screm Posted May 4, 2014 Report Share Posted May 4, 2014 You can't just re-declare with a rider in the team after you have publically announced his removal from the team the week before. Well I know you can, but it's totally wrong. No way should Roynan be banned for last nights fiasco. Otherwise anyone can declare anyone in their team. I agree with you so Sheffield should not have had R/R for either Proctor or Roynon last night. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
torpointfanatic22 Posted May 4, 2014 Report Share Posted May 4, 2014 From the 2014 Speedway Regulations: Rule 16.5.3 No facility is permitted to replace a rider, who although included in a re-declaration has not made an appearance for that team since being re-declared. If Sheffield re-declared him back into their 1-7, then he should've been at Berwick last night. They can re-declare him all they want but did he even know!? You can't ban someone if they don't even know they have been re-declared in a 1-7. If Roynon gets banned for this then this would be an all time low for the BSPA. Sheffield Speedway and the MC have clearly buggered this up so they should be the ones held accountable. I agree with you so Sheffield should not have had R/R for either Proctor or Roynon last night. Sounds fair - Take off the 3 points R/R got and leave it there. Probably the fairest way to resolve things. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
screm Posted May 4, 2014 Report Share Posted May 4, 2014 (edited) They can re-declare him all they want but did he even know!? You can't ban someone if they don't even know they have been re-declared in a 1-7. If Roynon gets banned for this then this would be an all time low for the BSPA. Sheffield Speedway and the MC have clearly buggered this up so they should be the ones held accountable. Sounds fair - Take off the 3 points R/R got and leave it there. Probably the fairest way to resolve things. Fair enough, if Sheffield re-declared without the knowledge of Roynon then he should not be banned, but then Sheffield should not have had any facility. One wonders that this would not have happened had they still had Mr Hoggart as part of their promotion, just a thought. Edited May 4, 2014 by screm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spin king Posted May 4, 2014 Report Share Posted May 4, 2014 They can re-declare him all they want but did he even know!? You can't ban someone if they don't even know they have been re-declared in a 1-7. If Roynon gets banned for this then this would be an all time low for the BSPA. Sheffield Speedway and the MC have clearly buggered this up so they should be the ones held accountable. Sounds fair - Take off the 3 points R/R got and leave it there. Probably the fairest way to resolve things. I would agree with that, but Sheffield were given permission by the BSPA. Management Committee They obtained written permission on the Friday to use Ty Proctor as Rider Replacement. Then the BSPA Management Committee gave verbal permission on the Saturday to use Adam Roynon as Rider Replacement. Why should Sheffield, be penalized for what is a BSPA Management Committee cock up If the Management Committee don't know their own rules how can anyone else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan_Jones Posted May 4, 2014 Report Share Posted May 4, 2014 Why should Sheffield, be penalized for what is a BSPA Management Committee cock up If the Management Committee don't know their own rules how can anyone else. But that's the problem, a lot of us seem to know the rules better than those given the responsibility of wielding them randomly. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hel'n'Back Posted May 4, 2014 Report Share Posted May 4, 2014 (edited) Lets just remove the 3 points scored by r/r and then we can put this thing to bed! BSPA............ Edited May 4, 2014 by Hel'n'Back 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jenga Posted May 4, 2014 Report Share Posted May 4, 2014 does a certain ex workington promoter have anytjing to do with sheffield, because he also THOUGHT he was bigger than the people that run speedway. adam roynon is a good wee rider and should not be handed a ban. of any discription. would like to see adam back in the sheff side, going out in 3 races, winning by a mile and suddenly having a mysterious e/f.. sheff are the poole of the pl. without the money. bspa and the speedway rules are pitiful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevePark Posted May 4, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 4, 2014 does a certain ex workington promoter have anytjing to do with sheffield, because he also THOUGHT he was bigger than the people that run speedway. adam roynon is a good wee rider and should not be handed a ban. of any discription. would like to see adam back in the sheff side, going out in 3 races, winning by a mile and suddenly having a mysterious e/f.. sheff are the poole of the pl. without the money. bspa and the speedway rules are pitiful. Therefore hitting himself in the pocket, so to speak?? Yeah, Royno is that stupid? I don't think so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lioness Posted May 4, 2014 Report Share Posted May 4, 2014 Why should Sheffield, be penalized for what is a BSPA Management Committee cock up If the Management Committee don't know their own rules how can anyone else. And by the same logic, why should Berwick be penalised for it? WE all know and have been saying all week that Sheffield arent entitled to a facility and an NL guest should be used. the rule book states that. It doesnt allow for rain offs but there are precedents - SCB has already pointed out Coventry had to bite the bullet and go NL when it happened to them last year - so I dont see Sheffield had a leg to stand on in this one. Yes the apparent actions of the Management committee are shambolic but Sheffield were trying to get a dispensation that shouldnt be allowed so why should Berwick be penalised? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan_Jones Posted May 4, 2014 Report Share Posted May 4, 2014 (edited) And by the same logic, why should Berwick be penalised for it? WE all know and have been saying all week that Sheffield arent entitled to a facility and an NL guest should be used. the rule book states that. It doesnt allow for rain offs but there are precedents - SCB has already pointed out Coventry had to bite the bullet and go NL when it happened to them last year - so I dont see Sheffield had a leg to stand on in this one. Yes the apparent actions of the Management committee are shambolic but Sheffield were trying to get a dispensation that shouldnt be allowed so why should Berwick be penalised? Nobody's saying anything that would penalise Berwick are they? IMO Sheffield put themselves in a position where they only had 6 riders. They should have gone with 6 riders and no R/R. If I were in a generous mood I'd have let them use reserves, but I'm rarely generous where rule flouting is concerned. Edited May 4, 2014 by Alan_Jones Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dontforgetthefueltapsbruv Posted May 4, 2014 Report Share Posted May 4, 2014 Berwick havent been penalised by the decision to allow Sheffield a facilty. Denied the chance to take advantage of a weakened side maybe but I would say that is different to being penalised. Every side should expect to take on full strength opposition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
screm Posted May 4, 2014 Report Share Posted May 4, 2014 Once Berwick have dumped Sheffield out of the KOC next Thursday all this will be immaterial. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lioness Posted May 4, 2014 Report Share Posted May 4, 2014 I get what you are saying guys but if Sheffield go through by 1 or 2 points I think you might find that Berwick feel they have been penalised although you can never say what an NL rider would have scored. To be honest, I was just trying to be logical about it as I read it as 'poor Sheffield being treated badly' which was probably a misinterpretation! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fromafar Posted May 4, 2014 Report Share Posted May 4, 2014 Once Berwick have dumped Sheffield out of the KOC next Thursday all this will be immaterial. That might come back to bite you on the ar*e.Dont think this tie is dead we should have finished them off last night but we let them off the hook in a couple of races.Stead was the only real threat. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
screm Posted May 4, 2014 Report Share Posted May 4, 2014 (edited) That might come back to bite you on the ar*e.Dont think this tie is dead we should have finished them off last night but we let them off the hook in a couple of races.Stead was the only real threat. Oh I`m only teasing. Edited May 4, 2014 by screm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spin king Posted May 4, 2014 Report Share Posted May 4, 2014 I get what you are saying guys but if Sheffield go through by 1 or 2 points I think you might find that Berwick feel they have been penalised although you can never say what an NL rider would have scored. To be honest, I was just trying to be logical about it as I read it as 'poor Sheffield being treated badly' which was probably a misinterpretation! Some fair comments, and in a way very difficult to argue with, the one thing could be said is that the Sheffield Promotional team is new to the game and I would say a little naive at the moment. But the Management Committee, are experienced Promoters and should now the rule book inside and out, so why have they allowed it to happen? But while the BSPA refuse to allow an independent Governing Body to run and set the rules for the sport I think we see these sort of situations happen over and over again. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orderly Posted May 4, 2014 Report Share Posted May 4, 2014 (edited) Some fair comments, and in a way very difficult to argue with, the one thing could be said is that the Sheffield Promotional team is new to the game and I would say a little naive at the moment. But the Management Committee, are experienced Promoters and should now the rule book inside and out, so why have they allowed it to happen? But while the BSPA refuse to allow an independent Governing Body to run and set the rules for the sport I think we see these sort of situations happen over and over again. While I take on board that the Sheffield promotion are still “Wet behind the ears “as new promoters they should have a mentoring promoter to guide them through the rules & regulations of promoting a speedway club and staying within the rules. Berwick should place a complaint on file now & not wait for the return leg the illegal granting RR for Ty Proctor as he hadn’t ridden for the club or for Adam Roynon who was sacked by the club, this is a matter of principal that the rules are adhered too not to see if the aggregate score requires a complaint I think that the Speedway public deserve a statement from the BSPA explaining their actions in this charade Edited May 4, 2014 by starshooter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spin king Posted May 4, 2014 Report Share Posted May 4, 2014 While I take on board that the Sheffield promotion are still “Wet behind the ears “as new promoters they should have a mentoring promoter to guide them through the rules & regulations of promoting a speedway club and staying within the rules. Berwick should place a complaint on file now & not wait for the return leg the illegal granting RR for Ty Proctor as he hadn’t ridden for the club or for Adam Roynon who was sacked by the club, this is a matter of principal that the rules are adhered too not to see if the aggregate score requires a complaint I think that the Speedway public deserve a statement from the BSPA explaining their actions in this charade That is fair enough, but the fact remains Sheffield were given permission by the BSPA, surely the BSPA should have if the team was illegal refuse permission to Sheffield to use Rider Replacement. I don't have a problem with people saying the Sheffield was not legal, the question for me is why, how did the powers that be not only give Sheffield permission to track what appears to an illegal team, but then tell them to track another illegal team. People seem quick to blame the Sheffield Promotion, but for me the BSPA Management Committee, has more to answer to. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catch Me If You Can Posted May 4, 2014 Report Share Posted May 4, 2014 That is fair enough, but the fact remains Sheffield were given permission by the BSPA, surely the BSPA should have if the team was illegal refuse permission to Sheffield to use Rider Replacement. I don't have a problem with people saying the Sheffield was not legal, the question for me is why, how did the powers that be not only give Sheffield permission to track what appears to an illegal team, but then tell them to track another illegal team. People seem quick to blame the Sheffield Promotion, but for me the BSPA Management Committee, has more to answer to. The way I see it (and may be wrong) is that for whatever reason the Ty proctor inclusion into Tigers team has not been approved in time for Thursday and Saturday past? So when that happens the original line up inc Roynon, dropped or not dropped, comes back into play. So if he not riding a facility could be granted. There was no way a facility could be granted to Proctor, surely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lewy Posted May 4, 2014 Report Share Posted May 4, 2014 Surely roynan is not to blame for this debacle and in no way should he be penalised if he gets fixed up elsewhere 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.