colin wood Posted April 22, 2016 Report Share Posted April 22, 2016 Pirates Pirates Pirates the truth is the NSS does exist and will be the best speedway facility in the country your comment about it ain't happening is frankly absurd. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starman2006 Posted April 22, 2016 Report Share Posted April 22, 2016 Pirates Pirates Pirates the truth is the NSS does exist and will be the best speedway facility in the country your comment about it ain't happening is frankly absurd. Yeh, but in what year... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orion Posted April 22, 2016 Report Share Posted April 22, 2016 (edited) I think that we have to accept that they acted in good faith and thought that the meeting would go ahead ,I was there and will be happy to wait for my refund so I am putting my money where my mouth is as it were!! Why should we accept that they acted in good faith ...the bottom line is after the track was handed over they failed to take Due Diligence in testing the track with full practice matches etc before they allowed a 6k crowd in . What they try to do was to fudge up a meeting on a untried and unfit track as they had already had sold all the tickets . Edited April 22, 2016 by orion 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The White Knight Posted April 22, 2016 Report Share Posted April 22, 2016 (edited) Why should we accept that they acted in good faith ...the bottom line is after the track was handed over they failed to take Due Diligence in testing the track with full practice matches etc before they allowed a 6k crowd in . What they try to do was to fudge up a meeting on a untried and unfit track as they had already had sold all the tickets . To the best of my knowledge the Stadium has not yet been handed over. (I could, of course, be wrong). Edited April 22, 2016 by The White Knight Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin wood Posted April 22, 2016 Report Share Posted April 22, 2016 Starman it won't be long now just needs your mate Shaleshifter to finish it with off with his wackerplate! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Science Posted April 22, 2016 Report Share Posted April 22, 2016 To the best of my knowledge the Stadium has not yet been handed over. (I could, of course, be wrong). How could they have staged the opening meeting if the stadium had not been handed over. ? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin wood Posted April 23, 2016 Report Share Posted April 23, 2016 Yes and who passed the track as fit for racing,I'm sure I have read in the speedway star an independent body someone from the SCB maybe will do this.Not just Belle Vue but any future new track.This makes sense and would have maybe stopped the opening night fiasco. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reviresco Posted April 23, 2016 Report Share Posted April 23, 2016 (edited) Yes and who passed the track as fit for racing,I'm sure I have read in the speedway star an independent body someone from the SCB maybe will do this.Not just Belle Vue but any future new track.This makes sense and would have maybe stopped the opening night fiasco. And wasn't it explained also, that the SCB inspection and granting of a licence does not include, rather amazingly, the track itself - apart from dimensions, but covers the safety fence, neutral zone, etc.? As per the relevant Article in the Regulations: 9.1 CIRCUIT LICENCE 9.1.1 A valid Circuit Licence is required for all Tracks staging speedway under these Regulations. 9.1.2 A Track Homologation Certificate, valid for 3 Seasons will detail the construction, size, type of fence, neutral zones, lighting, infield zones and details of all dispensations given. Edited April 23, 2016 by macca56 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The White Knight Posted April 23, 2016 Report Share Posted April 23, 2016 How could they have staged the opening meeting if the stadium had not been handed over. ? I do not believe that the Stadium/Track has been officially handed over to the Promoters yet. I thought it could not be handed over until everything (including the Track) was signed off by the Council and the Promoters. If anyone knows more about this I would appreciate the true facts on this matter. As I said in my previous Post - I could be wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted April 23, 2016 Report Share Posted April 23, 2016 Of course the SCB can't license a track as being fit to race on. They'd have to issue licenses every day as if it rains it's not fit. Of course they can only check dimensions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OveFundinFan Posted April 23, 2016 Report Share Posted April 23, 2016 I will stand corrected (not going to pile through all the posts) but I think it passed a SCB inspection as per SCB stated above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orion Posted April 23, 2016 Report Share Posted April 23, 2016 Of course the SCB can't license a track as being fit to race on. They'd have to issue licenses every day as if it rains it's not fit. Of course they can only check dimensions. Spot on ...it was down to Belle Vue to test the track and make sure it was fit for racing on the sat night ...sadly the test was two riders going round a couple of days before hand ...base on this they allowed 6000 fans in on a track that not fit for a race meeting . 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Humphrey Appleby Posted April 24, 2016 Report Share Posted April 24, 2016 Yes and who passed the track as fit for racing,I'm sure I have read in the speedway star an independent body someone from the SCB maybe will do this. The bottom line is that the onus always has to be on the host track to produce a track fit for racing. The SCB may ultimately have to sign off on certain aspects, but they don't really have anyone experienced in preparing or riding a track, and they're not the ones that will ultimately carry the can for an unfit track. If the SCB signed off on a track that's subsequently required substantial remedial work, then that just sums it all up... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orion Posted April 24, 2016 Report Share Posted April 24, 2016 (edited) The SCB always decide if a track is fit or unfit, derrr... ....maybe you should contact Gordon and Morton and tell them to appeal the fine they got for the Belle Vue v Poole call off ...after all according to you they never decided that the track was unfit . Edited April 24, 2016 by orion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reviresco Posted April 24, 2016 Report Share Posted April 24, 2016 (edited) The bottom line is that the onus always has to be on the host track to produce a track fit for racing. The SCB may ultimately have to sign off on certain aspects, but they don't really have anyone experienced in preparing or riding a track, and they're not the ones that will ultimately carry the can for an unfit track. If the SCB signed off on a track that's subsequently required substantial remedial work, then that just sums it all up... Whilst agreeing that the SCB do not licence a track as fit to race on - as I pointed out in my previous post, the SCB do employ both Colin Meredith and Alan Bridgett as Track Inspectors both of whom, I believe, have extensive knowledge of track preparation matters. And the aforementioned Mr Meredith is, of course, the track curator at the NSS... Edited April 24, 2016 by macca56 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orion Posted April 24, 2016 Report Share Posted April 24, 2016 (edited) If you had a horse you would probably put it behind your cart wouldn't you? If the promoter thinks the track is fit and the SCB decide it isn't then it isn't. If, as happened on the 19/3, the promoter thinks the track is fit and the SCB think the track is fit then it is. Riders are not allowed to even practice on a track unless it has been declared fit by the SCB. i expect you put the clocks backwards when they are due to go forward ...if a promoter chooses call a match off due to the track being poor or a bad weather forcast then they will ...hence why Belle Vue got fined for doing so under false reasons v Poole . Gordon choose not to test the track well enough he also choose to let 6000 in when most all was not well ...nearly all the blame is on him . Edited April 24, 2016 by orion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedibee Posted April 24, 2016 Report Share Posted April 24, 2016 So, as a result of the investigation the SCB decided the track was fit for the poole meeting (get it?) and fined Belle Vue for saying it wasn't. Not sure what that has to do with the SCB passing the track fit on the opening night though? Typical of the SCB /BSPA I suppose handing out fines is what the association is all about , personally I think they should be handing out help and encouragement Instead . 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin wood Posted April 24, 2016 Report Share Posted April 24, 2016 So regarding the opening meeting the promoters thought the track was OK,the SCB referee thought it was OK or why let riders go out on practise laps.I was there and was amazed they called it off.The track might have been a bit soft in parts but no way was it any worse than some of the GPs on artificial tracks.It was the riders decision not to race,using the rideable not racable excuse.This is fine if they are consistent but I don't remember the riders doing this when Poole rode at Belle Vue and insisted on riding in far worse conditions than the opening night.I'm confused can the riders refuse to race even if the referee deems the track fit? I never saw the referee leave his box and inspect the track on the opening meeting and nobody seemed to have any problems on their practice laps.I honestly don't know the answer as to who has the power to call a meeting off,riders or referee? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OveFundinFan Posted April 24, 2016 Report Share Posted April 24, 2016 (edited) I still hold the view it was a conspiracy against either BV or "the establishment" by some of the riders. They did it in Warsaw last year and I reckon they done it again. I not heard one fan say the track looked unfit after the 20 laps test ride by the 16 riders, the only reports I have heard is that they were suprised the meeting was called off. If the riders are setting a standard they got to be consistant, and if they are consistant then some tracks are going to be in trouble and probably often. Edited April 24, 2016 by Joe Hatton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin wood Posted April 24, 2016 Report Share Posted April 24, 2016 Joe what would happen if the riders couldn't all agree if the track is fit or not? On the opening night we were all stood about freezing for over an hour while they made their minds up. 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.