Mixy230 Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 (edited) If nobody had fallen (If Nikki had managed to stay on after that hit from Holder) lol.... would he have still Red lighted the race as an unsatisfactory start? Probably not as the start was ok! The Ref did NOT stop the race for an unsatisfactory start! He stopped it after the incident! Edited October 8, 2012 by Mixy230 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Blachshadow Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 (edited) ISN'T it far better when there is an element of doubt to have a race with four rather than three riders? Nothing to do with sphericals ... more like commonsense. It's far better to have a football match between two teams with 11 players a side but when a player breaks rules he goes. Nothing to do with what's better, it's to do with rules. Rules state the cause of a stoppage goes, end of.' An element of doubt' has never stopped a rider's exclusion later in a race (with one notable exception - Steele), so what was the difference here? Edited October 8, 2012 by Vincent Blackshadow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILIPRISING Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 It's far better to have a football match between two teams with 11 players a side but when a player breaks rules he goes. Nothing to do with what's better, it's to do with rules. Rules state the cause of a stoppage goes, end of.' An element of doubt' has never stopped a rider's exclusion later in a race, so what was the difference here? IF you haven't grasped that by now you never will. And your analogy above doesn't really work because Holder didn't break the rules. Had he done so he would have been excluded. But he didn't and wasn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Know Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 end of day will always be eliment of doudt now if holder had gone. would nicki have stolen it ? is holder the true champion ? holder did win it and were never know but always in the back of ya mind what if. IF you haven't grasped that by now you never will. And your analogy above doesn't really work because Holder didn't break the rules. Had he done so he would have been excluded. But he didn't and wasn't. quite a lot think he did, even the sky commentors said he should go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Blachshadow Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 IF you haven't grasped that by now you never will. And your analogy above doesn't really work because Holder didn't break the rules. Had he done so he would have been excluded. But he didn't and wasn't. There was a stoppage, it wasn't at the start, 'the cause', by the rules, goes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mixy230 Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 Anyway great viewing, well done Holder a great year! (The quickest over the year no doubt) A bit of a shambles but it all adds to the excitement! Well done Nikki on being filmed congratulating Chris. (With Jason C watching on like a bodyguard! lol that did make me smile) Vincent Philip says its up to the Ref when he deems the start to end? so when it suits him realy! Cant realy argue with that if there is no rules! maybe coming out of the 4th corner? lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILIPRISING Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 end of day will always be eliment of doudt now if holder had gone. would nicki have stolen it ? is holder the true champion ? holder did win it and were never know but always in the back of ya mind what if. quite a lot think he did, even the sky commentors said he should go. WHAT if Briggo hadn't been sent sprawling in the 1972 World Final. Would he have won that? What if ... that's life. Holder has proved his worth after 12 rounds, not just one race, and in my humble opinion has been then outstanding rider this year. And, as stated previously, Nicki wasn't excluded either. He had a second chance but was beaten fair and square by Holder as he had been in Heat 13. He hardly 'stole' the title. There was a stoppage, it wasn't at the start, 'the cause', by the rules, goes. WITH respect, your interpretation of the rules is not shared by those who matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mixy230 Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 (edited) Philip That is a bit strong saying Vincent does not matter. A speedway fan, a potential customer of Speedway, of Sky of Speedway Star! Of course he matters!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That is a little naughty! Edited October 8, 2012 by Mixy230 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iris123 Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 The thing is Philip you are often here telling us that ex riders say this and that as if it is gospel,so when 3 ex riders in the studio can watch the replays and say Holder should have gone,what do you do?Ignore that and say what someone else said is gospel..... No,but almost saying it.Fact is what you are saying is crazy imo,because what you are telling us is,if a rider has a bad start all he has to do is run into another rider and it will be all 4 back.The start was satisfactory,Holder was losing and lost his head for a split second,was the cause of the stoppage and should have been out.If that would have meant he lost his crown or kept it it was down to what happened after.No-one will now know,but tainted title imo 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Blachshadow Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 Philip That is a bit strong saying Vincent does not matter. A speedway fan, a potential customer of Speedway, of Sky of Speedway Star! Of course he matters!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That is a little naughty! Thanks for the support, but Mr Rising's post sums up exactly why I stopped buying his publication - I (and anybody else who points out official cock-ups, doesn't agree with the establishment or indeed, doesn't think everything in the sport is hunky-dory) don't matter. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILIPRISING Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 IRIS ... that's just another opinion. Keep saying this until I am blue in the face: others, including ex-riders, current referees, fans, etc, etc, don't believe that Ackroyd got it wrong. Which simply underlines the fact that it wasn't an open and cut case. If the referee deems that a rider has deliberately tried to get a race restarted he will exclude that rider. Ackroyd did not believe that was what happened. I agree with him. You don't. And nothing will change that. FOR the record I didn't say Vincent doesn't matter, whether he buys Speedway Star or not. I simply stated that ultimately the only one who mattered was the referee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mixy230 Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 (edited) Sometimes Magazines and there opinions follow the official line! They do not want to upset the apple cart etc. (For various reasons) Holder is a worthy champion (I take nothing away from him) I am more annoyed with the vague rules (open to interpretation etc) and the poor behaviour of Holders hangers on! (We all know if Nikki had done what Holder had done on track it may well have been different! We all know if Nikki and his crew had acted like Holder and his crew "pushing and shoving etc!" there would have been major uproar. The vague rules are the cause of the divided opinion! unsatisfactory start?!? No red light so the start was seen as fine?! Edited October 8, 2012 by Mixy230 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 Slightly off topic, but why are some people incapable of spelling the name of the world number 2 correctly? Nicki simples! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILIPRISING Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 Sometimes Magazines and there opinions follow the official line! They do not want to upset the apple cart etc. (For various reasons) Holder is a worthy champion (I take nothing away from him) I am more annoyed with the vague rules (open to interpretation etc) and the poor behaviour of Holders hangers on! (We all know if Nikki had done what Holder had done on track it may well have been different! We all know if Nikki and his crew had acted like Holder and his crew "pushing and shoving etc!" there would have been major uproar. The vague rules are the cause of the divided opinion! unsatisfactory start?!? No red light so the start was seen as fine?! BUT the 'start" does include what happens in the first corner and the red lights did come on. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Blachshadow Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 Sometimes Magazines and there opinions follow the official line! They do not want to upset the apple cart etc. (For various reasons) Holder is a worthy champion (I take nothing away from him) I am more annoyed with the vague rules (open to interpretation etc) and the poor behaviour of Holders hangers on! (We all know if Nikki had done what Holder had done on track it may well have been different! We all know if Nikki and his crew had acted like Holder and his crew "pushing and shoving etc!" there would have been major uproar. The vague rules are the cause of the divided opinion! unsatisfactory start?!? No red light so the start was seen as fine?! Exactly. Sometimes barging or running into another rider at or near the start culminates in an incident on the first bend which could and should be brought back as an unsatisfactory start. This was not such an incident, the riders got away from the tapes and the starting gate area satisfactorally. The initial incident was on the first bend. As the thread title suggests, Ackroyd stuck with the easy option and called all 4 back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILIPRISING Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 And if Nicki had walked straight off the track there would have been no pushing and shoving. As posted before that do not condone what happened by the pit gate but it was reactive no proactive and the direct result of Nicki deciding to confront Holder there and then so he cannot be entirely blameless on that score either. May be see that I am having a go at Nicki but I'm not. The scuffle, as with the first bend incident, was six of one and half a dozen of the other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mixy230 Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 Philip The Start only includes the first corner if the Ref decides it does! Its at his descretion! (No rule to say when the start ends!) The scuffle! Well we all play the gamesmanship part of life! (Nikki) We do not all play the near assault by the Holder crew! (Condone that at your peril) watch it again, it was appalling and then Chris had to get involved! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foreverblue Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 And if Nicki had walked straight off the track there would have been no pushing and shoving. As posted before that do not condone what happened by the pit gate but it was reactive no proactive and the direct result of Nicki deciding to confront Holder there and then so he cannot be entirely blameless on that score either. May be see that I am having a go at Nicki but I'm not. The scuffle, as with the first bend incident, was six of one and half a dozen of the other. Exactly which is why all 4 back was the right call and Jason Crump was a great pal to Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedy den boy Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 (edited) In all my years in speedway, i thought id seen it all with the way rules are applied, but Phil you have left me gobsmacked in what you are saying,it may well be true but when was this rule last put into motion on the 1st bend.So you should tell nigel pearson be careful with his wording if the rider tangle on the 1st bend,Nigel is going to be calling a lot more unsat starts is he? To me an unsat start is a rider jumping or the tapes not goin up,or riders tangle before the 30 metre line,what you are saying is new to me.Did you speak to Eric Gundersen ,he was fuming and he should know a thing or 2 about the starts. Edited October 8, 2012 by speedy den boy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frigbo Posted October 8, 2012 Report Share Posted October 8, 2012 IF you haven't grasped that by now you never will. And your analogy above doesn't really work because Holder didn't break the rules. Had he done so he would have been excluded. But he didn't and wasn't. Are you being deliberately obtuse???!!! 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.