Belle Vue Aces Vs Poole Pirates 29/4/2013

[AndyJ]

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.

 

Isn't the point here that the rules do not facilitate such a course of action?

[BWitcher]

Precisely E I.

 

I totally understand the situation Belle Vue found themselves in, but they weren't the first and won't be the last and as you say it could open the door to even more chicanery.

 

I remember a situation back in 1993 when Wolverhampton had a series of injuries in the space of a week, this in a season where guests were only allowed for your No 1 rider.. They were without Ronnie Correy, Dukie Ermolenko, Graham Jones, Phil Ashcroft. It was in the days of 8 man teams, Wolves requested a postponement to Ipswich to give them time to sign replacements.. Ipswich declined. Wolves had to track a team of Sam Ermolenko, Peter Karlsson, Neil Evitts (who was awful that year), R/R and 4 juniors. They lost by 1pt on the night. That match effectively cost them the league title.

 

Shane Parker became infamous with Wolves fans on that night, performing a series of gloating wheelies after he had beaten junior riders.

 

Belle Vue would have been far better placed to have been honest up front in this situation. Requested to Poole the meeting be called off. Had Poole declined, which they would have been within their rights to do, then Belle Vue could have held the 'moral high ground' and would no doubt have had sympathy.

 

As it is, they chose not to do this and went down another route. What made it worse was after it became apparent they were rumbled, they continued to put out press releases citing 'riders safety' etc...

Edited May 2, 2013 by BWitcher

[arthur cross]

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.

 

- - - - - - - - - -

 

It's no surprise speedway's in such a mess if someone with as significant a voice as Philip Rising can come up with as wishy-washy a post as shown above.

 

At the start of it he outlines a scenario where a team discovers just a few hours before a meeting that their team's been decimated ... yet by the end of it he's recommending the postponement to be made in plenty of time !!

 

What's your definition of "plenty of time" Philip ? ... enough time for away fans to cancel the day off work they've taken to enable them to travel to that evening's fixture ? ... enough time for those same fans to cancel hotel bookings ? ... and what about enough time to save unaffected riders from getting aboard flights they now no longer need to take ? (which would have been even more significant later in the season when plenty of those riders could save stacks of travel time by going straight from their Sunday action in Poland to Tuesday action in Sweden).

 

Back in 2010 does Philip remember that when the "ash cloud" chaos wrecked air travel across Europe one morning, emergency rules were allowed to enable relatively competitive sides to face each other that same night (from memory, it was a Thursday so it enabled at least a couple of Elite League meetings to still go ahead) .... hence clearly it is possible to get round travel chaos in another country

 

From what's been reported so far, both in terms of social media on Monday and any official announcements by the BSPA or Belle Vue, there's no sign of any attempt by Belle Vue to alert Poole (or the BSPA or whoever was Monday's referee) that they were having a nightmare with their line-up and in itself, that's bad enough.

 

But what's even more unforgivable (if eventually confirmed by the SCB inquiry) is that instead of facing up to their awkward situation, it then appears Belle Vue went down a ridiculous route towards feeling it was ok to call off the meeting in mid-afternoon.

 

Fans can accept that difficult situations can crop up ... what they can't accept (and will walk away from) is those in charge of (or those reporting on) difficult situations regularly making them even worse by their stupid reactions (or unwillingness to ask anywhere near tough enough questions).

[jimmy jimmy]

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.

 

They have, a very bad error of judgement in my view. We should have a three point penalty , the equivalent of a Poole away win and Poole fans should get free entry if they get the ticket from Poole Speedway.

 

 

[AndyJ]

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

 

Totally disagree. Contempt would have been shown had the (hypothetical) meeting taken place with a severely weakened side. The bulk of the paying public would have been Belle Vue fans and we'd be the ones out for blood had we paid £17 to witness a complete mismatch.

[Dave_minall]

They have, a very bad error of judgement in my view. We should have a three point penalty , the equivalent of a Poole away win and Poole fans should get free entry if they get the ticket from Poole Speedway.

 

They definitely should award full points to Poole as this would have been the outcome had the meeting gone ahead.

 

Reimbursing the Poole fans would in my opinion be a bigger financial outlay than a fine, but it does need to be factored in. Not doing this would damage the fans' want to travel to away meetings and that's something that cannot be tolerated.

[BWitcher]

Totally disagree. Contempt would have been shown had the (hypothetical) meeting taken place with a severely weakened side. The bulk of the paying public would have been Belle Vue fans and we'd be the ones out for blood had we paid £17 to witness a complete mismatch.

 

Only if they hadn't informed anyone of the situation.

[PHILIPRISING]

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.

 

SORRY but you are missing the point. Speedway, like it or not, is unique. Replacing one of your top two let alone both with virtual novices simply doesn't work. You can cover for absent players in cricket to a certain extent but not speedway. And, I repeat, it is the fans who we are considering here.

 

Of course it would have to be properly policed (again, an independent adjudicator) and postponements not permitted for just any spurious reasons. But in exceptional circumstances surely the option should be available. EL tracks have relatively few fixtures these days (BV one home meeting in May I believe), Scott Nicholls says he has just 38 UK meetings this year, that there must be some slack in the fixture schedules.

 

The bottom line, as with any business and it is just that, is the customer. They are being ripped off, whether it was at Belle Vue on Monday or Coventry on the same night.

[BWitcher]

 

 

The bottom line, as with any business and it is just that, is the customer. They are being ripped off, whether it was at Belle Vue on Monday or Coventry on the same night.

 

Eh??

 

I don't think the majority of the crowd at Coventry will say they were ripped off on Monday...

 

Agree with your views though, you can't compare speedway to other sports because the gap between top riders and replacements is massive. It doesn't excuse Belle Vue's actions though.

[SCB]

The answer would have been for BV to ask Poole to postpone, if Poole disagreed, as would be there right then BV could have got a couple of guests in. There would have been a close meeting and the fans would have gone home having seen a meeting. The BSPA would then have removed the points scored illegally. BV would have technically cheated but they would have been forced into it due to circumstances, could have blamed Poole for forcing them to do it but no fans would have been ripped off. In stead they covered up and lied - nobody likes a liar.

[JC!]

SORRY but you are missing the point. Speedway, like it or not, is unique. Replacing one of your top two let alone both with virtual novices simply doesn't work. You can cover for absent players in cricket to a certain extent but not speedway. And, I repeat, it is the fans who we are considering here.

 

Of course it would have to be properly policed (again, an independent adjudicator) and postponements not permitted for just any spurious reasons. But in exceptional circumstances surely the option should be available. EL tracks have relatively few fixtures these days (BV one home meeting in May I believe), Scott Nicholls says he has just 38 UK meetings this year, that there must be some slack in the fixture schedules.

 

The bottom line, as with any business and it is just that, is the customer. They are being ripped off, whether it was at Belle Vue on Monday or Coventry on the same night.

 

Every sport is unique, surely? There is no facility for calling off a meeting in these circumstances, so the discussion of whether there should be is a side issue on this occasion. Belle Vue are far from the first to be in position, but they chose to try to brazenly lie about the situation, and have been caught out massively. I would be interested in the players that you can name from Notts Second XI that could adequately replace Broad Swann and Lumb and perform at even near the same standard to support your argument?

[PHILIPRISING]

I'M not defending BV here ... just asking what the paying customers would prefer under similar circumstances.

 

As for Coventry v Wolves ... I felt like I was being ripped off just watching on TV. But then perhaps the majority of the crowd came from the West and enjoyed the massacre,

[AndyJ]

Only if they hadn't informed anyone of the situation.

 

Agreed- but in all seriousness would any promotion advertise along the lines of "we're fielding 2 juniors and R/R instead of 3 of our best riders" and honestly expect many paying customers? Totally agree with the ethics but it'd be financial suicide.

[PHILIPRISING]

Every sport is unique, surely? There is no facility for calling off a meeting in these circumstances, so the discussion of whether there should be is a side issue on this occasion. Belle Vue are far from the first to be in position, but they chose to try to brazenly lie about the situation, and have been caught out massively. I would be interested in the players that you can name from Notts Second XI that could adequately replace Broad Swann and Lumb and perform at even near the same standard to support your argument?

 

I am certainly no expert on Notts cricket but I would hazard a guess that any players replacing Broad, Swann and Lumb would closer in standard than NL riders replacing Zagar and Zetterstrom at BV. Mind you, how many county games do Broad and Swann compete in?

 

There is no facility for calling off meetings in these circumstances. My question was: should there be?

 

From the outset of this discussion I did point out this was not solely about BV on Monday.

[BWitcher]

As for Coventry v Wolves ... I felt like I was being ripped off just watching on TV. But then perhaps the majority of the crowd came from the West and enjoyed the massacre,

 

Sorry, but its a ridiculous argument.. apart from maybe KK.

 

This is sport, big wins take place. Was the 7-0 Bayern demolotion of Barcelona over 2 legs a rip off also?

 

Agreed- but in all seriousness would any promotion advertise along the lines of "we're fielding 2 juniors and R/R instead of 3 of our best riders" and honestly expect many paying customers? Totally agree with the ethics but it'd be financial suicide.

 

Yes they would. I've seen Wolves do it on a number of occasions before, including the one I have already mentioned earlier on the thread where they had to track FOUR junior riders. Not PL riders with an average of up to 6, but 4 junior riders, 2nd half junior riders.

 

Every sport is unique, surely? There is no facility for calling off a meeting in these circumstances, so the discussion of whether there should be is a side issue on this occasion. Belle Vue are far from the first to be in position, but they chose to try to brazenly lie about the situation, and have been caught out massively. I would be interested in the players that you can name from Notts Second XI that could adequately replace Broad Swann and Lumb and perform at even near the same standard to support your argument?

 

There is absolutely no comparision between cricket and speedway. A 2nd XI player can come into the 1st XI in cricket and outperform an established player, even a Swann, Broad, Lumb. It happens on a regular basis. A 3pt junior rider will NEVER come into an EL team and outperform a no 1 heat leader.

Edited May 2, 2013 by BWitcher

[cyclone]

Perhaps Mr Rising can clarify how other riders competing in Poland managed to return to the UK on Monday ?

 

Furthermore can he cite incidences in other European Speedway leagues where it has been officially permitted to postpone fixtures on the day, because of riders being unavailable due to travel difficulties ?

 

IMO if any club employs several riders who are involved in tight travelling schedules, then they must be aware of such potential risks.

 

Rather than cancel the fixtures in these circumstances, when it becomes apparent that scheduled riders will require to be replaced by junior riders, clubs should be obliged to publicise the situation immediately, including making patrons aware of the situation before they pay at the turnstiles.

Edited May 2, 2013 by cyclone

[JC!]

There is absolutely no comparision between cricket and speedway. A 2nd XI player can come into the 1st XI in cricket and outperform an established player, even a Swann, Broad, Lumb. It happens on a regular basis. A 3pt junior rider will NEVER come into an EL team and outperform a no 1 heat leader.

 

Which is, of course, correct. My point originally being that it would not be accepted in other professional sport that a team could brazenly cancel because they do not fancy competing with a weakened team - they just have to get on with it with the resourses they have.

Edited May 2, 2013 by JC!

[Irk Deflector]

I'M not defending BV here ... just asking what the paying customers would prefer under similar circumstances.

The simple answer is HONESTY!

 

At another level it is a set of rules/regulations which are put in place, monitored and enforced by an Independent Body rather than a bunch of promoters with nothing but self interest at heart. If having an independent body means the weak fall by the wayside then so be it, at least the sport will prosper!

 

How many promoters are interested in what the paying customers would prefer - you've only got to look at the decisions they make.

[PHILIPRISING]

Sorry, but its a ridiculous argument.. apart from maybe KK.

 

This is sport, big wins take place. Was the 7-0 Bayern demolotion of Barcelona over 2 legs a rip off also?

 

NO, it was entertaining. Monday night's fare from Brandon was boring. I have plenty of mates, non regular speedway goers, who like watching on Sky. All of them turned-over Monday but loved Tuesday's offering from Scunthorpe. Make of that what you will.

 

 

 

Yes they would. I've seen Wolves do it on a number of occasions before, including the one I have already mentioned earlier on the thread where they had to track FOUR junior riders. Not PL riders with an average of up to 6, but 4 junior riders, 2nd half junior riders.

 

 

 

There is absolutely no comparision between cricket and speedway. A 2nd XI player can come into the 1st XI in cricket and outperform an established player, even a Swann, Broad, Lumb. It happens on a regular basis. A 3pt junior rider will NEVER come into an EL team and outperform a no 1 heat leader.

[TonyE]

As I stated in an earlier post, BV were between a rock and a hard place and now that things have moved on, it is the SCB that are in a similar position. There has to be some form of sanction and deciding just what it should be will be a major problem.

 

It is very difficult to formulate rules/regulations to cover every conceivable circumstance and hence the inclinination (by BV) to go down a route that appeared to offer a way out of their predicament.