Leicester V Lakeside 12 Apr

[The Voice Of Reason]

Just to clarify TMW that despite a number of contributions on this particular thread, at no time have I inferred that the MO was biased nor bribed.

 

I also do not, in any way whatsoever, doubt his/her integrity; his/her professional ability nor his/her good intent.

 

However, what I do question, particularly as the individual apparently wasn't the regular MO, is their knowledge of Speedway Regulations - and whether the laid down procedures (that I previously outlined) were followed correctly. I would also bring into question whether The Clerk of the Course or, most importantly the Referee, checked this particular point. Both parties undertake regular exams at SCB HQ to ensure that they have a sound knowledge of The Regulations that control our sport.

 

If not, then with all due respect to all parties concerned, we have every right of an appeal in this instance.

 

And, if indeed, that is the intent of our appeal then the SCB will have no option other than to uphold it. If they do not, then basically they will be demonstrating due negligence towards their own regulations. The ramifications of which, as I'm sure you can appreciate, could potentially create utter chaos for the sport as a whole - as some clubs could potentially 'cherry pick' only those aspects of The Regulations that they wish to abide by.

 

The SCB, in order to retain it's integrity (and also potentially the integrity of The ACU) simply has no option in this instance.

 

Moreover, it is also their subsequent responsibility to ensure that clubs (possibly via the BSPA) learn from this issue - in order that this incident does not happen again.

Edited April 14, 2014 by The Voice Of Reason

[clambo71]

To hear that Lakeside are to make an official complaint about the referee & the paramedics at Leicester is unreal.

 

If the paramedic says that a rider is unfit to continue the meeting then who is Neil Vatcher or anyone else to argue that.

match

Fact is that I'm told Adam Ellis popped his shoulder out it's socket & was in a lot of pain.

 

If Lakeside win or even take a point from the meeting there would not even be a mention of a compla int.

 

Lakeside are looking for a scapegoat for losing to a tiny club that everyone feels will prop the league up.

Thomas Jorgensen popped his shoulder out in the scunny match yesterday.Had it put back in again

and came out to gain a point for his team.It seems there are different opinions on fitness.

[Jonny the spud]

Adams shoulder was aching. No one said it had "popped out" and the fact that he did the practice start and corner as requested by the referee without difficulty showed that he was able to control the bike

[E I Addio]

Adams shoulder was aching. No one said it had "popped out" and the fact that he did the practice start and corner as requested by the referee without difficulty showed that he was able to control the bike

 

Ah that's an important piece of information that hasn't been mentioned before. If that's correct then it seems the referee has some explaining to do. And who was the referee ? Why our old friend Peter Clarke. Has that man ever handled anything properly ?

[Nobblytriers]

Just to clarify TMW that despite a number of contributions on this particular thread, at no time have I inferred that the MO was biased nor bribed.

 

I also do not, in any way whatsoever, doubt his/her integrity; his/her professional ability nor his/her good intent.

 

However, what I do question, particularly as the individual apparently wasn't the regular MO, is their knowledge of Speedway Regulations - and whether the laid down procedures (that I previously outlined) were followed correctly. I would also bring into question whether The Clerk of the Course or, most importantly the Referee, checked this particular point. Both parties undertake regular exams at SCB HQ to ensure that they have a sound knowledge of The Regulations that control our sport.

 

If not, then with all due respect to all parties concerned, we have every right of an appeal in this instance.

 

And, if indeed, that is the intent of our appeal then the SCB will have no option other than to uphold it. If they do not, then basically they will be demonstrating due negligence towards their own regulations. The ramifications of which, as I'm sure you can appreciate, could potentially create utter chaos for the sport as a whole - as some clubs could potentially 'cherry pick' only those aspects of The Regulations that they wish to abide by.

 

The SCB, in order to retain it's integrity (and also potentially the integrity of The ACU) simply has no option in this instance.

 

Moreover, it is also their subsequent responsibility to ensure that clubs (possibly via the BSPA) learn from this issue - in order that this incident does not happen again.

 

I'm struggling to see where the medics knowledge of speedway comes into it.

 

Surley, in the event of an accident, the medic is there to make a professional assessment of a riders ability to continue racing, and if he/she thinks not, then they have a duty of care to advise against riding. In their professional capacity, the medic in charge on the night, thought that Ellis should not race again in the meeting. Why should they have any knowlege of speedway regulations?

 

As for cherry picking aspects of the regulations, If you go against a medics judgement, aren't you doing just that? I thought they had the final say as to a riders ability to race. Maybe I'm wrong.

 

I must admit I was surprised at Morely being excluded as the cause of the crash and even more surprised, and confused, when Ellis came out to the tapes after we'd been told he'd been withdrawn from the rest of the meeting.

[Vince]

robert72 The riders were complaining that there was to much grip all night and had me take the dirt to the very out side. So for you to say there was no grip ????????????????????

I can't believe that you as an ex rider and track man along with a crop of current riders actually believe you know more about track conditions than Robert72 who has stood and watched tracks from the sidelines for years you know!!!

 

Feeling a bit sorry for the ref here as I find it hard to imagine anybody in that position over ruling a medical opinion. It would just leave you wide open to sue now pay later brigade if it went wrong. Sounds like he did his best to change the medics opinion by letting Adam prove he was OK but short of the medic giving the OK I can't see how the ref can risk it.

[robert72]

How can you be stunned that was not bad refereeing in fact it was good refereeing because the CMO had advised the referee that Ellis had been withdrawn by a fully qualified Paramedic who is registered with the Health Professions Council and has gone through a lot of training before, during & after his/her Paramedic qualifications.

If a paramedic is in charge of the medical side of a meeting then the paramedic assumes the roll of the Chief Medical Officer, if a Doctor is also contracted to attend the meeting then that Doctor must be B A S I C S (British Association for Immediate Care) trained and not just a GP from the surgery down the road

 

That is a comment that could attract litigation both from the promoter and the paramedic concerned and not the sort of comment needed on this forum

 

I wonder if the paramedic/ref took the van keys off him so he didn't drive home ?

 

The way this country is going maybe this will be a common thing in speedway with every crash that the rider will then be stopped from carrying on as a precaution ?

[Crazy robin]

So what it sounds like to me from the previous pages, might go something like;

Ref makes a howler and excludes the wrong rider, and doesn't realise or admit it (or if he does, it's too late).

Medic who isn't experienced with sporting injuries and in particular motorcycle sport and by the sound of it wasn't the usual Medic, took an overly cautious decision probably due to that inexperience.

Yes it sounds as if Lakeside would have gained an away point, had those two factors been different. But they wern't, and unfortunately Lakeside will just have to accept that it's happened and if they are going to have an official moan, maybe it should be about the ref?

The other thing to keep in mind, is this little espisode stemmed from an incident involving two riders who are still relatively inexperienced. Whatever the reasons and arguments for and against, the Elite league now contains such riders, and so it is likely that incidents will occur throughout the season, affecting all teams at some point. We just hope that the seriousness of incidents in terms of injury are not high, although sadly there has been a serious one so far. The risk is that these young riders will on occasion, due to the pressure they feel under because of the closeness of the match score, overdo things. The clubs should be more concerned about this and be careful about making public statements such as saying "the team is not performing well enough". We can't wrap them in cotton wool, but it must be remembered they are a very different entity to the guys at 1-5.

It amazes me that we moan about young drivers driving powerful cars when just passing their tests then expect young inexperienced speedway riders to go out & not push themselves to limits beyond their present ability.

 

I said right at the start of this draft decision that young riders should be left to develop at their own pace & not pushed to doin it as the risk of serious injury could be a result.

 

We've already seen one young rider have a serious injury & with the pressure they're under I just hope it's the last.

[E I Addio]

 

I'm struggling to see where the medics knowledge of speedway comes into it.

 

Surley, in the event of an accident, the medic is there to make a professional assessment of a riders ability to continue racing, and if he/she thinks not, then they have a duty of care to advise against riding. In their professional capacity, the medic in charge on the night, thought that Ellis should not race again in the meeting. Why should they have any knowlege of speedway regulations?

 

 

 

 

Its not a knowledge of the regulations that's important , its a knowledge of what riding a speedway bike involves. For example if a builder breaks his leg he probably can't do his job, but if a clerical worker breaks his leg he probably can do his job. The issue therefore is whether the doctor properly understood what the sport involved, and on this occasion he appears to have been inexperienced in that area.

 

The point has already been made on this thread that riders have in the past ridden with far more serious injuries than a sore shoulder. Not only ridden, but in some cases won World Championships like it. The medic has to use a bit of common sense. If he has no knowledge and no experience of speedway then he is not really in a position to make a balanced judgment.

[Jonny the spud]

Spot on.

 

Its not a knowledge of the regulations that's important , its a knowledge of what riding a speedway bike involves. For example if a builder breaks his leg he probably can't do his job, but if a clerical worker breaks his leg he probably can do his job. The issue therefore is whether the doctor properly understood what the sport involved, and on this occasion he appears to have been inexperienced in that area.

 

The point has already been made on this thread that riders have in the past ridden with far more serious injuries than a sore shoulder. Not only ridden, but in some cases won World Championships like it. The medic has to use a bit of common sense. If he has no knowledge and no experience of speedway then he is not really in a position to make a balanced judgment.

[jim3751]

It's very difficult to argue against the common sense view that the paramedic knows best. But I don't think John Cook really wants the points at all. What he will get from the appeal is a judgement that says who has the final word on whether a rider is fit to ride. If a doctor or paramedic gives advice not to ride will a rider be able to ignore it and take the risk?

 

If medics can take these decisions on safety grounds with no input from the rider there'll be be no more Tai, Bomber, Emil.or Nicki heroics. Teams will be depleated on the night and may have to adapt by keeping extra riders.on standby. Is that expense speedway can afford?

[robert72]

I have heard from 2 people today that the lad couldn't lift his arm up and that's why the paramedic said No however if this IS the case what was the lakeside management doing allowing him onto the track to risk danger to other riders,track staff & spectators if is mobility was that bad?

 

I think there needs to be official clarification on what went on.

 

Glad both riders were ok as it was a nasty crash.

[Jonny the spud]

I have heard from 2 people today that the lad couldn't lift his arm up and that's why the paramedic said No however if this IS the case what was the lakeside management doing allowing him onto the track to risk danger to other riders,track staff & spectators if is mobility was that bad?

 

I think there needs to be official clarification on what went on.

 

Glad both riders were ok as it was a nasty crash.

If you heard that then the two people were wrong

[Nobblytriers]

 

 

Its not a knowledge of the regulations that's important , its a knowledge of what riding a speedway bike involves. For example if a builder breaks his leg he probably can't do his job, but if a clerical worker breaks his leg he probably can do his job. The issue therefore is whether the doctor properly understood what the sport involved, and on this occasion he appears to have been inexperienced in that area.

 

The point has already been made on this thread that riders have in the past ridden with far more serious injuries than a sore shoulder. Not only ridden, but in some cases won World Championships like it. The medic has to use a bit of common sense. If he has no knowledge and no experience of speedway then he is not really in a position to make a balanced judgment.

 

I can see your point there, I was reponding to TVOR's statement about regulations. I think we've all seen nasty crashes with riders carrying on to the end of the meeting.

Can we then say that this is about erring on the side of caution combined with a lack of knowledge of the sport (if that's the case)? Is this the only time where a rider has wanted to ride but has been overruled by the medic? If it has it happened in the past, was there a subsequent appeal and if so, what was the outcome? If this is a first then it will be interesting to see who gets the final say as to who rides and who doesn't, as jim3751 says.

[TMW]

If there is to be an appeal lets wait and see what the investigation unearths then analyse the outcome. Wouldnt that be better?

[LagutaRacingFan]

If you heard that then the two people were wrong

Pretty sure.. It's are wrong.

There's a reason why the London School of Economics are chasing me up.

Edited April 14, 2014 by KingKennyBjerre

[Skodaman]

It's very difficult to argue against the common sense view that the paramedic knows best. But I don't think John Cook really wants the points at all. What he will get from the appeal is a judgement that says who has the final word on whether a rider is fit to ride. If a doctor or paramedic gives advice not to ride will a rider be able to ignore it and take the risk?

 

If medics can take these decisions on safety grounds with no input from the rider there'll be be no more Tai, Bomber, Emil.or Nicki heroics. Teams will be depleated on the night and may have to adapt by keeping extra riders.on standby. Is that expense speedway can afford?

Its been said that the medic made the decision without any knowledge of speedway; then surely you can turn that around and the rider/lakeside management felt he was fit to ride without medical knowledge!!

[marko]

I was not there so i dont have much to go on but i will say this and that is if Adam felt he was ok to complete four laps (didnt need to win the race, just pick up the point) then he should have been allowed to do so, chances are he would have then pulled out of the meeting anyway if what the medic says was true.

Any rider can poodle around at the back not being a danger to anyone, the only time i would make an exception to this is with a head injury because then you could have concussions and everything which would not be safe but for a arm that is hurt then all you need do is hang on and ride around quick enough not to be lapped but not so quick you cant control the machine, we see this sometimes with non injured riders nursing a very sick bike home for a couple of laps.

 

Yes it comes down to being robbed of the chance to race for a single point which as it happend would have given Hammers a league point on the night but that was not known at that stage.

So does it boil down to sour grapes? well in a way yes, much like people moan when a ref in football refuses to give a blatent penalty! everyone feels there has been an injustice done and that is what we have here, firstly the notion that Morley should not have been excluded and second that the other rider who should have been excluded but wasnt was not allowed to take part in the re-run, effectively Lakeside was punished twice.

[Jonny the spud]

Adam was ok to continue. It wasn't a question of just holding in for the point. He was there to race, it's his job. It's how he earns his living.

[justathought]

Adam was ok to continue.

How do you know he was, it amazes me how so many people have the inside, undisputable knowledge that normal fans are not privy to. Perhaps your uncles, sisters, brothers, aunty told you. I know, it was that bloke in the burger van ......he knows everything.

Edited April 14, 2014 by nightshift