IronScorpion Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 TMW. Thanks for the reply, as we have a few on here & our own forum that "attack the post & not the poster". It seems they know it all about everything as we don't as we say it as we see it. Comical, though, reading the replies. Berwick v Scorpions was another thread that had some "juicy" replies. Some posters have not got a life except for having a go at others.(Hoggy, also, had some replies on the Scunthorpe v Sheffield thread). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMW Posted June 5, 2012 Report Share Posted June 5, 2012 (edited) O have a day of will you!!!!! I feel priviledged u remember TMW. Thanks for the reply, as we have a few on here & our own forum that "attack the post & not the poster". It seems they know it all about everything as we don't as we say it as we see it. Comical, though, reading the replies. Berwick v Scorpions was another thread that had some "juicy" replies. Some posters have not got a life except for having a go at others.(Hoggy, also, had some replies on the Scunthorpe v Sheffield thread). Your welcome I could see where you were coming from . Edited June 5, 2012 by TMW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teddy2706 Posted June 25, 2012 Report Share Posted June 25, 2012 Any views on the SCB statement on Scunthorpe "inadvertently" including Steve Jones in their line up for this meeting? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Smith Posted June 25, 2012 Report Share Posted June 25, 2012 (edited) Any views on the SCB statement on Scunthorpe "inadvertently" including Steve Jones in their line up for this meeting? Here's my view. It has been proven yet again that it's OK for a team to cheat and still be allowed to win a meeting. It's time for the BSPA to adjust these results accordingly and award the removed points to the opposition which would have 44-48 to Buxton. No team should benefit from breaking the rules Edited June 25, 2012 by screamer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fozzie4388 Posted June 25, 2012 Report Share Posted June 25, 2012 TBF. Steve doesnt have a team, His average didnt take Scunthorpe over the average limit so i cant see what harm Scunthorpe have done its an honest mistake they were giving a British rider a chance to put himself in the shop window, The SCB have made the correct call for a change in my view. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
builderbob Posted June 25, 2012 Report Share Posted June 25, 2012 i understand the rule is you can have a guest for your no 1 and a three point guest for others, not sure how steves average has been worked out but if he is over 3, then yes scunthorpe are deemed to have fielded an illegal team. i agree the buxton riders should allso have there points adjusted from the rides steve had main point though, have scunthorpe been fined, as poole were for doing nothing wrong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucifer sam Posted June 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 25, 2012 Surely it's time to go back to ten-man squads in the National League. Otherwise what is supposed to happen when a club has five riders out all at once, as happened with the Saints in this case. There needs to be a way that a club can cover for the absence of multiple riders. All the best Rob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
builderbob Posted June 25, 2012 Report Share Posted June 25, 2012 ten man squads wont work, where are you going to get the extra riders Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manchesterpaul Posted June 25, 2012 Report Share Posted June 25, 2012 (edited) It's time for the BSPA to adjust these results accordingly and award the removed points to the opposition which would have 44-48 to Buxton. No team should benefit from breaking the rules IN TODAY'S SCB STATEMENT? They have the amended score as Scunthorpe 44 Buxton 36. So no awarding of points to the races where technically Scunthorpe would only have fielded one rider! Quote from the site "staged on June 4. National League: SCUNTHORPE v BUXTON: Monday 4th June 2012 At the above Meeting, Scunthorpe were short-handed as a consequence of the non-availability of 5 Riders, Jerran Hart, Steve Worrall, Oliver Greenwood, Gary Irving & Adam Wrathall and left the Team with just 3 Riders available (Tom Young, Danny Phillips & the nominated #8, Max Clegg) . Using Ashley Birks as a Guest for Jerran Hart and the Rider Replacement facility for Steven Worrall, the Team included also include Tommy Fenwick as a 3.00 CMA replacement. This left one further position to be filled and inadvertently Scunthorpe included Steve Jones, a rider not in any Team Declaration but holding a previously achieved CMA of 5.33. The National League Co-Ordinator has ruled that whilst Tommy Fenwick was eligible, Steve Jones was not. Accordingly the points scored by Steven Jones are to be deducted, therefore the Meeting Result is therefore: SCUNTHORPE 44 BUXTON 36" NB: I've updated the MiniMax tables to reflect the change in race points scored. Even though the BSPA haven't i presume this is a final decision on the matter and they just haven't got around to changing their tables? Edited June 25, 2012 by manchesterpaul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teddy2706 Posted June 25, 2012 Report Share Posted June 25, 2012 ten man squads wont work, where are you going to get the extra riders Presumeably from the same place that you would get them if another two teams were riding in the NL? None of this is Steve's fault and he was very good at that meeting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
builderbob Posted June 25, 2012 Report Share Posted June 25, 2012 no it wasnt steves fault, the fault lies with the way the national league is run, it wouldnt surprise me if steve had been 21 years old nothing would have been said Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucifer sam Posted June 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted June 25, 2012 ten man squads wont work, where are you going to get the extra riders In the case of the Saints, by adding Steve Jones and Tommy Fenwick to the squad. There are dozens of riders out there looking for slots in the National League. Look at a Scunny Amateur meeting line-up, and you'll see plenty of names. With only one guest and one R/R facility available, there does need to be a way that a team can cover for having five riders out. The young lads at this level can quite often get in the wars, while heat leaders often have PL commitments. All the best Rob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedy bill Posted June 26, 2012 Report Share Posted June 26, 2012 surly if jones should not have rode the riders would move up a place in the races jones was in illegally giving a final score of scunny 44 hitmen 48 if it is to be resolved right Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
builderbob Posted June 26, 2012 Report Share Posted June 26, 2012 only 1 double up rider per team should be allowed no elite league riders should be allowed and relax the over 30 rule and guest rule then we wouldnt have this problem , real score for this meeting should be scunny 45 buxton 41 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fozzie4388 Posted June 26, 2012 Report Share Posted June 26, 2012 and if Jones hadnt rode would Buxton still have been able to use a TR when they did? No i think not. So saying the score should be 44-48 Pointless and had it been crucial i'm sure Birks would have come out in red in heat 15 instead of Max Clegg who then didnt appear at the tapes due to bike problems leaving 3 riders only, It's all if's and buts, The SCB have done the correct thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
montie Posted June 26, 2012 Report Share Posted June 26, 2012 If team was under team building limit i dont really see what the drama is?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
builderbob Posted June 26, 2012 Report Share Posted June 26, 2012 super star 1 yes thats why i have the real score 45 41,and as for montie ,yes it makes a lot of difference, at end of season if one or both are challenging for honours, not likely i know but possible heat 3 1-5 instead of 2-4 heat 5 3-3 instead of 5-1 heat 7 2-4 instead of 2-7 not in position to use tactical heat 9 3-2 instead of 5-1 heat 12 0-5 instead of 3-3 heat 14 0-5 instead of 3-3 heat 15 irrelevent no the scb have got it wrong again 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.