Belle Vue Aces Vs Poole Pirates 29/4/2013

[uk_martin]

...As I said before unless your found guilty of what you said it means nothing...

...Of course it might of happened but it's only a might ...but unless you found guilty ...

 

"Honour amongst thieves" is the best explanation of that conundrum.

[Jacques]

People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones, B Vue have admitted to calling the meeting off when perhaps they could of got it on, nothing else. Lets see what the SCB uncover, if anything then as I said earlier if we cheated we need to man up and accept the consequences.

 

Are you for real? " When perhaps they could have got it on"

[Steve0]

 

Confessed?

The way I read it is that they panicked after discovering the "leak" and postponed. They will admit to acting in haste, but on reflection made the wrong call.

I'm sure they will admit to making a genuine mistake.

All the other elements that point to skulduggery are purely coincidental.

It's speedway and a complete circus, never been any different.

 

The way I read it "we've been silly billies, been caught out, humble apologies, please go easy on us"

[cyclone]

Credit to Graham Reeve of the SCB for initiating a rapid & apparently effective investigation into this escapade.

 

IMO if it had not been for this official intervention, the BV Promotion would never have issued their apology.

 

This sends out a message to others that the SCB will be more proactive in establishing the facts behind any future questionable cancellations.

[stevebrum]

Credit to Graham Reeve of the SCB for initiating a rapid & apparently effective investigation into this escapade.

 

IMO if it had not been for this official intervention, the BV Promotion would never have issued their apology.

 

This sends out a message to others that the SCB will be more proactive in establishing the facts behind any future questionable cancellations.

 

I hope that they send out an independent representative to ALL called off meetings when there is any question of reasons other than the weather.

[Griff]

 

 

I hope that they send out an independent representative to ALL called off meetings when there is any question of reasons other than the weather.

How about a webcam at each venue?

[seanmuffe]

Given today's statement from Belle Vue admitting an "error of judgement" made in the "heat of the moment", how do you think the average council tax payer of Manchester is going to feel about letting those same folk be the ones responsible for starting to pay back over £4million during the initial 60 years of use of the new stadium - you wouldn't let the current regime run a bath, never mind a multi-million pound project !!

...........seemed ok with a hose

I hope that they send out an independent representative to ALL called off meetings when there is any question of reasons other than the weather.

..............is there enough spare referees to make this achievable?

[Daniel Smith]

I see UKM continues to talk bull-locks about the kings Lynn v birmingham fixture in 2009 (get over yourself man, 5 days my ass) but anyway I feel the facts have to be mentioned. The failure happened during a stockcar meeting on a bank holiday sunday weekend which continued throughout. It was assessed on the Monday and couldn't be fixed until the following Monday due to obsolete power supply. Bare in mind, the floodlights at kings Lynn are the old hackney speedway setup. Understandably birmingham kicked up a fuss (both clubs really fell out over this) and an SCB official was sent to investigate & kings Lynn where cleared of any wrong doing. + we had a far superior side than Birmingham in 09

 

 

Below was on the BSPA website

 

http://ip133.216-86-156.static.steadfastdns.net/news.php?extend.4862

[hyderd]

I suppose I am one of the keyboard warriors hyderd is talking about. But as I went up to BV on a fine Manchester evening, to walk across the the road to the stadium to find it in total lock down, even the local rats could not get in, and only an A4 piece of paper saying "speedway off" would I think Pee you off.

Then to find out later that two riders had missed their flights and one was out injured, does make it a little suspicious. What Pirate Baz said is completely true ,(post 209) as we were there together with our wives. As he stated 525 miles worth of fuel plus hotel and meals, does grate a bit IF the reason for calling it off was not genuine. At least I suppose we saved on the admission.

 

PM sent.

[Irk Deflector]

But why didn't he show a photo of the part of the track that was causing the problem ie coming of 2nd bend on back straight.

 

https://twitter.com/...9467520/photo/1

If it wasn't flooded at the time why would he take a photo of every part of the track?

[PHILIPRISING]

LET’S take a step back for a moment and examine what we can for the sake of argument call a hypothetical situation.

Team A discovers on Monday morning that they will be without three of their seven riders for a meeting later that day through no fault of their own.

One rider is injured while employees of the airline they are using to return from Poland delay their top two en route due to a strike.

The rules do not allow any facilities for the missing riders. They would have to go into action with a seriously weakened team for what is probably their plum fixture of the year and the one their own fans are most looking forward to.

League speedway, while a team sport, is essentially an individual contest (like cricket) but there are no reserve riders of similar standards waiting in the wings to come in.

What is the lesser of two evils? Call the opposing team and agree that in the best interests of the sport and the fans the meeting is postponed. There are plenty of free dates available.

Or go ahead with the meeting, which will be a non-contest and one that will undoubtedly not provide any value for money for those who do turn up and pay at the turnstiles.

The former option is not one that is currently available to the BSPA to sanction but should it be?

Is it better under exceptional circumstances that are outside the control of the home promotion – or indeed the away team – to call off a meeting rather than deprive the fans of a true contest?

 

Of course, such a decision would require the agreement of both teams and be made in plenty of time to inform the fans that the scheduled meeting had been postponed.

[Irk Deflector]

People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones, B Vue have admitted to calling the meeting off when perhaps they could of got it on, nothing else. Lets see what the SCB uncover, if anything then as I said earlier if we cheated we need to man up and accept the consequences.

So why wouldn't BV put out a CLEAR statement saying: it was a splash of water from a leaking pipe, we decided not to repair it and ultimately made the wrong decision? I guess that would be too simple, assuming it were true!

 

As for the consequences (assuming BV have done wrong) most will damage the sport and/or the fans - the best result from this would be an Independent Body to run the sport!

 

LET’S take a step back for a moment and examine what we can for the sake of argument call a hypothetical situation.

Team A discovers on Monday morning that they will be without three of their seven riders for a meeting later that day through no fault of their own.

One rider is injured while employees of the airline they are using to return from Poland delay their top two en route due to a strike.

The rules do not allow any facilities for the missing riders. They would have to go into action with a seriously weakened team for what is probably their plum fixture of the year and the one their own fans are most looking forward to.

League speedway, while a team sport, is essentially an individual contest (like cricket) but there are no reserve riders of similar standards waiting in the wings to come in.

What is the lesser of two evils? Call the opposing team and agree that in the best interests of the sport and the fans the meeting is postponed. There are plenty of free dates available.

Or go ahead with the meeting, which will be a non-contest and one that will undoubtedly not provide any value for money for those who do turn up and pay at the turnstiles.

The former option is not one that is currently available to the BSPA to sanction but should it be?

Is it better under exceptional circumstances that are outside the control of the home promotion – or indeed the away team – to call off a meeting rather than deprive the fans of a true contest?

 

Of course, such a decision would require the agreement of both teams and be made in plenty of time to inform the fans that the scheduled meeting had been postponed.

But a burst water pipe is! :rofl:

[PHILIPRISING]

THEY have made a statement to the effect that they made the wrong decision for the right (as they see it) reason ...

[bigcatdiary]

LET’S take a step back for a moment and examine what we can for the sake of argument call a hypothetical situation.

Team A discovers on Monday morning that they will be without three of their seven riders for a meeting later that day through no fault of their own.

One rider is injured while employees of the airline they are using to return from Poland delay their top two en route due to a strike.

The rules do not allow any facilities for the missing riders. They would have to go into action with a seriously weakened team for what is probably their plum fixture of the year and the one their own fans are most looking forward to.

League speedway, while a team sport, is essentially an individual contest (like cricket) but there are no reserve riders of similar standards waiting in the wings to come in.

What is the lesser of two evils? Call the opposing team and agree that in the best interests of the sport and the fans the meeting is postponed. There are plenty of free dates available.

Or go ahead with the meeting, which will be a non-contest and one that will undoubtedly not provide any value for money for those who do turn up and pay at the turnstiles.

The former option is not one that is currently available to the BSPA to sanction but should it be?

Is it better under exceptional circumstances that are outside the control of the home promotion – or indeed the away team – to call off a meeting rather than deprive the fans of a true contest?

 

Of course, such a decision would require the agreement of both teams and be made in plenty of time to inform the fans that the scheduled meeting had been postponed.

 

Your last paragraph says it all Phil, the agreement of both teams (if teams think they can gain a serious advantage common sense fair play goes out of the window straight away, do you really think Ford would have waived the chance of an easy away win) and secondly when are fans ever giving any thought.

 

Depriving fans of a true contest should be the first consideration but as lasts night match at Kings Lynn showed the powers at be don't give a damn, and unfortunately in recent times the fans are catching on and voting with their feet.

[SteveLyric2]

PM sent.

That's what the sport needs - send the Prime Minister to get it sorted and get some valuable national publicity too!!

[E I Addio]

LET’S take a step back for a moment and examine what we can for the sake of argument call a hypothetical situation.

Team A discovers on Monday morning that they will be without three of their seven riders for a meeting later that day through no fault of their own.

One rider is injured while employees of the airline they are using to return from Poland delay their top two en route due to a strike.

The rules do not allow any facilities for the missing riders. They would have to go into action with a seriously weakened team for what is probably their plum fixture of the year and the one their own fans are most looking forward to.

League speedway, while a team sport, is essentially an individual contest (like cricket) but there are no reserve riders of similar standards waiting in the wings to come in.

What is the lesser of two evils? Call the opposing team and agree that in the best interests of the sport and the fans the meeting is postponed. There are plenty of free dates available.

Or go ahead with the meeting, which will be a non-contest and one that will undoubtedly not provide any value for money for those who do turn up and pay at the turnstiles.

The former option is not one that is currently available to the BSPA to sanction but should it be?

Is it better under exceptional circumstances that are outside the control of the home promotion – or indeed the away team – to call off a meeting rather than deprive the fans of a true contest?

 

Of course, such a decision would require the agreement of both teams and be made in plenty of time to inform the fans that the scheduled meeting had been postponed.

 

But then what happens if before the re-arranged date the visitors star rider or second heatleader gets hurt? Is it postponed again ? What if it is two days before the play-off cut off date ? What if in the meantime one or other of the sides re-declare with a stronger line -up ? What about the season ticket holders who can't make the re-arranged fixture ? Once you go down the road of postponing meetings at short notice for anything other than totally unavoidable reasons i.e. rain-offs it becomes fraught with all kinds of problems.

 

When I started my last job which involved travelling around London and Home Counties I was told nobody will be interested in the reasons why you can't get somewhere on time. Absolutely correct. The riders should be told the same thing. They are paid to entertain the public and it should be their responsibility to get somewhere on time. If there are travel problems then tough. A heavy fine will concentrate the mind .

[PHILIPRISING]

But then what happens if before the re-arranged date the visitors star rider or second heatleader gets hurt? Is it postponed again ? What if it is two days before the play-off cut off date ? What if in the meantime one or other of the sides re-declare with a stronger line -up ? What about the season ticket holders who can't make the re-arranged fixture ? Once you go down the road of postponing meetings at short notice for anything other than totally unavoidable reasons i.e. rain-offs it becomes fraught with all kinds of problems.

 

When I started my last job which involved travelling around London and Home Counties I was told nobody will be interested in the reasons why you can't get somewhere on time. Absolutely correct. The riders should be told the same thing. They are paid to entertain the public and it should be their responsibility to get somewhere on time. If there are travel problems then tough. A heavy fine will concentrate the mind .

 

I understand what you are saying but I did mention exceptional circumstances. Riders caught in an airline strike or other circumstances outside their control are hardly guilty of not trying or worthy of a fine. Many riders are commuting in and out of the country all the time and these things can and do happen. An independent judicator (yes, that again) could be charged with making any decision after being afforded all the facts.

 

But I go back to the paying public... what would they rather happen? These are the people who actually matter and who are currently voting with their feet by staying away in their droves.

[JC!]

LET’S take a step back for a moment and examine what we can for the sake of argument call a hypothetical situation.

Team A discovers on Monday morning that they will be without three of their seven riders for a meeting later that day through no fault of their own.

One rider is injured while employees of the airline they are using to return from Poland delay their top two en route due to a strike.

The rules do not allow any facilities for the missing riders. They would have to go into action with a seriously weakened team for what is probably their plum fixture of the year and the one their own fans are most looking forward to.

League speedway, while a team sport, is essentially an individual contest (like cricket) but there are no reserve riders of similar standards waiting in the wings to come in.

What is the lesser of two evils? Call the opposing team and agree that in the best interests of the sport and the fans the meeting is postponed. There are plenty of free dates available.

Or go ahead with the meeting, which will be a non-contest and one that will undoubtedly not provide any value for money for those who do turn up and pay at the turnstiles.

The former option is not one that is currently available to the BSPA to sanction but should it be?

Is it better under exceptional circumstances that are outside the control of the home promotion – or indeed the away team – to call off a meeting rather than deprive the fans of a true contest?

 

Of course, such a decision would require the agreement of both teams and be made in plenty of time to inform the fans that the scheduled meeting had been postponed.

 

Surely what you describe is any team sport - but it is just that - a SPORT!!!

 

What is the point of a sport if a team can just decide that the variables happen to be against them so they will just take their ball home and not play? You compare Speedway to Cricket - imagine if Notts decided they don't want to play Essex as Swann and Broad have been selected for England and Lumb is injured, which significantly weakens the side. So could they decide to put it off until they can be more competitive by making up a total pack of lies to cover their tracks (maybe turnips growing in the pitch, endangered species found in the outfield, whites found to be not white enough) - not a chance, it is simply inconceivable that it would be allowed to happen in any truly professional sport.

 

The staggering part of this is the complete and utter contempt shown for the paying public, shameful.

[Steve0]

 

That's what the sport needs - send the Prime Minister to get it sorted and get some valuable national publicity too!!

 

Where's Margaret Thatcher when you need her? She would sort things out more so than Mr Suave!

[Dave_minall]

I agree entirely Phil - the best course of action would have been to call the meeting off as soon as they realised they couldn't track a competitive side instead of trying to hide behind what could potentially have been a self inflicted puddle on a part of the track that's (in all honestly) not used that much.

 

They've shot themselves in the foot big style here, honesty is the best policy and they've been caught with their pants down trying to fool the public into thinking that this was something that it is not.

 

I don't want BV to be slapped with a hearty fine as they need the money, but they do deserve punishment of some sorts.