spin king Posted May 5, 2014 Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 I agree regards signing riders who will miss fixtures for the Team no facilities should be allowed, might make Promotions think a bit more about who they sign.You could then scrap half the stupid rules in Speedway. I would agree with you on that, but the problem is that there is not enough quality riders around that want to ride in leagues in this country. With the new draft system in the Elite League now we have an abundance of riders riding in three leagues, for me that has to stop after this season and riders should be told that they can in only two out of the three leagues. But I think getting riders and Promoters to simply commit to one club in one league would see quite few retirements of younger British riders, as their lack of rides and earning potential would go down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fromafar Posted May 5, 2014 Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 I would agree with you on that, but the problem is that there is not enough quality riders around that want to ride in leagues in this country. With the new draft system in the Elite League now we have an abundance of riders riding in three leagues, for me that has to stop after this season and riders should be told that they can in only two out of the three leagues. But I think getting riders and Promoters to simply commit to one club in one league would see quite few retirements of younger British riders, as their lack of rides and earning potential would go down. I think it would have been better to introduce a draft system of YOUNG riders to PL instead of EL.It was purely a money saving exercise to save EL IMO 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hel'n'Back Posted May 5, 2014 Report Share Posted May 5, 2014 Agree with you Fromafar, should have used the draft system in the PL instead of EL 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Najjer Posted May 6, 2014 Report Share Posted May 6, 2014 Suppose situations like this can arise when a sport strangles itself by an ever increasing , and confusing , set of rules and regulations This one really isn't confusing, just the BSPA made a massive balls up - imagine the uproar if Sheffield win by 2 on aggregate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fromafar Posted May 6, 2014 Report Share Posted May 6, 2014 This one really isn't confusing, just the BSPA made a massive balls up - imagine the uproar if Sheffield win by 2 on aggregate.Correct ,they forgot to consult their own rule book.The Ref at Berwick should have also read it and made the correct decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YAMYAMBANDIT Posted May 6, 2014 Report Share Posted May 6, 2014 Correct ,they forgot to consult their own rule book.The Ref at Berwick should have also read it and made the correct decision. The BSPA committee made rule that you could not lodge an objection when a decision was made by themselves. I understand Berwick promotion still made their objection anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pirate Nick Posted May 6, 2014 Report Share Posted May 6, 2014 The problem with the committee is that you can phone 3 different members and get 3 different answers! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fromafar Posted May 6, 2014 Report Share Posted May 6, 2014 The BSPA committee made rule that you could not lodge an objection when a decision was made by themselves. I understand Berwick promotion still made their objection anyway.Sounds right regarding BSPA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Local Boy Posted May 6, 2014 Report Share Posted May 6, 2014 Was Ty Proctor EVER approved in a re-declared Sheffield 1-7? We know they trumpeted in the papers he was, and told Berwick he was in their line up on Thursday and would be covered by r/r on Saturday. But was the new 1-7 ever approved by BSPA? Did Sheffield maybe forget something in their excitement about making, and announcing, the deal? Perhaps a need for a different kind of visa, or something? The BSPA would picked up on what was going on when Berwick (presumably) pointed out on Saturday morning the rule about no facility being available for a rider who has never raced for a club. The BSPA then realised Sheffield's "old" 1-7 was still valid and presumably offered a sop to the Tigers by ruling that r/r could be used for Roynon, who will hopefully be spared the usual 28-day ban in view of the circumstances. At that point the authorities would have immediately told the Sheffield promotion/ownership, along with the referee and Berwick promotion/ownership what was to happen. Around lunchtime on Saturday? Amazingly, the Sheffield ownership/promotion then failed to inform either of their two team managers of this, who then turned up at Berwick expecting to be using a facility for Proctor! How very embarrassing. One feels that a certain Mr Hoggart just might be smiling into his Ovaltine tonight. It was kind of one of the regular posters to point your post out to me; so a big thanks you to Stan Dandycomic or whatever his name is. Roynon copping a ban is pure BS I don't quite understand why people are suggesting that will happen. He was sacked hence he is not required to report for duty Captain Mainwaring. If as you state there is a need for a different kind of visa that will be interesting; I don't know how it applies to speedway but it is relatively easy to get a visa for foreign nationals providing you can prove that a British/European citizen does not have the skills to do the job. I assume it must be different for speedway as Roynon can clearly show he has the skills to perform as a speedway rider; yet he has been sacked and replaced by a foreigner. Better tell UKIP quickly so that their leader with the German wife can do a new advert. I can see it now; Adam Roynon sat on the pavement with his best kevlars on, helmet by his side, begging for money as some foreigner has nicked his job! Gotta be a vote winner in the current climate. Roynon has been treated disgracefully in my view. The problem with the committee is that you can phone 3 different members and get 3 different answers! That's why its a committee! The deal is you don't ask the question to individual members, you ask the question of the committee; then hopefully they come back with one answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
screm Posted May 6, 2014 Report Share Posted May 6, 2014 The problem with the committee is that you can phone 3 different members and get 3 different answers! Isnt it time then that these kinds of decisions should be put into the hands of an independent body. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Byker Biker Posted May 6, 2014 Report Share Posted May 6, 2014 If what I overheard at Brough at the weekend has any substance this is the biggest can of worms ever, I only listened to some of the conversation mind but this could be serious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lioness Posted May 6, 2014 Report Share Posted May 6, 2014 in what way? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted May 6, 2014 Report Share Posted May 6, 2014 Compared to some of Pooles cans of worms over the years, this is a tiny bag of maggots! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markyb Posted May 6, 2014 Report Share Posted May 6, 2014 Confused.com Sheffield own web site shows the result vs. Berwick and team scores with r/r accredited to Ty Proctor ! So where all this Roynon ban,no ban (kelvin) mullarkey coming from ? - now there is a name from the past ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The White Knight Posted May 6, 2014 Report Share Posted May 6, 2014 Confused.com Sheffield own web site shows the result vs. Berwick and team scores with r/r accredited to Ty Proctor ! So where all this Roynon ban,no ban (kelvin) mullarkey coming from ? - now there is a name from the past ! A very hard man was Mullarky. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fromafar Posted May 6, 2014 Report Share Posted May 6, 2014 Confused.com Sheffield own web site shows the result vs. Berwick and team scores with r/r accredited to Ty Proctor ! So where all this Roynon ban,no ban (kelvin) mullarkey coming from ? - now there is a name from the past ! The Berwick programme had R/r no2 for Procter but Berwick protested and the r/r was then changed for Roynan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OILYRAG Posted May 6, 2014 Report Share Posted May 6, 2014 Whats the problem here ? The same riders would have taken thr r/r rides be it for Roynon or Procter and the end result the same . for gods sake stop getting your knickers in a twist. Nowt to see here ... move on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fromafar Posted May 6, 2014 Report Share Posted May 6, 2014 Whats the problem here ? The same riders would have taken thr r/r rides be it for Roynon or Procter and the end result the same . for gods sake stop getting your knickers in a twist. Nowt to see here ... move on. Your wrong there Simon Stead would have had a ride as Procter was 2nd in the Sheffield averages.but for Roynon he wasn't 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Local Boy Posted May 6, 2014 Report Share Posted May 6, 2014 Whats the problem here ? The same riders would have taken thr r/r rides be it for Roynon or Procter and the end result the same . for gods sake stop getting your knickers in a twist. Nowt to see here ... move on. SMOD is suggesting Proctor may not be correctly registered and Roynon was sacked; so how can they have RR for someone who isn't part of their team? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OILYRAG Posted May 6, 2014 Report Share Posted May 6, 2014 Your wrong there Simon Stead would have had a ride as Procter was 2nd in the Sheffield averages.but for Roynon he wasn't Good point ... so Sheffield ended up worse off for the coq up then. SMOD is suggesting Proctor may not be correctly registered and Roynon was sacked; so how can they have RR for someone who isn't part of their team? So what should have happened then ... three rider races ? 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.