bruno Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 actually reading damons post i suppose there was passing but because it was by the mildenhall riders i suppose i turned a blind eye to it 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fozzie4388 Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 Never say Never, Everyone thought the Playoff final was over last year when Scunthorpe took a 28 point lead to Mildenhall. Then look what nearly happened Speedway is a funny old sport, Anything can happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seanmuffe Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 Shame this meeting was totally spoiled by a very nasty looking crash and injury to Bekker, I do hope he is not injured as much as first feared. His injury seemed instantly to take the guts out of the Dudley side especially him being their captain and I suppose being a load of young riders thats understandable. So thereafter it became almost a procession of Mildenhall winners and many 5 - 1s and running out easy easy winners by 28 points. The 2nd leg now should be a total formality. No wonder speedway is struggling to survive when fans have to pay £12 to watch 3rd tier speedway and then also have to buy an over priced programme. Thank god the fish and chips are still brill and sensibly priced at £5.50 and at least we enjoyed those Isnt that more expensive than "Uncle Lens Chippy"??? ..............mind you it looked more like fish n chips rather than Goldfish n Chips!!!!!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greyhoundp Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 May i say firstly that it is great to see Byron may not be as seriously hurt as was first thought "Where there, s no sense there is no feeling Byron mate" get back on asap byron . Secondly, good to see posts from BOTH sets of supporters without abuse. Well done to Mildenhall and its nice to see some of there younger riders scoring a few points, and just shows how YOUNGER riders can improve over a season, despite the fantastic come back by The Tigers last season, i cant for the life of me, see how The Heathens can come back from this. Lets hope we can recover in time "weather permitting" for our two play off legs this week against The Potters, if not it will be another season of so near, but so far, YES there are some who WILL take pleasure if we dont win a major Trophy, and to them i say; lifes tough sometimes, and we dont always get what we deserve, but we will be back next season, trying more than ever to gain some Major Silverware for our great fans and management, but for ALL us Heathens there is ONE thing greater than Silverware to be won, and thats our OWN Track once again. Again well done to the Mildenhall Team. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aljack Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 Isnt that more expensive than "Uncle Lens Chippy"??? ..............mind you it looked more like fish n chips rather than Goldfish n Chips!!!!!!!!!!! Ive never liked lining "uncle lens" pocket so I would not know but Mildenhalls fish'n'chips are just the greatest along with the stadium Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigertas Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 I must admit i did feel sorry for the dudley fans after you lost Byron who i hope has a speedy recovery I thought it would be closer. I am glad that my team won and i think these two teams have been the strongest teams out there this season. I have supported Mildenhall for a few years and have been to staduims where i know we will lose but i stil go to support them as they need to know the fans care. Both teams have been hit with injuries ( which there have been too many this season) and had to overcome this. think Byrons crash affected the Dudley riders and they lost interest in the meeting. i am sure the next leg at home for you will be closer and anything can happen in speedway. We may have a lead but we still have to keep it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
21st century heathen Posted October 9, 2012 Report Share Posted October 9, 2012 Well, well, well things are never straight forward are they?! It seems that Dudley may have made a protest about Bates inclusion as he is not in the Mildenhall declared line-up. That's something I'm sure none of us would have even thought to check. I have now taken a look at the Team Declarations on the BSPA and it seems to me that Dudley are correct. Bates was last in the declared line-up on issue 21 which was effective from 1st Sept. He was dropped from the line-up and has not been reinstated as far as I can see. Whatever the reason for it the rules are the rules and I rather suspect there is a very real possibility that his points will be removed from the team total. What is strange, if I remember right, is that a rider's points are not then reallocated with heat results being amended. So if it's true that a protest was made and the SCB rule in favour of the protest I think the result will be amended to 51-33. http://www.speedwayg...nl12_dec_21.pdf http://www.speedwayg...nl12_dec_25.pdf No doubt that whatever happens it will spark some lively debate again but remember that it's not the fault of our members on here so keep it respectful please. ----------------------------------------------------------------- I have seen a suggestion that Bekker may have broken a bone in his back. That's yet to be confirmed officially but he stated himself yesterday that he was waiting on the result of further x-rays and the Heathens website did state he had back and knee injuries. So good news about not breaking his leg may have been quickly followed by bad news about his back. ATB 'Boris'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
refereerick Posted October 9, 2012 Report Share Posted October 9, 2012 Gareth Isherwood was in as a temporary injury replacement for Josh Bates. According to Kevin Jolly in the Cambridge News, the bringing back of Josh Bates was given the Ok by both the BSPA and Peter Moorish. Time will tell I guess Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thehitman Posted October 9, 2012 Report Share Posted October 9, 2012 Well, well, well things are never straight forward are they?! It seems that Dudley may have made a protest about Bates inclusion as he is not in the Mildenhall declared line-up. That's something I'm sure none of us would have even thought to check. I have now taken a look at the Team Declarations on the BSPA and it seems to me that Dudley are correct. Bates was last in the declared line-up on issue 21 which was effective from 1st Sept. He was dropped from the line-up and has not been reinstated as far as I can see. Whatever the reason for it the rules are the rules and I rather suspect there is a very real possibility that his points will be removed from the team total. What is strange, if I remember right, is that a rider's points are not then reallocated with heat results being amended. So if it's true that a protest was made and the SCB rule in favour of the protest I think the result will be amended to 51-33. http://www.speedwayg...nl12_dec_21.pdf http://www.speedwayg...nl12_dec_25.pdf No doubt that whatever happens it will spark some lively debate again but remember that it's not the fault of our members on here so keep it respectful please. ----------------------------------------------------------------- I have seen a suggestion that Bekker may have broken a bone in his back. That's yet to be confirmed officially but he stated himself yesterday that he was waiting on the result of further x-rays and the Heathens website did state he had back and knee injuries. So good news about not breaking his leg may have been quickly followed by bad news about his back. ATB 'Boris'. What u say might be true , however as Dudley are about to put roynon back in the team isn't this the same ? - a rider coming back from injury !! So there must be a rule in place to legislate for this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
21st century heathen Posted October 9, 2012 Report Share Posted October 9, 2012 Gareth Isherwood was in as a temporary injury replacement for Josh Bates. According to Kevin Jolly in the Cambridge News, the bringing back of Josh Bates was given the Ok by both the BSPA and Peter Moorish. Time will tell I guess I've seen the article and the, for once, well written response on the Heathens website which led me to mention it on here. I think the issue is that although there's no reason Bates shouldn't be brought back in he's not in the declared line-up. Take a look at the links I posted. The first link is when he was last in the declared team and the second link is the latest and update with all the current declared teams. He is not in the team so if a protest was made, as seems to be the case, it should be upheld. It's such a shame that it will be seen as another negative between clubs that have been sniping at each other a but too much this season but the rules are the rules. What u say might be true , however as Dudley are about to put roynon back in the team isn't this the same ? - a rider coming back from injury !! So there must be a rule in place to legislate for this It's not certain that Roynon will ride for the Heathens again this season. He's riding for Worky at the weekend and I guess we'll see what happens after that. The Heathens would be in the same position as Mildenhall in that Roynon would have to be in the declared team. Currently Haines is in the declared line-up. It's not that Roynon or Bates can't come back in but rather about the paper work being sorted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fentigers lad Posted October 9, 2012 Report Share Posted October 9, 2012 If Bates' points are removed, I have a feeling the promotion won't be too happy. Could be interesting when it comes to sorting play off dates assuming both teams make it. Would be a shame if Bates excellent performance is penalised due to paperwork but as 21stCH says rules are rules. I wonder what the response would have been if Bates scored 1 or 2? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greyhoundp Posted October 9, 2012 Report Share Posted October 9, 2012 I dont want to see our supporters involved in this, The protest has to be registered before The meeting starts, so its irelevent how many Bates scored, to my mind Mildenhall won, end of. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rami Posted October 9, 2012 Report Share Posted October 9, 2012 What u say might be true , however as Dudley are about to put roynon back in the team isn't this the same ? - a rider coming back from injury !! So there must be a rule in place to legislate for this Are you sure about that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
21st century heathen Posted October 9, 2012 Report Share Posted October 9, 2012 If Bates' points are removed, I have a feeling the promotion won't be too happy. Could be interesting when it comes to sorting play off dates assuming both teams make it. Would be a shame if Bates excellent performance is penalised due to paperwork but as 21stCH says rules are rules. I wonder what the response would have been if Bates scored 1 or 2? Friday the 19th is reserved according to the Mildenhall website so I'm assuming that's the date for the PO Final home leg. To be honest even with his points taken off it's still a mammoth task and I would not expect to overhaul the difference. I don't think a technicality would overshadow his performance in the eyes of the fans. Super return and good luck to the lad. As below - my understanding is that the protest should have been made before the meeting. The protest has to be registered before The meeting starts, so its irelevent how many Bates scored, to my mind Mildenhall won, end of. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
21st century heathen Posted October 10, 2012 Report Share Posted October 10, 2012 Well, a full statement by the Heathens management regarding the Bates issue makes interesting reading. http://www.dudleyheathens.co/news.php?extend.672 The main point I would take from this is that if, and I can't stress that enough at the moment, it's true that the Mildenhall management have ignored a BSPA ruling for the second time this season then surely some sort of action must be taken. That simply cannot go unpunished. As I've said before, I would not be in favour of a fine. The sport is not in a comfortable position financially speaking. It would open the BSPA up to accusations of making rulings to make money too, which in itself would bring the sport into disrepute. My personal opinion is that a points deduction for the following season would be suitable. I know some people don't like the comparison but points deductions work in football so I see no reason why it couldn't in speedway. I would just like to reiterate that whatever happens it will not take the gloss off Bates' performance on track. Cracking score by him on his return. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Leslie Posted October 10, 2012 Report Share Posted October 10, 2012 What u say might be true , however as Dudley are about to put roynon back in the team isn't this the same ? - a rider coming back from injury !! So there must be a rule in place to legislate for this 17.6.4 No Team changes will be allowed after 12th September with the effective date being 15th September, except for Riders returning to the Team after injury. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Blue Posted October 10, 2012 Report Share Posted October 10, 2012 17.6.4 No Team changes will be allowed after 12th September with the effective date being 15th September, except for Riders returning to the Team after injury. So with myself not being a rule boffin in any way shape or form does this mean it was fully in the rules to bring Josh back or not ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norwichkev Posted October 10, 2012 Report Share Posted October 10, 2012 Well, a full statement by the Heathens management regarding the Bates issue makes interesting reading. http://www.dudleyhea....php?extend.672 The main point I would take from this is that if, and I can't stress that enough at the moment, it's true that the Mildenhall management have ignored a BSPA ruling for the second time this season then surely some sort of action must be taken. That simply cannot go unpunished. As I've said before, I would not be in favour of a fine. The sport is not in a comfortable position financially speaking. It would open the BSPA up to accusations of making rulings to make money too, which in itself would bring the sport into disrepute. My personal opinion is that a points deduction for the following season would be suitable. I know some people don't like the comparison but points deductions work in football so I see no reason why it couldn't in speedway. I would just like to reiterate that whatever happens it will not take the gloss off Bates' performance on track. Cracking score by him on his return. I agree with some of what you say. Let's just take your if - two points: 1) Points deductions would be difficult, what would happen if a side either did not ride or rode in another league? 2) Did I not read somewhere that Kevin Jolly was quite categorical that Josh had been sanctioned by Peter Morrish & I believe the BSPA - if so then surely that is either another twist or the end of the matter. Separately, as for the part of the Dudley statement: “It is quite clear we could have objected on the day to the use of Josh but that would not have been fair on the Mildenhall and Dudley fans who had paid to watch the meeting. Indeed, had we done that, than we could accept an accusation of dirty tricks Weasel words indeed, and I am surprised that you hang your hat on them. Let me explain why. As the team had been on here since Thursday 4/10 & would have been with Dudley at least 24 hours prior to the meeting why not raise then? Isherwood could have ridden then and we would not have this conversation, both sets of supporters would have seen the requisite number of riders - lets be clear on this if it was not fair to fans before the meeting, nothing has changed - except that Josh Bates scored more points than perhaps was expected. Your team managers post meeting words was most gracious in defeat - reading through the statement he would surely have been aware of the Bates situation at that time, what then changed?. Sorry none of this seems to add up. Also: “It has been brought to our attention that Mildenhall were informed, in writing, by the British Speedway Promoters’ Association that Josh Bates could not be brought back into the side Would be interested to hear where that came from. In addition as has been explained on here from one of your fellow supporters before the rules seem to state that protests should be made befor the meeting? Why would Dudley be prepared to break this rule, until it no longer suited them? An interesting point that is not clear is when in the referee's report did the point about Bates be mentioned e.g. after the meeting? Kev Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilK Posted October 10, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 10, 2012 Well, a full statement by the Heathens management regarding the Bates issue makes interesting reading. http://www.dudleyhea....php?extend.672 The main point I would take from this is that if, and I can't stress that enough at the moment, it's true that the Mildenhall management have ignored a BSPA ruling for the second time this season then surely some sort of action must be taken. That simply cannot go unpunished. As I've said before, I would not be in favour of a fine. The sport is not in a comfortable position financially speaking. It would open the BSPA up to accusations of making rulings to make money too, which in itself would bring the sport into disrepute. My personal opinion is that a points deduction for the following season would be suitable. I know some people don't like the comparison but points deductions work in football so I see no reason why it couldn't in speedway. I would just like to reiterate that whatever happens it will not take the gloss off Bates' performance on track. Cracking score by him on his return. A points deduction from next year is totally unneccessary and a daft suggestion! It really is quite simple, if Bates was not in the declared line up then his points should be deducted and the score becomes 51-33 to Mildenhall.I would be more dissapointed if Bates is stopped from returning to the Mildenhall line up for the rest of the season as even the most biased fan cannot say that would be good for speedway, denying an exciting young 16 year old the chance to return after injury? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midland Robin Posted October 10, 2012 Report Share Posted October 10, 2012 This is the last circulated team declaration. http://www.speedwaygb.co/issues12/nl12_dec_25.pdf 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.