E I Addio Posted May 2, 2013 Report Share Posted May 2, 2013 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. No doubt Matt Ford will be pushing for a tough sanction. He can't stand cheats 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemini Posted May 2, 2013 Report Share Posted May 2, 2013 Eh?? I don't think the majority of the crowd at Coventry will say they were ripped off on Monday... I think you will find they would say they were, hence a lot of fans leaving half way through. Complete waste of £17. However, it was probably a good night for any Wolves fans as their team was banging in 5-1 after 5-1 so they wouldn't care what the racing was like. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacques Posted May 2, 2013 Report Share Posted May 2, 2013 I think you will find they would say they were, hence a lot of fans leaving half way through. Complete waste of £17. However, it was probably a good night for any Wolves fans as their team was banging in 5-1 after 5-1 so they wouldn't care what the racing was like. I watched it on the tele and I still felt ripped off! 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWitcher Posted May 2, 2013 Report Share Posted May 2, 2013 I think you will find they would say they were, hence a lot of fans leaving half way through. Complete waste of £17. However, it was probably a good night for any Wolves fans as their team was banging in 5-1 after 5-1 so they wouldn't care what the racing was like. That's why I said the 'majority' 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILIPRISING Posted May 2, 2013 Report Share Posted May 2, 2013 GOING off on a bit of a tangent here but would be interested in people's constructive views... In light of the comments made by Wolves manager Peter Adams on Sky on Monday (with which I wholeheartedly concur), that any weak Elite League teams are to the detriment of the league as a whole, would it be better for speedway in the UK if for example... Coventry decide to dispense with Kaspzrak and Greg Hancock says he is prepared to help the Bees out for the rest of the season but his average prevents him from doing so. Would fans in general prefer that special dispensation be granted (by an independent adjudicator) to allow Hancock to compete. Such a move might not only boost attendances at Brandon (essential if we are not to lose them) but also potentially swell the gates at the tracks Coventry visit. Or do you prefer the current situation where clubs wishing to strengthen are effectively in a mathematical straightjacket? This is obviously a hypothetical example... cannot see any reason why Greg and many of his SGP colleagues would wish to return to the UK. But would more flexibility in the regulations be generally beneficial. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyE Posted May 2, 2013 Report Share Posted May 2, 2013 (edited) No special dispensations please - (did the Hammers ever get any when they were struggling big time to be competetive)? If Coventry want to bring in someone like Hancock then they should have to redeclare their 1 to 7 in accordance with the points limit. Where will the independent adjudicator come from and who will pay him/her? Edited May 3, 2013 by TonyE 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILIPRISING Posted May 2, 2013 Report Share Posted May 2, 2013 No special dispensations please - (did the Hammers ever get any when they were struggling big time to be competetive)? If Coventry want to bring in someone like Hancock then they should have to redeclare their 1 to 7 in accordance with the points limit. Where will the independent adjudicator copme from and who will pay him/her? PLENTY of candidates who I am sure would happily do the job when required. Doesn't have to cost much. Understand what you say about Lakeside ... but was that in the best interests of speedway? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted May 2, 2013 Report Share Posted May 2, 2013 GOING off on a bit of a tangent here but would be interested in people's constructive views... In light of the comments made by Wolves manager Peter Adams on Sky on Monday (with which I wholeheartedly concur), that any weak Elite League teams are to the detriment of the league as a whole, would it be better for speedway in the UK if for example... Coventry decide to dispense with Kaspzrak and Greg Hancock says he is prepared to help the Bees out for the rest of the season but his average prevents him from doing so. Would fans in general prefer that special dispensation be granted (by an independent adjudicator) to allow Hancock to compete. Such a move might not only boost attendances at Brandon (essential if we are not to lose them) but also potentially swell the gates at the tracks Coventry visit. Or do you prefer the current situation where clubs wishing to strengthen are effectively in a mathematical straightjacket? This is obviously a hypothetical example... cannot see any reason why Greg and many of his SGP colleagues would wish to return to the UK. But would more flexibility in the regulations be generally beneficial. Tought rubbish. You sign z team you have to stick with it. You want changes, fit within the limit. And i doubt Greg Hancock will make bugger all difference to attendances. And as it is I think Greg would fit for KK without any other changes anyway. Where will the independent adjudicator copme from and who will pay him/her? Are there not a dozen or so independent and SCB licensed people already? Referees? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arson fire Posted May 2, 2013 Report Share Posted May 2, 2013 - - - - - - - - - - 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). great post..... Surely this deserves a reply Phillip?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILIPRISING Posted May 2, 2013 Report Share Posted May 2, 2013 I WAS simply asking for people's opinions on a hypothetical situation similar to that which occurred with BV on Monday but made it clear (or so I thought) that it was not specifically about what happened there and was in no way condoning it. Both with riders missing through not fault of their own and teams unable to strengthen by fractions within the points limit I was (and still am) trying to ascertain views of the paying public. Some people very quickly get their knickers in a twist. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ipswich Jules Posted May 3, 2013 Report Share Posted May 3, 2013 It seems the views are fairly consistent - stick to the rules! If your riders are missing - regardless of the reason or who you try and blame - then it's unlucky, how to react to that situation is up to the promotion, assuming they can't mutually agree to cancel the meeting with the opposing promotion then they have limited choices within the rules: Use reserves - but inform the spectators before they pay to enter the stadium, would probably result in a home loss. Use illegal guests - better for spectators although it'll mean points being deducted later down the line resulting in that home loss again. What you don't do is make up some yarn about a burst waterpipe to justify cancelling a meeting without the track even being seen by a referee - just because a couple of your riders couldn't be there. As has been said, other riders rode in Poland the day before and managed to get to Belle Vue, maybe their travel plans were a bit better thought out? Rules are rules and should be stuck to, no allowing higher averaged riders to replace lower ones and exceeding the points limit because it's "in the interest of the sport" - that term has become pretty much synonymous with cheating these past few years, if you allow it to happen more often whilst the inmates are still running the asylum then you may as well not bother with having rules on team building limits etc 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philfromcov Posted May 3, 2013 Report Share Posted May 3, 2013 this has been caused by the rolling averages, which was a knee jerk reaction to coventry in 2010. take away the rolling averages and hey prestos teams can re build! between kaspazak and nicholls they have lost 3 average points, taking the fact that we are already 1 point under, then we could easily strengthen up IF there are riders willing to come to the Uk. The reality is that very few top riders want to come here anymore and unless your team can get rules changed at a whim will only be here one season. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dornier Posted May 3, 2013 Report Share Posted May 3, 2013 I`ve always been a believer in sticking to the rules no matter what, whether it be Coventry, Aces or Poole stick to the rules and you can`t go wrong.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E I Addio Posted May 3, 2013 Report Share Posted May 3, 2013 I see that in Speedway Star Neil Middleditch has pitched in and probably comes as close as he can to calling Belle Vue a bunch of liars without actually using the word. He says all he got was a text saying its off with no explanation, then he talks about BV already having R/R for Mroccza and adds "something doesn't smell right". His comments seem pretty strong stuff to me. The SS article also says the SCB have "substantial " photographic evidence so clearly they have much more than the few pictures we have seen on here. Not looking at all good for Gordon and Morton. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ipswich Jules Posted May 3, 2013 Report Share Posted May 3, 2013 <snip> The other option of course is to force every meeting to run, missing riders or not, unless safety is the issue with rain or a flooded track due to a burst water main. What burst water main? Do you honestly believe that? Genuine question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
internetman Posted May 3, 2013 Report Share Posted May 3, 2013 (edited) Another twist in the tail from World Champion Chris Holder from the local, Daily Echo!? Pirates: Captain Holder wants the four points from Belle Vue call-off 7:00am Friday 3rd May 2013 in Pirates News By Ian Wadley CAPTAIN Chris Holder is urging the speedway authorities to hand Pirates four points in the wake of the postponement at Belle Vue. The world champion claimed Poole should be awarded a victory after the Aces had controversially called off Monday’s Elite League clash. Belle Vue, who issued an apology on Wednesday, previously reported that a burst water pipe had caused flooding at Kirkmanshulme Lane. They had already confirmed that Artur Mroczka had withdrawn from the meeting due to injury and Holder alleged, via social networking website Twitter, that two other Aces stars, rumoured to be Matej Zagar and Magnus Zetterstrom, had missed their flights to the UK from Poland on Monday. The heated fall-out and claims led the Speedway Control Bureau to announce a “full investigation” into the matter. And after the Aces had said sorry, Holder insisted Pirates should not have to make another trip to Belle Vue. Asked if he felt Poole should be given the points, the Australian told the Daily Echo: “For sure. We shouldn’t have to go back up there because of a mistake by them. But if they don’t want to do that, reimburse us for our flights and travel, or give us the four points.” Article Continues....... http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/sport/speedway/piratesnews/10397300.Pirates__Captain_Holder_wants_the_four_points_from_Belle_Vue_call_off/ Edited May 3, 2013 by internetman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ipswich Jules Posted May 3, 2013 Report Share Posted May 3, 2013 I can't comment as it is the subject of an inquiry. You can't have an opinion? Are you an official of the Belle Vue club and involved in the investigation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil The Ace Posted May 3, 2013 Report Share Posted May 3, 2013 (edited) Poole will get the 4 pouts but won't get the flight money back Edited May 3, 2013 by Phil The Ace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveLyric2 Posted May 3, 2013 Report Share Posted May 3, 2013 I WAS simply asking for people's opinions on a hypothetical situation similar to that which occurred with BV on Monday but made it clear (or so I thought) that it was not specifically about what happened there and was in no way condoning it. Both with riders missing through not fault of their own and teams unable to strengthen by fractions within the points limit I was (and still am) trying to ascertain views of the paying public. Some people very quickly get their knickers in a twist. Philip, I think we should go back to having all riders graded rather than their individual averages, as this might give a bit more flexibility and avoid the need for any average manipulation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted May 3, 2013 Report Share Posted May 3, 2013 Philip, I think we should go back to having all riders graded rather than their individual averages, as this might give a bit more flexibility and avoid the need for any average manipulation. Grade are just averages of averages. It makes no difference, if you only have room for a grade 4 rider but the rider available is a grade 5 it still won't fit any better than if you have 8.5 and the replacement is 8.51. 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.