Local Boy Posted May 6, 2014 Report Share Posted May 6, 2014 So what should have happened then ... three rider races ? No idea; work it out for yourself; but if SMOD is right it seems a very odd situation to get yourselves in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OILYRAG Posted May 6, 2014 Report Share Posted May 6, 2014 No idea; work it out for yourself; but if SMOD is right it seems a very odd situation to get yourselves in. Well either three rider races or a National league guest ??? He was supposed to have been riding for Sheffield in the rain off last Thursday so I would have thought he was registered alright. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fromafar Posted May 6, 2014 Report Share Posted May 6, 2014 Good point ... so Sheffield ended up worse off for the coq up then. So what should have happened then ... three rider races ? The fuss is that they should have had to use an NL rider in place of Roynon if the rules are to be adhered too. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OILYRAG Posted May 6, 2014 Report Share Posted May 6, 2014 The fuss is that they should have had to use an NL rider in place of Roynon if the rules are to be adhered too. They did in a couple of the r/r races 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Najjer 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. Try and paper over it as much as you like, but Sheffield broke the rules here. They should have had a NL guest in their side and not R/R for either Roynon or Proctor. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OILYRAG Posted May 6, 2014 Report Share Posted May 6, 2014 Try and paper over it as much as you like, but Sheffield broke the rules here. They should have had a NL guest in their side and not R/R for either Roynon or Proctor. So whats the punishment gonna be then ? For gods sake you easily won and r/r got 3 points , unless you realy hate Sheffield and want them to suffer for it why go on about it ? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Najjer Posted May 6, 2014 Report Share Posted May 6, 2014 So whats the punishment gonna be then ? For gods sake you easily won and r/r got 3 points , unless you realy hate Sheffield and want them to suffer for it why go on about it ? I'm not a Berwick fan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spin king Posted May 6, 2014 Report Share Posted May 6, 2014 Try and paper over it as much as you like, but Sheffield broke the rules here. They should have had a NL guest in their side and not R/R for either Roynon or Proctor. That needs to be re phrased to. If Sheffield did break the rules as you point out it seems that way, then BSPA knowingly allowed them to do so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hel'n'Back Posted May 6, 2014 Report Share Posted May 6, 2014 (edited) Like I've said before, just take the 3 points away that R/R scored ... solution? Edited May 6, 2014 by Hel'n'Back Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The White Knight Posted May 7, 2014 Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 That needs to be re phrased to. If Sheffield did break the rules as you point out it seems that way, then BSPA knowingly allowed them to do so. ........................ and surely that is the crucial point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
screm Posted May 7, 2014 Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 Try and paper over it as much as you like, but Sheffield broke the rules here. They should have had a NL guest in their side and not R/R for either Roynon or Proctor. Everyone knows that, apart from the MC and Sheffield Speedway it seems. So whats the punishment gonna be then ? For gods sake you easily won and r/r got 3 points , unless you realy hate Sheffield and want them to suffer for it why go on about it ? Sheffield should have the points that R/R scored last Saturday night taken away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lioness Posted May 7, 2014 Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 Like I've said before, just take the 3 points away that R/R scored ... solution? Ah but just to muddy the waters further, the BSPA have previous for not just taking the points away but awarding them to the other side making a difference of 6 points! lol Its a well worn phrase but it does just highlight again why its so hard to get the media and sports channels to take speedway seriously 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigcatdiary Posted May 7, 2014 Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 Suppose situations like this can arise when a sport strangles itself by an ever increasing , and confusing , set of rules and regulations Agreed, and the BSPA can only be taken to task for the complete shambles we get like this on a regular basis. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevePark Posted May 7, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 http://www.sheffieldspeedway.co/news.php?extend.1549 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthur cross Posted May 7, 2014 Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 (edited) 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. http://www.sheffieldspeedway.co/news.php?extend.1549 It wasn't just at Sunday's Newcastle-Workington meeting that another visa "can of worms" was a hot topic ... either earlier on this thread or in the Berwick-Sheffield thread, there was a similar note about it being a hot topic at Friday's Edinburgh-Scunthorpe meeting. Today's confirmation that it's Proctor's visa status at the root of this saga doesn't surprise me and it also clears up why there's been no mention whatsoever by either the BSPA or among the plenty of recent tweets by Adam Roynon that he was under any threat of a "withholding services" ban despite R/R being used in his name on Saturday at Berwick. Strictly speaking, the BSPA rulebook forces a team to use their previous 1-to-7 if their newly submitted 1-to-7 is rejected (however awkward that is for either the frustrated-team or the dumped-rider) ... however, that's on the assumption that it's the BSPA themselves justifying the rejection rather than an outside force's rejection overriding the BSPA's approval !! PS ... Thanks to both "salty" & "jenga" for acknowledging in various ways my much lengthier post that was on here for about 20-minutes but which was in-depth speculation about a work-permit problem ... the only snag was that all my careful (and as it's turned out, fairly accurate) speculation was being written at exactly the same time as Sheffield were confirming the actual situation !! Edited May 7, 2014 by arthur cross 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jenga Posted May 7, 2014 Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 i am going to have to read that post a least 8 times before it sinks in, but neverless a good post. prob a case of new promotions not doing their homework correctly and the bspa not understanding their own rules... maybe,, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben91 Posted May 7, 2014 Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 (1) I don't think that anyone is suggesting that Adam should received a ban for withholding his services at least I will say I don't think anyone has said he should on here. (2) Under the rules as I understand it, you and many others the Rider Replacement which was given for Sheffield to use for Ty Proctor was incorrect, but Sheffield were given written permission from the BSPA on the Friday After a protest by the Berwick Promotion, perfectly understandable the Rider Replacement was changed to Adam Roynon, by the BSPA. Again under the rules as I, you and others understand is incorrect, as Adam was released by the club earlier in the week, so he could not withholding his services. The question remains, why did the BSPA allow Sheffield the rider replacement for firstly Ty Proctor and then Adam Roynon. If the BSPA as a governing body cannot give the right information to clubs, as to what is right or wrong then who can. So unless there is another twist in the tale I fail to see where this all Sheffield speedways doing, as me and you and others know Sheffield should have been granted the facility to use a National League rider, which is what the BSPA should have done the minute the fixture on Thursday at Sheffield which I believe they did so mid morning. There is no doubt that Sheffield Promotion made a big mistake, but you also have to question the role of The BSPA in saga. I agree with what your saying, in my book Sheffield haven't abided by the rules but then in their defence the rules appear as clear as mud! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smod Posted May 7, 2014 Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 I agree with what your saying, in my book Sheffield haven't abided by the rules but then in their defence the rules appear as clear as mud! The rules are pretty clear, Sheffield's problem was jumping the gun and putting it in the papers before they got approval of the changes. Which perhaps alerted the authorities that a UK citizen was being replaced at his workplace by a "foreigner" (sorry, Ty). I see they've put more in the papers today, whether this will help or hinder the undecided case remains to be seen. No offence to the new promotion, but Hoggy might just have handled the matter a little more carefully. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triple.H. Posted May 7, 2014 Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 Surely if theres a visa issue it should be a case of you cant let a foreigner put a British citizen/subject out of a job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The White Knight Posted May 7, 2014 Report Share Posted May 7, 2014 Surely if theres a visa issue it should be a case of you cant let a foreigner put a British citizen/subject out of a job. That would be OK by me. I like Proctor - but - British Riders should always come first in my book. I hope that something is sorted out for Adam soon - he is too good a British Rider to be out of the Sport. 4 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.