understand the point you are making, please expand. And for clarity on the 'objective' front you failed IMO. PS just skim read the reports on the site and as I suspected you didn't employ your own 'awful' rule of thumb. True yesterday's meeting wasn't the greatest , but i put that down to the lack of quality opposition . One sided league matches are usually not the best , but still better than those awful individual meetings . Thankfully i wasn't at Armadale on Friday , but the general consensus from the Monarch contingent yesterday was that the Scottish Open was pretty poor fayre . I know it's maybe just my personal opinion , but i hate these type of meeting - the clubs charge more for them and most end up being diluted with call-offs which then cheats the public . Apart from the PLRC , i would love to see them all binned . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCOTLAND1314 Posted August 1, 2011 Report Share Posted August 1, 2011 I dunno what you are reading as I havent put my report up yet! Typical Monarch not getting the facts right before engaging mouth As to the bold bit its simple - meeting 'b' being poor does not have any relevance to meeting 'a' being poor. Meetings are mutually exclusive. Meeting 'a' does not suddenly become any better simply because another meeting is also bad. The bit in bold above referred to the first two meetings of the season to which I previously referred, not yesterday's meeting. So for clarity facts obtained and commentated upon. To be clear, I am making the point that if you employ a rule of thumb i.e. your "awful" rule of thumb perhaps it should be employed across all your reviews, for opinion to be credible. Hence if you thought Friday's meeting was awful due to a dodgy bend and 2 passes (Fact incorrect incidentally) then I would have thought a similar review of Glasgow's first two home meetings as they fitted neatly into your rule of thumb. However, as you've previously admitted you are "un-impartial" so perhaps you have another agenda. I still don't understand your other explanation or whether it is relevant ot this debate. To be honest it is negative comments like those you provided on this thread originally i.e. meeting was awful, that turns many people off this forum. Constructive criticism is welcomed but I think your original comment was far from that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCOTLAND1314 Posted August 1, 2011 Report Share Posted August 1, 2011 True yesterday's meeting wasn't the greatest , but i put that down to the lack of quality opposition . One sided league matches are usually not the best , but still better than those awful individual meetings . Thankfully i wasn't at Armadale on Friday , but the general consensus from the Monarch contingent yesterday was that the Scottish Open was pretty poor fayre . I know it's maybe just my personal opinion , but i hate these type of meeting - the clubs charge more for them and most end up being diluted with call-offs which then cheats the public . Apart from the PLRC , i would love to see them all binned . P My reference to yesterday's meeting (and the two meetings I attended at the start of the season at Ashfield) was only to use the 'awful' rule of thumb employed by your fellow Tiger fan. i.e. Friday was described as awful by your fellow Tiger fan for a couple of reasons, those same reasons were in evidence in the meetings above. But having read the write ups from the first two meetings of the season there was no use of the word 'awful'. Pedantic you may think but an unduly negative description of Friday's meeting IMO. Like I've stated above no-one is claiming that Friday's meeting was great but to describe it as 'awful' seems a bit much. I'm fully conversant with your lack of interest in many individual meetings however you and I both know that a lot of effort goes into these fixtures (or The Scottish Open anyway) and as a result much cost is incurred. So I choose to attend especially as the club's financial results last season weren't great and I don't wish the same for this season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigFatDave Posted August 1, 2011 Report Share Posted August 1, 2011 I'm fully conversant with your lack of interest in many individual meetings however you and I both know that a lot of effort goes into these fixtures (or The Scottish Open anyway) and as a result much cost is incurred. So I choose to attend especially as the club's financial results last season weren't great and I don't wish the same for this season. Good to see you're enjoying your individual meetings, Scott, I reckon we taught you well when you were Downunder. How good is Rory, eh - and he's from DARWIN!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lioness Posted August 1, 2011 Report Share Posted August 1, 2011 then we will just have to disagree. I stated previously I have seen far better than that at Armadale - do you have a problenm with that too? As for the un-impartial comment made on a totally different thread on something completely different well I am sure some of those who have links to such images can post some straws for you to grasp at. Another agenda? What the hell is that about? If anyone disagrees with you they suddenly have 'another agenda'? Yeah right People are always going to have opinions on meetings and no one is stupid enough to make a comment based on what one person says. Interesting to see that Paulco was speaking to Edinburgh fans yesterday who also thought the meeting poor as did my two Edinburgh mates who I also spoke to for the 1st time since Friday yesterday. You thought it was fine - thats your perogative and I have respected that. But dont think you can put words in my mouth or change my opinion based on other meetings or deflecting away from Friday. Trying the discrediting on past comments is just laughable as well but that is up to you. I stand by MY opinion - people can take it or leave it as they like and most have the intelligence to realise that opinions are just that. So sorry I dont employ the use of the words you would prefer on a Glasgow site - actually no I am not in case you dont realise I am being sarky. I wrote stuff ont he early meetings at the time and gave whaty MY opinions were - theres tht opinions word again. If it doesnt suit you then youare perfectly capable of writing your own stuff but I will NOT be dictated to over what opinions I can and cant have and frankly to pull the 'other agenda' remark out of the blue when people dont follow your train of thought is not really much of an argument imo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlin Posted August 1, 2011 Report Share Posted August 1, 2011 To say that this meeting was 'awful' is a bit harsh. It's true that some of the racing was not that exciting but there was always interest in the 'qualifying for the final' situation which meant that the top scoring seven riders were all still in contention prior to the semi-final and final. The loss of Oliver Allen was a bit of a blow as the serious challengers to Rory Schlein were a bit thin on the ground. As it turned out nobody got near him all night after the second bend. However of the non-home riders Lee Complin and Sam Simota were always worth watching and gave it plenty of effort and the evening was blessed with just about the warmest night experienced at the Dale for a long time. It was like you'd come to the wrong venue when you entered the stadium! Wolbert's effort in heat 8 was one of the highlights while the semi-final was probably the other. A good crowd turned out and nobody other than the unfortunate Allen was injured (and I gather that there was thankfully no lasting damage to him). With 22 heats on offer and the weather in such benign mood it was a very enjoyable evening out. A big thanks go to the behind the scenes guys for the efforts they put in by installing all those extra speakers around the ground. I believe that they were there from early morning onwards. Like Paulco I am no great fan of individual meetings although some of the Grand Prixs have been excellent this year (though not the Cardiff one unfortunately). There have been some great Scottish Opens in the past and, strangely enough, this one would have been better if Rory had not been so dominant. If I'm being honest I'd have to say that a rider or two from Glasgow would probably have spiced it up too although, as it turns out, neither Joe Screen not James Grieves (the likely invitees) would have been fit enough to ride. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCOTLAND1314 Posted August 1, 2011 Report Share Posted August 1, 2011 then we will just have to disagree. I stated previously I have seen far better than that at Armadale - do you have a problenm with that too? As for the un-impartial comment made on a totally different thread on something completely different well I am sure some of those who have links to such images can post some straws for you to grasp at. Another agenda? What the hell is that about? If anyone disagrees with you they suddenly have 'another agenda'? Yeah right People are always going to have opinions on meetings and no one is stupid enough to make a comment based on what one person says. Interesting to see that Paulco was speaking to Edinburgh fans yesterday who also thought the meeting poor as did my two Edinburgh mates who I also spoke to for the 1st time since Friday yesterday. You thought it was fine - thats your perogative and I have respected that. But dont think you can put words in my mouth or change my opinion based on other meetings or deflecting away from Friday. Trying the discrediting on past comments is just laughable as well but that is up to you. I stand by MY opinion - people can take it or leave it as they like and most have the intelligence to realise that opinions are just that. So sorry I dont employ the use of the words you would prefer on a Glasgow site - actually no I am not in case you dont realise I am being sarky. I wrote stuff ont he early meetings at the time and gave whaty MY opinions were - theres tht opinions word again. If it doesnt suit you then youare perfectly capable of writing your own stuff but I will NOT be dictated to over what opinions I can and cant have and frankly to pull the 'other agenda' remark out of the blue when people dont follow your train of thought is not really much of an argument imo We shall indeed agree to disagree but I note that you no longer are referring to the meeting as 'awful' which is exactly the initial point of contention (employing 'poor' now) Of course you're entitled to your opinion and I've never disagreed with that concept, it's just a shame that this one is so negative unnecessarily so IMO. The promotion put in lots of effort which is somewhat denegrated with a statement such as 'the meeting was awful' chat. Re the Glasgow site I again of course wouldn't have anticipated you being consistent with an 'awful' statement. Which then begs the question why be inconsistent? Ergo perhaps other agendas are afoot. Which seems a potential argument in my book, whether you care to admit it or not. Like I say I'll agree to disagree. Apologies if this has developed into a bit of a pedantic journey but I felt compelled to respond to your overly negative opinion. IMO. At a time where Scottish speedway needs all the positive press it can get it would help if the supporters could focus on the positive rather than the negative. Enjoy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCOTLAND1314 Posted August 1, 2011 Report Share Posted August 1, 2011 Good to see you're enjoying your individual meetings, Scott, I reckon we taught you well when you were Downunder. How good is Rory, eh - and he's from DARWIN!! Dave Yes I like all forms of the sport, it's taken to an amazing extreme down in Oz. Magic time had by all that's for sure. I'll definitely be back down under but it doesn't look good for Jan 2012 Oz Series for me, as things stand. Hopefully my luck changes on that front. Rory was untroubled on Friday, would have been good (for us) if he'd missed the gate once or twice to see him negotiate his way by other riders. Looked as good as I've seen him for some time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lioness Posted August 1, 2011 Report Share Posted August 1, 2011 We shall indeed agree to disagree but I note that you no longer are referring to the meeting as 'awful' which is exactly the initial point of contention (employing 'poor' now) At a time where Scottish speedway needs all the positive press it can get it would help if the supporters could focus on the positive rather than the negative. Enjoy. Oh for heavens sake man, awful , poor, what does it matter? My language useage theres no difference - it wasnt worth the money and far better meetings have been held - that better? if all you want to do is pick up on my language and what words I use when then have fun - Im no english scholar, its my second language, and its a speedway forum. you'll be trying to write my posts for me yet! On your last point, I do actually agree with it although you seem to be forgetting your own morale high ground whilst trying to keep rubbish stirring on the Edinburgh /Glasgow thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotchopper Posted August 2, 2011 Report Share Posted August 2, 2011 Oh for heavens sake man, awful , poor, what does it matter? My language useage theres no difference - it wasnt worth the money and far better meetings have been held - that better? That was my initial point i do think there is a big difference between awful and poor, whilst i think it was better than both of those i can accept someone saying the racing was poor. To say the meeting was awful was an exageration and giving a negative reflection on the meeting that wasn't deserved. If you are involved in the promotion of the sport (i.e. contributing to the tigers website) then I would expect better as Scottish speedway needs all the positive spin it can get! As for value for money, I actually bought one of the advance tickets (which was normal price for a 15 heat league meeting), so i think it was! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCOTLAND1314 Posted August 6, 2011 Report Share Posted August 6, 2011 Oh for heavens sake man, awful , poor, what does it matter? My language useage theres no difference - it wasnt worth the money and far better meetings have been held - that better? if all you want to do is pick up on my language and what words I use when then have fun - Im no english scholar, its my second language, and its a speedway forum. you'll be trying to write my posts for me yet! On your last point, I do actually agree with it although you seem to be forgetting your own morale high ground whilst trying to keep rubbish stirring on the Edinburgh /Glasgow thread. Re paragraph one I note that you've finally realised that when you're in a hole stop digging. Re paragraph two please be specific with this accusation rather than an unsubstantiated personal attack. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lioness Posted August 6, 2011 Report Share Posted August 6, 2011 you are the one with the spade who keeps going back to look for that bone! lol How is it a personal attack when I have a go at your post on the edinburgh /glasgow thread? personal would be calling someone a name, obviously your english can be as poor as mine lol. You have no idea how many people commented on this thread to me last night and said I was right! If you want to keep dragging it back up and have people reading over and over again that quite a few thought the track bad/awful/poor/whatever thats up to you but its just highlighting what was not a good piece of track preparation over and over again, something even your promotion seem to have acknowledged (as in it could have been better) with their pre meeting comments yesterday that they were trying something different with the track to improve the racing! Cant imagine digging it up over and over (the post not the track....although maybe thats an idea.....) is doing much good. You accused ME of being detrimental to Scottish speedway! lol Interestingly it looked as if there was a bit of a spat between one of your promotion and your track curator last night over track conditions - I saw the 'parting of company' but one of your track staff was stating that was what it was over. Still, its only me thought I had seen better at Armadale eh? lol Keep digging all you like, my opinion remains the same and whereas I was willing to accept different opinions about 3 pages back you have chosen to keep it going. I can keep up as long as you like though I would prefer to return to talking about speedway lol 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.