Should The "heat 10" Rule Be Scrapped?

[arnieg]

This illustrates the typical cycle of a speedway rule

 

1. There is an injustice.

 

Let me take you back to 1989. The visitors were 43-29 up with four heats to go before the match was abandoned due to lack of ambulance cover. The hosts concede (due to injuries they would only have had one rider in heat 13's rerun). However according to the rule book the match can't be awarded. Much sympathy for the visitors and widespread agreement among fans that it should have been awarded.

 

2. Fans call for a new rule allowing result to be declared after a certain number of heats after this and other examples.

 

3. New rule introduced (in this case not for another decade) - result can be declared after 12 heats (now 10)

 

4. Everyone says how sensible.

 

5. New rule produces arguments about whether the last 3/5 heats should be run in poor conditions and matches being called off once a result has been achieved even where there is no curfew (particularly second part of double headers)

 

6. Calls for scrapping of rule

 

7. Rule scrapped

 

8. More examples like point 1 and abandoned fixtures being rearranged on cold Thursdays with two guest stuffed teams lead to demands for its reintroduction.

 

9. repeat ad nauseum

 

Alternatively at point 7 the rule is rewritten to incorporate all sorts of caveats, and that explains why the rule book gets longer and longer.

[DC2]

It's clear that some Heat 10 "results" have been influenced by the requirements of one or other team rather than the safety of the riders or value for money for the paying public so at the very least a Heat 10 result should carry one less point than a full result. That way we might see genuine abandonments & re-staging.

[Mike.Butler]

another nail in the coffin...instead of 20+ heats for one's money it's now apparently acceptable for 10 heats to be deemed a nights entertainment. £1.50 a heat!... talk about taking the p**s...I can see no future with the current model and total lack of governance...my heart bleeds for our sport

[scoobydoo]

For your admission money you get approx one minute of entertainment per heat so a completed meeting gives you 15 minutes of actual entertainment and people wonder why crowds are falling then you get sky presenters who promote the fact that it's a result after 10 heats with no thought for the paying public it's one of the reasons I don't attend meetings anymore it's just not worth the money

[oldace]

This illustrates the typical cycle of a speedway rule

 

1. There is an injustice.

 

Let me take you back to 1989. The visitors were 43-29 up with four heats to go before the match was abandoned due to lack of ambulance cover. The hosts concede (due to injuries they would only have had one rider in heat 13's rerun). However according to the rule book the match can't be awarded. Much sympathy for the visitors and widespread agreement among fans that it should have been awarded.

 

2. Fans call for a new rule allowing result to be declared after a certain number of heats after this and other examples.

 

3. New rule introduced (in this case not for another decade) - result can be declared after 12 heats (now 10)

 

4. Everyone says how sensible.

 

5. New rule produces arguments about whether the last 3/5 heats should be run in poor conditions and matches being called off once a result has been achieved even where there is no curfew (particularly second part of double headers)

 

6. Calls for scrapping of rule

 

7. Rule scrapped

 

8. More examples like point 1 and abandoned fixtures being rearranged on cold Thursdays with two guest stuffed teams lead to demands for its reintroduction.

 

9. repeat ad nauseum

 

Alternatively at point 7 the rule is rewritten to incorporate all sorts of caveats, and that explains why the rule book gets longer and longer.

 

 

I don't think anyone doubts the wisdom of the heat 10 rule if used properly. It is when matches are dragged on purely for that purpose. If it pours down after heat 10 and a match has to be abandoned then fair enough but nowadays even if it is heat 5 or 6 when the track becomes bad a match is limped through to heat 10 purely for that reason. Often the track can be in better shape at heat 10 than it was for heat 6 but it is still off. A track can not be fit to ride until we reach heat ten the immediately unfit with no further adverse weather conditions.

 

That is unless you count the "moisture coming out of the track" nonsense that Tony Steele was spouting at Belle Vue last year

[mickthemuppet]

For your admission money you get approx one minute of entertainment per heat so a completed meeting gives you 15 minutes of actual entertainment and people wonder why crowds are falling then you get sky presenters who promote the fact that it's a result after 10 heats with no thought for the paying see it's one of the reasons I don't attend meetings anymore it's just not worth the money

The old rubbish statement of 15 minutes of entertainment again. So go horse racing for the afternoon and see 8 minutes. in 3 hours. NO lets go watch a tennis match which is 12 minutes play in an hour. Or we could go to the dogs for a whole evening and see 12 races last 45 seconds each, which makes 8 minutes in three hours. Then again we could go to the Golf Open and follow Rory McIlroy round and hit the ball in play for perhaps 14 minutes in 4 hours. .

Surely it is time to put this stupid statement to bed now!!!

[SCB]

This illustrates the typical cycle of a speedway rule

 

1. There is an injustice.

 

Let me take you back to 1989. The visitors were 43-29 up with four heats to go before the match was abandoned due to lack of ambulance cover. The hosts concede (due to injuries they would only have had one rider in heat 13's rerun). However according to the rule book the match can't be awarded. Much sympathy for the visitors and widespread agreement among fans that it should have been awarded.

 

2. Fans call for a new rule allowing result to be declared after a certain number of heats after this and other examples.

 

3. New rule introduced (in this case not for another decade) - result can be declared after 12 heats (now 10)

 

4. Everyone says how sensible.

 

5. New rule produces arguments about whether the last 3/5 heats should be run in poor conditions and matches being called off once a result has been achieved even where there is no curfew (particularly second part of double headers)

 

6. Calls for scrapping of rule

 

7. Rule scrapped

 

8. More examples like point 1 and abandoned fixtures being rearranged on cold Thursdays with two guest stuffed teams lead to demands for its reintroduction.

 

9. repeat ad nauseum

 

Alternatively at point 7 the rule is rewritten to incorporate all sorts of caveats, and that explains why the rule book gets longer and longer.

The rule is fine.It's the abuse of the rule thats not.

[Grachan]

another nail in the coffin...instead of 20+ heats for one's money it's now apparently acceptable for 10 heats to be deemed a nights entertainment. £1.50 a heat!... talk about taking the p**s...I can see no future with the current model and total lack of governance...my heart bleeds for our sport

Actually, in the good old days, it was 6 heats and we then had matches being forced through to 6 and then abandoned in order to avoid giving a refund.

[Woz01]

As posted on the Lakeside v Poole thread:

 

The Speedway Control Bureau rule states:

 

15.11 After Heat 10 in an official Team fixture, only the Team that is losing may request a track

inspection, or seek abandonment of the Meeting.

 

So it was the Belle Vue call last season and should have been Swindon's decision 2 weeks ago. It should also have been up to Poole last night!!

 

Maybe they all need to recheck the rules - referees, riders, managers, promoters and Sky!!!

But wasn't Belle Vue barred from making that kind of decision after the burst pipe fiasco?

[bigcatdiary]

Middlo clearly doesn't know the rules then.

None of them know the rules well enough including some referees.

[Trees]

Actually, in the good old days, it was 6 heats and we then had matches being forced through to 6 and then abandoned in order to avoid giving a refund.

Quite!

[SteveLyric2]

But wasn't Belle Vue barred from making that kind of decision after the burst pipe fiasco?

which is why they now have a Meeting 'Co-ordinator' eg Mick Bates last night. Not that it seemed to make much difference.

 

 

Middlo clearly doesn't know the rules then.

Didn't I say 'managers'!!

[abbo]

I think I should mention the happenings at Coventry in relation to the NL League team Storm. A few weeks ago at Brandon we had a double header, at 10.45pm the last race of the second meeting was called off due to a Curfew. I didn't know that such a thing existed at Coventry. Last Friday another Storm meeting was called off at 10.10pm with five races left to run. I spoke with Mick Horton and he explained that it was his decision to end the meeting because of the Curfew. I reminded him that the previous meeting was called off at 10.45pm. He explained that he had been trouble about the timing of the late call off. I had paid £30 for my adult son and myself and that I felt we had been short changed. There were too many delays between heats, long interval all totally not necessary, a burst air fence that seemed to take a lot longer than usual. Sundays meeting against Leicester took 2 hours 10 minutes to complete. Next Friday week we have a double header against Eastbourne, if there are similar delays (some I accept in Speedway you can't plan for) then we are talking about 4.20 hours. Start time is planned for 7pm how can these meetings finish before 10pm, almost impossible I would suggest. I realise that Promoters have difficulty in arranging these meetings before cut off date. Also I note we have two matches listed against Wolves at home and Belle Vue away. The Wolves match is not listed as TBA in their fixture list, does it mean that these fixtures are to be forfeited as they do not affect Play off qualification?. My main concern is the Eastbourne situation.

[waiheke1]

Actually, in the good old days, it was 6 heats and we then had matches being forced through to 6 and then abandoned in order to avoid giving a refund.

Yep. And even if it was called off before then, it was no refunds, just admittance to one of the next two meetings (per belle vue programme 1987).

[A ORLOV]

I think I should mention the happenings at Coventry in relation to the NL League team Storm. A few weeks ago at Brandon we had a double header, at 10.45pm the last race of the second meeting was called off due to a Curfew. I didn't know that such a thing existed at Coventry. Last Friday another Storm meeting was called off at 10.10pm with five races left to run. I spoke with Mick Horton and he explained that it was his decision to end the meeting because of the Curfew. I reminded him that the previous meeting was called off at 10.45pm. He explained that he had been trouble about the timing of the late call off. I had paid £30 for my adult son and myself and that I felt we had been short changed. There were too many delays between heats, long interval all totally not necessary, a burst air fence that seemed to take a lot longer than usual. Sundays meeting against Leicester took 2 hours 10 minutes to complete. Next Friday week we have a double header against Eastbourne, if there are similar delays (some I accept in Speedway you can't plan for) then we are talking about 4.20 hours. Start time is planned for 7pm how can these meetings finish before 10pm, almost impossible I would suggest. I realise that Promoters have difficulty in arranging these meetings before cut off date. Also I note we have two matches listed against Wolves at home and Belle Vue away. The Wolves match is not listed as TBA in their fixture list, does it mean that these fixtures are to be forfeited as they do not affect Play off qualification?. My main concern is the Eastbourne situation.

At Swindon recently we had a delayed start due to rain and more rain was due later in the evening. The ref got the meeting going and on a few occasions the riders came out before the last of the riders from the preceding heat had left the track. Also on a restart due to an unsatisfactory start the riders were not allowed back into the pits. For a restart due to unsatisfactory start the two mins should be put on a couple of seconds after the red light. Meetings can be run quickly, even allowing time for rr and accidents if all the other pi##ing about and delays between races are got rid of. I was speaking to one ref and they recon that the two min clock on the centre green can also delay meetings as riders will muck about at the start right up to the limit of the time allowed. The start marshall should have the power to stop all the gardening and delays at the start if all four riders are at the start etc.

Edited September 3, 2014 by A ORLOV

[E I Addio]

But wasn't Belle Vue barred from making that kind of decision after the burst pipe fiasco?

 

 

No, in that case the meeting hadn't started. The meeting comes under the referees control two hours before the start and that's where the rule kicks in. Up until that time it seems the promoter can do more or less what he likes,. I think Belle Vue's problem was that they were telling lies about the burst pipe. If a promoter postpones a meeting because he thinks it might rain that seems to be OK. Len Silver seems to do that all the time. I think BV were only banned from making the decision for a limited period of time like to the end of the season or something.

Edited September 3, 2014 by E I Addio

[Pirate Nick]

In Poland they call it off earlier and award the rest of the heats as 3 alls.

The indifferent weather we get these days and the ridiculous state we get into year after year trying to fit meeting after meeting in a few weeks means that getting a result has to be the aim.

If we didn't allow a meeting to be called off to get a result there would be little chance of fulfilling its fixture list which to me is worse and farcical.

 

It seems that in Sweden and Poland they accept that call offs are part and parcel of the sport, here we expect only good weather and perfect 15 heats.

Time to wake up.

It would be perfect if all meetings got to heat 15 regardless.

Whatever the decision the fans would just have something to moan about!

 

If this meeting had been held in Poland or Sweden there would probably have been a 1 1/2 hr ish break during which the track would have been completely relaid. Just saying.

[stevebrum]

 

If this meeting had been held in Poland or Sweden there would probably have been a 1 1/2 hr ish break during which the track would have been completely relaid. Just saying.

 

Precisely.

They are serious in getting meetings ON and have the equipment and skills to do so.

The minute one raindrop falls here there is already calls of `its too wet for the riders`.

We just don't have the skill or more importantly the equipment to save meetings. Or the interest it seems.

[Pirate Nick]

 

Precisely.

They are serious in getting meetings ON and have the equipment and skills to do so.

The minute one raindrop falls here there is already calls of `its too wet for the riders`.

We just don't have the skill or more importantly the equipment to save meetings. Or the interest it seems.

The interest most of the time seems to be not having to give refunds and saving 5 hts worth of points money.

[Trees]

Surely it's more being able to pay all the expenses of the meeting to heat 10 and saving the headache of having to schedule the meeting into the fixture list again and their rider's already hyper busy lives?