TheReturn Posted July 14, 2013 Report Share Posted July 14, 2013 I still don't understand the rule change of last season to put the SWC hosts direct into the final. Why was it changed? I just feel that hosts in the final have not earned the right, surely if you are going to see the hosts it should be to the semi-final, not direct to the final and then have the top two from he semi proceed to the final. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LagutaRacingFan Posted July 14, 2013 Report Share Posted July 14, 2013 Because the Czech federation paid the organizers some £££ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JC! Posted July 14, 2013 Report Share Posted July 14, 2013 I still don't understand the rule change of last season to put the SWC hosts direct into the final. Why was it changed? I just feel that hosts in the final have not earned the right, surely if you are going to see the hosts it should be to the semi-final, not direct to the final and then have the top two from he semi proceed to the final. Ticket sales I should imagine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T.N.T. Posted July 15, 2013 Report Share Posted July 15, 2013 How many Czech's will be at the final compared to Poles or Danes etc. If it was all about ticket sales, then surely they could just as easily seed the host nation into the race off as this meeting won't have the home team in, but will still be heavily watched. Have the two qualifiers and seed the defending champions and host nation into the play offs ..... or ...... increase it to three qualifiers (12 countries) and have the three winners of each round go to the final. The race off would then be the three second placed teams and the host nation with the winners only going to the final. Poland, Denmark, Sweden, GB, Latvia, Russia, Australia, Czech Republic, Germany, Finland, USA and Ukraine ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f-s-p Posted July 15, 2013 Report Share Posted July 15, 2013 I still don't understand the rule change of last season to put the SWC hosts direct into the final. Why was it changed? I just feel that hosts in the final have not earned the right, surely if you are going to see the hosts it should be to the semi-final, not direct to the final and then have the top two from he semi proceed to the final. The rule change came out (NOT LAST YEAR) at the same time as the new BV stadium plan was made public and SWC meetings planned to be ridden there. Do your math anyone, it was introduced to give GB a chance for a medal... 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racers and royals Posted July 15, 2013 Report Share Posted July 15, 2013 The rule change came out (NOT LAST YEAR) at the same time as the new BV stadium plan was made public and SWC meetings planned to be ridden there. Do your math anyone, it was introduced to give GB a chance for a medal... Sorry to take issue with you-but in 2011 Poland rode at Kings Lynn and won it to go to the final in Gorzow. In 2012 Sweden only rode in the final in Malilla So if not in 2012 when did the new rule come in ??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f-s-p Posted July 15, 2013 Report Share Posted July 15, 2013 Sorry to take issue with you-but in 2011 Poland rode at Kings Lynn and won it to go to the final in Gorzow. In 2012 Sweden only rode in the final in Malilla So if not in 2012 when did the new rule come in ??? Not a problem at all. I knew it's not a popular view and posted it anyway. At the moment I'm on my break sitting in the sun, but will dig some facts later today. I've saved the rulebooks year by year so should be able to find this info... If not, I guess I'm föcked?! LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldace Posted July 15, 2013 Report Share Posted July 15, 2013 Not a problem at all. I knew it's not a popular view and posted it anyway. At the moment I'm on my break sitting in the sun, but will dig some facts later today. I've saved the rulebooks year by year so should be able to find this info... If not, I guess I'm föcked?! LOL The rule change came out (NOT LAST YEAR) at the same time as the new BV stadium plan was made public and SWC meetings planned to be ridden there. Do your math anyone, it was introduced to give GB a chance for a medal... 2012 was the first year that the hosts were seeded In 2011 Poland qualified for the Gorzow Final by winning at Kings Lynn In 2010 The Danes qualified for the Vojens final via the race off after being second in the Gorzow round In 2009 The Ploes qualified for the Leszno Final by winning at Peterborough I could go back further but still no team was seeded to the final Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheReturn Posted July 15, 2013 Author Report Share Posted July 15, 2013 The rule change came out (NOT LAST YEAR) at the same time as the new BV stadium plan was made public and SWC meetings planned to be ridden there. Do your math anyone, it was introduced to give GB a chance for a medal... I would hate it either way, be it for Team GB or as in this case, Team Czech. It's like seeding Brazil straight to the final of the World Cup, with all other nations battling it out for that final space. If they have to be seeded then it should be to the race-off. I like the earlier suggestion of three qualifiers, with the second placed teams going to the play off with the seeded hosts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldace Posted July 15, 2013 Report Share Posted July 15, 2013 I would hate it either way, be it for Team GB or as in this case, Team Czech. It's like seeding Brazil straight to the final of the World Cup, with all other nations battling it out for that final space. If they have to be seeded then it should be to the race-off. I like the earlier suggestion of three qualifiers, with the second placed teams going to the play off with the seeded hosts. It is done in order that the World Cup can be moved around a bit from the usual Denmark/Poland and occasionally Sweden/UK cycle. No other country in their right mind would take the event without the security of knowing they were in it to draw a crowd. Even in the sports glory days the terraces at White City in 76/79/82 were empty thanks to the absence of the hosts. Ironic as England were quite successful during that period and the only times we failed to qualify was when we were hosting the event Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevebrum Posted July 15, 2013 Report Share Posted July 15, 2013 The change is purely for sales, no other country outside Poland, Sweden, Denmark are likely to win (Australia is exempt unless it is hosted out of season which to me has great merit) and besides the UK would be financial suicide for any country hosting. Great for other nations to have a chance to host but have no chance of making the final so seeding to the final is the only option. Whether that is right or wrong is a different matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandorum Posted July 15, 2013 Report Share Posted July 15, 2013 It's easy to see why the idea sounded good to those in charge but sadly the final will possibly throw up a scenario where the home team can't even manage double figures or even (and it's a remote possibility but still possible considering the weakness of the home team) fail to register a point. The SGP is caught between a rock and a hard place trying to involve more countries and it's damned both ways. One would have thought the involvement with Monster might by now have been bearing fruit but looking at the non crowd for the first leg in speedways strongest country it seems it hasn't. It will be interesting to see what sort of crowd we see tonight and then in Prague for the play off. Whether the Czechs being seeded will ensure a good Final crowd remains to be seen. The SWC needs money rather than free energy drinks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RPNY Posted July 15, 2013 Report Share Posted July 15, 2013 I am very much opposed to the hosts being seeded, however as always I try to Understand it & maybe a change of venue isn't such a bad thing. I think it's time there was a qualifier outside of Poland and the UK but as always, money talks. I know we do love to pick penuts out of poop about our sport on here, but let's try and remeber that the SWC really had produced some unreal racing over the years and it would be silly to write off the competiton. It's a real shame Russia fielded a weakended team and I personally think there should be some sort of punishment for them. But otherwise it's a great competiton & at least there's an outside shot GB can win a medal this year!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hazzman Posted July 15, 2013 Report Share Posted July 15, 2013 I am very much opposed to the hosts being seeded, however as always I try to Understand it & maybe a change of venue isn't such a bad thing. I was personally a fan of when the World Cup was held in the same country for one week. I can understand why this is no longer the case. Just felt it built a real festival atmosphere. It also made it more worthwhile for fans to travel abroad. If you are going to spend x amount going Poland, might as well make 5 to 7 days and spend a touch more. Maybe if the IGM/FIM offered some money to improve the hosting tracks, then you'd get more neutral countries will to host the tournament and happy to have low crowd knowing the long-term benefits. Obviously, no bleeding seeding other than the semi-finalists as per the norm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shale Shaker Posted July 15, 2013 Report Share Posted July 15, 2013 I was personally a fan of when the World Cup was held in the same country for one week. I can understand why this is no longer the case. Just felt it built a real festival atmosphere. It also made it more worthwhile for fans to travel abroad. If you are going to spend x amount going Poland, might as well make 5 to 7 days and spend a touch more. I second that as well. I seem to remember you could get a ticket deal which got you into both qualifiers, semi and the final at a pretty good discount as well. That to me seems a better way to ensure good crowds at all 4 events. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RPNY Posted July 15, 2013 Report Share Posted July 15, 2013 I agree, it was what the world cup should be IMO. All in one country and a festival type atmosphere. If it was once ervery 2 years, they probably coulda done that, but I guess it just wasn't finacially viable. I'm hearing they may alternate between the current format & a pairs format soon, maybe not a bad idea, but I'd personally be saddened to not see the SWC every year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted July 15, 2013 Report Share Posted July 15, 2013 Bigger joke is the final is on the joke of a track that is the Marketta Stadium rather than the Czechs are in the final! As post a while back, it's going to make the race-off one hell of a meeting though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f-s-p Posted July 15, 2013 Report Share Posted July 15, 2013 (edited) Not a problem at all. I knew it's not a popular view and posted it anyway. At the moment I'm on my break sitting in the sun, but will dig some facts later today. I've saved the rulebooks year by year so should be able to find this info... If not, I guess I'm föcked?! LOL I wrote in July EDIT: early August 2011 (with a pic by Conkers) that BV stadium plan is made public and that in two years they plan to ride SWC there. This story was based on internet material from Manchester Evening something... I remember questioning the article since it said they are using 60 million for BMX and 6 for speedway... Sounded funny but was actually somehow correct. 2011 rulebook states 078.8.1 FIM Speedway World Cup Final Tournament Format Competitions for teams. 8 teams in total. and 2012 rulebook says 078.8.1 FIM Speedway World Cup Final Tournament Format Competitions for teams. 9 teams in total. So to seed the host nation came in to play for 2012 to first play in favour of Swedes... Turned/played against them according to many though. Edited July 16, 2013 by f-s-p Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BluPanther Posted July 15, 2013 Report Share Posted July 15, 2013 Ticket sales I should imagine. Exactly right.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheReturn Posted July 21, 2013 Author Report Share Posted July 21, 2013 I think last night is proof that it is totally ridiculous to seed hosts to the final. A World Cup final should be the pinnacle of any sport, and teams should earn the right to be there. Last night we saw what happens when a lesser team is seeded to the final, they are totally outclassed, and what happened is the final became a three team final, rather than a four team final. 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.