Warsaw Gp Saturday 18th April

[TonyMac]

From a retro perspective, I'd just like to say what a privilege it was to know and interview the riders of the pre-95 era, when men were men and, by and large, they got on with it no matter how bad track conditions were.

 

Coming as the first GP of 2015 did In the week of the funeral of Nigel Boocock, one of the most courageous and injury-plagued riders ever to grace the world stage, the actions of the GP prima donnas in Warsaw was contemptible. Booey must have been turning in his grave at the complete disregard the 'Warsaw 18' showed for the supporters who had invested money and time travelling to Poland.

 

This was Rider Power at its most destructive worst. Nowadays, if they insist they will not ride, then there is nothing anyone - the referee, BSI, PZM, Ole Olsen et al - can possibly do about it.

 

Whoever had the idea of sending out the riders to further insult the intelligence of the 55,000 crowd with a 'lap of dishonour' after the meeting was curtailed should receive the 'P***-Take Of The Year' Award.

 

The damage inflicted on the sport and the GP series as a whole by their refusal to complete the meeting beyond the 12th heat, in conditions no worse than many other big meetings we have witnessed down the years, is incalculable.

 

One of the worst aspects was what seemed a complete lack of communication with the viewing public and the thousands watching at home on TV. I always Sky+ the GPs, because the delays between races are invariably interminable, but the lack of information coming from the commentators working for British Eurosport throughout the ridiculous delay was unprecedented in televised sporting history. I don't doubt that the comms themselves didn't know any more than we did about what was happening behind the scenes, where the riders debunked to the dressing room to agree on their sickening rebellion pact - but they should have done.

 

In this digital communications age, was it really beyond the wit of a Eurosport producer or member of staff in London to dial or text from a mobile phone and connect with a contact in the pits at Warsaw (Steve Brandon?) to try and establish what was going on, so that the likes of Nigel Pearson/Kelvin Tatum and Andy Jaye/Scott Nicholls could, in turn, relay updates to their viewers? Poor Scott, he deserved a 'Man of the Meeting' award for the way he had to fend off one rhetoric question after another from Andy Jaye, whose lack of speedway knowledge was put to the test. The 'padding' was cringeworthy, but at the same time you had to feel sorry for them. Eurosport need to look very closely at how it handles presentation of GPs in future and, if need be, it should insist that the GP organisers BSI always provide a clear line of communication at all times. Viewers of live TV events simply cannot be left in the dark for 30-40 minutes, or whatever it was before the plug was finally pulled.

 

The one saving grace (if there can possibly be one given the dire circumstances) is that the sad, lamentable events of Saturday are confined to the pages of Speedway Star, one column in MCN and social media. The British press probably won't have even heard about it, let alone report on the farce that unfolded. On wretched occasions such as this, we have to be thankful that the national media ignore our sport, otherwise you dread to think what they would have made of it.

 

If you think I'm being unkind to the riders who compete (or don't, as the case may be) today, check out video footage of numerous meetings from the 70s, notably the 1975 and 1977 World Finals, plus the 1984 British Final, the 1978 BLRC and the 1979 UK WTC round at Reading, which was run in horrendously wet conditions.

 

Safety standards for riders barely existed back in the day but they still got on with it. There were no dirt deflectors, no air fences to cushion the fall. Just totally committed riders who cared a lot more about the sport that gave them their living - the bigger picture - rather than themselves.

[oldace]

From a retro perspective, I'd just like to say what a privilege it was to know and interview the riders of the pre-95 era, when men were men and, by and large, they got on with it no matter how bad track conditions were.

 

Coming as the first GP of 2015 did In the week of the funeral of Nigel Boocock, one of the most courageous and injury-plagued riders ever to grace the world stage, the actions of the GP prima donnas in Warsaw was contemptible. Booey must have been turning in his grave at the complete disregard the 'Warsaw 18' showed for the supporters who had invested money and time travelling to Poland.

 

This was Rider Power at its most destructive worst. Nowadays, if they insist they will not ride, then there is nothing anyone - the referee, BSI, PZM, Ole Olsen et al - can possibly do about it.

 

Whoever had the idea of sending out the riders to further insult the intelligence of the 55,000 crowd with a 'lap of dishonour' after the meeting was curtailed should receive the 'P***-Take Of The Year' Award.

 

The damage inflicted on the sport and the GP series as a whole by their refusal to complete the meeting beyond the 12th heat, in conditions no worse than many other big meetings we have witnessed down the years, is incalculable.

 

One of the worst aspects was what seemed a complete lack of communication with the viewing public and the thousands watching at home on TV. I always Sky+ the GPs, because the delays between races are invariably interminable, but the lack of information coming from the commentators working for British Eurosport throughout the ridiculous delay was unprecedented in televised sporting history. I don't doubt that the comms themselves didn't know any more than we did about what was happening behind the scenes, where the riders debunked to the dressing room to agree on their sickening rebellion pact - but they should have done.

 

In this digital communications age, was it really beyond the wit of a Eurosport producer or member of staff in London to dial or text from a mobile phone and connect with a contact in the pits at Warsaw (Steve Brandon?) to try and establish what was going on, so that the likes of Nigel Pearson/Kelvin Tatum and Andy Jaye/Scott Nicholls could, in turn, relay updates to their viewers? Poor Scott, he deserved a 'Man of the Meeting' award for the way he had to fend off one rhetoric question after another from Andy Jaye, whose lack of speedway knowledge was put to the test. The 'padding' was cringeworthy, but at the same time you had to feel sorry for them. Eurosport need to look very closely at how it handles presentation of GPs in future and, if need be, it should insist that the GP organisers BSI always provide a clear line of communication at all times. Viewers of live TV events simply cannot be left in the dark for 30-40 minutes, or whatever it was before the plug was finally pulled.

 

The one saving grace (if there can possibly be one given the dire circumstances) is that the sad, lamentable events of Saturday are confined to the pages of Speedway Star, one column in MCN and social media. The British press probably won't have even heard about it, let alone report on the farce that unfolded. On wretched occasions such as this, we have to be thankful that the national media ignore our sport, otherwise you dread to think what they would have made of it.

 

If you think I'm being unkind to the riders who compete (or don't, as the case may be) today, check out video footage of numerous meetings from the 70s, notably the 1975 and 1977 World Finals, plus the 1984 British Final, the 1978 BLRC and the 1979 UK WTC round at Reading, which was run in horrendously wet conditions.

 

Safety standards for riders barely existed back in the day but they still got on with it. There were no dirt deflectors, no air fences to cushion the fall. Just totally committed riders who cared a lot more about the sport that gave them their living - the bigger picture - rather than themselves.

 

 

Brilliant summing up, agree completely

 

To be honest Tony, apart from a few morons spouting the "riders know best" they risk their lives for our entertainment" cobblers then more and more now seem accepting that the track was perfectly adequate and the riders were a disgrace.

 

Hopefully in the fullness of time they will get duly punished for what happened on Saturday

 

That though shouldn't exonerate others for their part. The FIM jury for allowing this to get as far as it did are culpable along with the race director. The failure to provide another starting gate, although a green light was an adequate solution it could have been avoided was a major cock up

Edited April 23, 2015 by Oldace

[timetoturnleftagain]

 

Wonder who the 'blue chip crisis management expert' commenting was?

 

Chances are it is Mike Bennett who runs a very successful company in this line of work.

[spook]

 

 

Brilliant summing up, agree completely

 

To be honest Tony, apart from a few morons spouting the "riders know best" they risk their lives for our entertainment" cobblers then more and more now seem accepting that the track was perfectly adequate and the riders were a disgrace.

 

Hopefully in the fullness of time they will get duly punished for what happened on Saturday

 

That though shouldn't exonerate others for their part. The FIM jury for allowing this to get as far as it did are culpable along with the race director. The failure to provide another starting gate, although a green light was an adequate solution it could have been avoided was a major cock up

 

I do have an issue in people saying 'that the track was perfectly adequate' or 'perfectly rideable' ....... watch ht10 please and tell me it was 'perfectly' anything

.............. The riders should have been going back out there and had no grounds to down tools for the night.... but they did have a case for grumble....and there was a case that the track needed attention

 

 

[iris123]

 

Whoever had the idea of sending out the riders to further insult the intelligence of the 55,000 crowd with a 'lap of dishonour' after the meeting was curtailed should receive the 'P***-Take Of The Year' Award.

 

While I agree with the sentiments in the rest of your post,i just wonder if the parade was planned before to honour Gollobs career?Once the meeting was called off the organisers still wanted to honour Gollob.It was the only and last chance,so they went ahead with the parade and presentation as planned at the end of the meeting.I agree it didn't feel right,but I guess the alternative was to give Gollob anther wildcard for the next Polish GP and that might not have been possible?

 

In the end it wasn't really a fitting end to his GP career though

[Grand Central]

Re tmc posting.

 

Excellent in every respect.

 

Just makes me miss the Speedway Mail even more.

Telling it as it is.

[spook]

From a retro perspective, I'd just like to say what a privilege it was to know and interview the riders of the pre-95 era, when men were men and, by and large, they got on with it no matter how bad track conditions were.

 

Coming as the first GP of 2015 did In the week of the funeral of Nigel Boocock, one of the most courageous and injury-plagued riders ever to grace the world stage, the actions of the GP prima donnas in Warsaw was contemptible. Booey must have been turning in his grave at the complete disregard the 'Warsaw 18' showed for the supporters who had invested money and time travelling to Poland.

 

This was Rider Power at its most destructive worst. Nowadays, if they insist they will not ride, then there is nothing anyone - the referee, BSI, PZM, Ole Olsen et al - can possibly do about it.

 

Whoever had the idea of sending out the riders to further insult the intelligence of the 55,000 crowd with a 'lap of dishonour' after the meeting was curtailed should receive the 'P***-Take Of The Year' Award.

 

The damage inflicted on the sport and the GP series as a whole by their refusal to complete the meeting beyond the 12th heat, in conditions no worse than many other big meetings we have witnessed down the years, is incalculable.

 

One of the worst aspects was what seemed a complete lack of communication with the viewing public and the thousands watching at home on TV. I always Sky+ the GPs, because the delays between races are invariably interminable, but the lack of information coming from the commentators working for British Eurosport throughout the ridiculous delay was unprecedented in televised sporting history. I don't doubt that the comms themselves didn't know any more than we did about what was happening behind the scenes, where the riders debunked to the dressing room to agree on their sickening rebellion pact - but they should have done.

 

In this digital communications age, was it really beyond the wit of a Eurosport producer or member of staff in London to dial or text from a mobile phone and connect with a contact in the pits at Warsaw (Steve Brandon?) to try and establish what was going on, so that the likes of Nigel Pearson/Kelvin Tatum and Andy Jaye/Scott Nicholls could, in turn, relay updates to their viewers? Poor Scott, he deserved a 'Man of the Meeting' award for the way he had to fend off one rhetoric question after another from Andy Jaye, whose lack of speedway knowledge was put to the test. The 'padding' was cringeworthy, but at the same time you had to feel sorry for them. Eurosport need to look very closely at how it handles presentation of GPs in future and, if need be, it should insist that the GP organisers BSI always provide a clear line of communication at all times. Viewers of live TV events simply cannot be left in the dark for 30-40 minutes, or whatever it was before the plug was finally pulled.

 

The one saving grace (if there can possibly be one given the dire circumstances) is that the sad, lamentable events of Saturday are confined to the pages of Speedway Star, one column in MCN and social media. The British press probably won't have even heard about it, let alone report on the farce that unfolded. On wretched occasions such as this, we have to be thankful that the national media ignore our sport, otherwise you dread to think what they would have made of it.

 

If you think I'm being unkind to the riders who compete (or don't, as the case may be) today, check out video footage of numerous meetings from the 70s, notably the 1975 and 1977 World Finals, plus the 1984 British Final, the 1978 BLRC and the 1979 UK WTC round at Reading, which was run in horrendously wet conditions.

 

Safety standards for riders barely existed back in the day but they still got on with it. There were no dirt deflectors, no air fences to cushion the fall. Just totally committed riders who cared a lot more about the sport that gave them their living - the bigger picture - rather than themselves.

good post TMC and hopefully looking forward this will have given everyone a jolt, and a reminder of what their roles are............ on the night everyone messed up and the riders took it upon themselves to carry out the final calamity

 

Steve Brandon was talking to Nigel & Kelvin in the hour after heat 12 ..... but had nothing to report on the riders' meeting.... nothing was coming out

 

The treatment of the media.... and by extension all of the fans who werent in the stadium was a disgrace..... it would have been a disgrace in the 70's.... let alone now......................... if the riders want to play hardball then there should have been a statement made by one of them................ if the Jury want to rubber stamp the decision then a statement should have been made by them ............... if BSI/PZM want fans to feel valued then a statement should have been made............................I still cannot believe that fans had to endure what was an extremely painful 12 heats over two hours...... followed by another hour's wait with no update..... and then no statement...no interview............................. put simply it is just suicide for a sport in this day and age

 

edit: and as for the fans in the stadium who simply put are being robbed by the chain of events .... I wouldnt be suprised if a large portion of them never trust the GP's enough again to go to one

 

I disagree about the coverage to follow............... i'd like it to be warts and all, turning over every stone with full disclosure as the secrets, lies and back scratching in speedway is part of its problem............ lets have it all out and then move on

 

 

and if the riders want to change the margins involved in 'rider safety'.... then it is clear to me that it will end up in changes to the bikes

Edited April 23, 2015 by spook

[zlata prilba]

Oh my word, Speedwáy Star in refusing to blame officials shock. Theres a surprise.

well as most of them were British dont think that was ever going to be the case...

[BWitcher]

 

 

Brilliant summing up, agree completely

 

To be honest Tony, apart from a few morons spouting the "riders know best" they risk their lives for our entertainment" cobblers then more and more now seem accepting that the track was perfectly adequate and the riders were a disgrace.

 

Hopefully in the fullness of time they will get duly punished for what happened on Saturday

 

That though shouldn't exonerate others for their part. The FIM jury for allowing this to get as far as it did are culpable along with the race director. The failure to provide another starting gate, although a green light was an adequate solution it could have been avoided was a major cock up

 

Spot on.

 

I would also add that the others who are revelling in it and refuse to point any blame at the riders are those with prior agendas. i.e. the anti-GP/BSI mob..

 

As you say, that doesn't exonerate the other errors made.

[norbold]

Humphrey, spook, I run a theatre and there are four different ways of charging for use of the theatre. The first is that the artiste demands a guarantee. This is most often done by the bigger names we have and is most risky for the theatre as we have to meet their guarantee however many tickets we sell, so we can (and have!) lost on this deal. The second is a straightforward percentage, the bigger the star the higher the percentage they take, usually in the range of 70/30, 75/25 or 80/20. But at least we can't lose on this as even if we only sell one ticket we get a percentage of the ticket price.

 

Thirdly, there is a first call, where we agree that the first £1000 (or whatever it is) goes to the artiste and then there is a percentage split. If we only take, say, £900, the artiste gets £900 and we get nothing but we don't have to make up the shortfall as with a guarantee. This is better than a guarantee where we could actually lose money, but not as good as percentage split where we will always make some money.

 

Fourthly, there is a hire, where the artiste or company pay us a fee and all takings go to them, so the risk is entirely theirs whether they make the fire fee or not. Our local amateur drama and musical societies also pay an extra fee per day for hiring the theatre normally for three or four days beforehand for setting up and final rehearsals. This may be most relevant to the number of days Ole Olsen needs to lay a track.

 

I'm not sure whether any of this helps, but I expect it's all much the same for use of stadia.

[spook]

well as most of them were British dont think that was ever going to be the case...

 

to be fair Phil Rising has long defended Ole Olsen on this forum against many of us who had the knives out.... and he isn't British

 

From where I sit the issue usually appears to be the friendships which are made rather than a non compromising impartial position ............ but that could be said for a lot of the speedway community

 

 

Humphrey, spook, I run a theatre and there are four different ways of charging for use of the theatre. The first is that the artiste demands a guarantee. This is most often done by the bigger names we have and is most risky for the theatre as we have to meet their guarantee however many tickets we sell, so we can (and have!) lost on this deal. The second is a straightforward percentage, the bigger the star the higher the percentage they take, usually in the range of 70/30, 75/25 or 80/20. But at least we can't lose on this as even if we only sell one ticket we get a percentage of the ticket price.

 

Thirdly, there is a first call, where we agree that the first £1000 (or whatever it is) goes to the artiste and then there is a percentage split. If we only take, say, £900, the artiste gets £900 and we get nothing but we don't have to make up the shortfall as with a guarantee. This is better than a guarantee where we could actually lose money, but not as good as percentage split where we will always make some money.

 

Fourthly, there is a hire, where the artiste or company pay us a fee and all takings go to them, so the risk is entirely theirs whether they make the fire fee or not. Our local amateur drama and musical societies also pay an extra fee per day for hiring the theatre normally for three or four days beforehand for setting up and final rehearsals. This may be most relevant to the number of days Ole Olsen needs to lay a track.

 

I'm not sure whether any of this helps, but I expect it's all much the same for use of stadia.

Thx Norbold that is interesting............... my cousin experienced this to his cost after he sank a fortune in a club in California (look before you leap!) ........ clearly he must have been going for one of the first three options as the sticking point when acts got in touch was always how many fans were they going to bring with them .......... never an issue when Santana came to town but many other desperate nights!

Edited April 23, 2015 by spook

[racers and royals]

Humphrey, spook, I run a theatre and there are four different ways of charging for use of the theatre. The first is that the artiste demands a guarantee. This is most often done by the bigger names we have and is most risky for the theatre as we have to meet their guarantee however many tickets we sell, so we can (and have!) lost on this deal. The second is a straightforward percentage, the bigger the star the higher the percentage they take, usually in the range of 70/30, 75/25 or 80/20. But at least we can't lose on this as even if we only sell one ticket we get a percentage of the ticket price.

 

Thirdly, there is a first call, where we agree that the first £1000 (or whatever it is) goes to the artiste and then there is a percentage split. If we only take, say, £900, the artiste gets £900 and we get nothing but we don't have to make up the shortfall as with a guarantee. This is better than a guarantee where we could actually lose money, but not as good as percentage split where we will always make some money.

 

Fourthly, there is a hire, where the artiste or company pay us a fee and all takings go to them, so the risk is entirely theirs whether they make the fire fee or not. Our local amateur drama and musical societies also pay an extra fee per day for hiring the theatre normally for three or four days beforehand for setting up and final rehearsals. This may be most relevant to the number of days Ole Olsen needs to lay a track.

 

I'm not sure whether any of this helps, but I expect it's all much the same for use of stadia.

At the very least it gave some theatre to the whole shambles

[E I Addio]

I do have an issue in people saying 'that the track was perfectly adequate' or 'perfectly rideable' ....... watch ht10 please and tell me it was 'perfectly' anything

.............. The riders should have been going back out there and had no grounds to down tools for the night.... but they did have a case for grumble....and there was a case that the track needed attention

 

Well said. That is pretty much the point

 

Anyone who does not agree with Oldace is, in his words "a moron" but then reality is that, as you say the track was not perfectly anything, at least that's what a lot of the "morons" think. The mere fact that even before the riders meeting it was said that after heat 12 there would be some extended track maintenance, is in itself evidence that the track was not perfectly adequate, otherwise they would not be doing it when the meeting was already running 2 hours late.

 

The question of whether the extended track maintenance would have returned the track to a decent standard suitable for the occasion is something will shall now never know. However, Paul Burbidge makes an interesting point in SS when he said that there seems to be a common denominator in temporary tracks that don't come up to scratch, and that Is excessive moisture. If that was the case on Saturday it difficult to see how the track werecould have been significantly improved as the evening got colder. However that is just speculation.

 

Speedwáy Star has just arrived and I have to say that I think t he article by Peter Oakes (presumably another"moron" on Oldace line of thought) is excellent. Peter Oakes in my view draws the right balance between bluntly saying what needs to be said without mincing his words but at the same time without going OTT as Oldace and a few others seem intent on doing.

 

There were a few interesting quotes from riders in SS:-

 

Chris Harris: Everyonewas in agreement that the track wasn't raceable and for safety reasons the right call was made. Everybody could see that the track wasn't great . We didn't want anyone seriously hurt.

 

Matej Zagar: I even refused to practice. I knew the track wasn't ideal ......I did my best to take points from 3 heats. But rider safety comes first. I totally agree with this. We made a common decision. Everybody has there own opinion but common sense won.

 

NKI . We ne ed to look at safety before anything else. It would have been the wrong decision to continue because people were falling off by them selves. When it's like that I tells you everything about the conditions. I think it was the right decision to call it off, but it's really disappointing

 

 

Jason Doyle: The track was very dangerous for myself........the right decision was made in the end. Something went wrong with the track and it was like walking on cushions......It wasn't that we didn't want to ride, it was just how dangerous the track was.

 

Nicki Pedersen : The surface was unstable. It was very inconsistent and just moved around all the time when they did the preparation and grading.

 

I put the riders quotes out for what they are worth, to be put in the melting pot of opinion. What is not in dispute is that the track had been giving problems from the first practice session. Maybe in theory the track could have been improved after maintenance and maybe the combined hassle of the practice sessions, the starting gate, and Batch and Holders crashes were the last straw. I don't know. I tend to agree with Peter Oakes when he says that whether the full story of what went wrong will ever come out is hard to say at this juncture. What is clear though is that the bulk of the eveidence suggests that the track was less than "perfectly adequate" as Oldace would have as believe.

Edited April 23, 2015 by E I Addio

[Star Lady]

Been told by someone unfortunate enough to have been there that they have been informed if they post their tickets back they will be exchanged for tickets for next years event.

 

Question is would you risk it considering travel/accomodation costs.

[orion]

Batch and Holder was injured and that is the main reason they fell off ..who else bar them also fell off on this so called dangerous track like Puk was saying .. Harris said the track was not raceable ? well I watched the last few heats and people were racing and passing . Zagar was happy for it to end I bet he was ££££

[Noodles]

Been told by someone unfortunate enough to have been there that they have been informed if they post their tickets back they will be exchanged for tickets for next years event.

 

Question is would you risk it considering travel/accomodation costs.

Interesting, I've not heard anything about this yet. Do you know who they spoke to?

[oldace]

Well said. That is pretty much the point

 

Anyone who does not agree with Oldace is, in his words "a moron" but then reality is that, as you say the track was not perfectly anything, at least that's what a lot of the "morons" think. The mere fact that even before the riders meeting it was said that after heat 12 there would be some extended track maintenance, is in itself evidence that the track was not perfectly adequate, otherwise they would not be doing it when the meeting was already running 2 hours late.

 

The question of whether the extended track maintenance would have returned the track to a decent standard suitable for the occasion is something will shall now never know. However, Paul Burbidge makes an interesting point in SS when he said that there seems to be a common denominator in temporary tracks that don't come up to scratch, and that Is excessive moisture. If that was the case on Saturday it difficult to see how the track werecould have been significantly improved as the evening got colder. However that is just speculation.

 

Speedwáy Star has just arrived and I have to say that I think t he article by Peter Oakes (presumably another"moron" on Oldace line of thought) is excellent. Peter Oakes in my view draws the right balance between bluntly saying what needs to be said without mincing his words but at the same time without going OTT as Oldace and a few others seem intent on doing.

 

There were a few interesting quotes from riders in SS:-

 

Chris Harris: Everyonewas in agreement that the track wasn't raceable and for safety reasons the right call was made. Everybody could see that the track wasn't great . We didn't want anyone seriously hurt.

 

Matej Zagar: I even refused to practice. I knew the track wasn't ideal ......I did my best to take points from 3 heats. But rider safety comes first. I totally agree with this. We made a common decision. Everybody has there own opinion but common sense won.

 

NKI . We ne ed to look at safety before anything else. It would have been the wrong decision to continue because people were falling off by them selves. When it's like that I tells you everything about the conditions. I think it was the right decision to call it off, but it's really disappointing

 

 

Jason Doyle: The track was very dangerous for myself........the right decision was made in the end. Something went wrong with the track and it was like walking on cushions......It wasn't that we didn't want to ride, it was just how dangerous the track was.

 

Nicki Pedersen : The surface was unstable. It was very inconsistent and just moved around all the time when they did the preparation and grading.

 

I put the riders quotes out for what they are worth, to be put in the melting pot of opinion. What is not in dispute is that the track had been giving problems from the first practice session. Maybe in theory the track could have been improved after maintenance and maybe the combined hassle of the practice sessions, the starting gate, and Batch and Holders crashes were the last straw. I don't know. I tend to agree with Peter Oakes when he says that whether the full story of what went wrong will ever come out is hard to say at this juncture. What is clear though is that the bulk of the eveidence suggests that the track was less than "perfectly adequate" as Oldace would have as believe.

 

 

No, the evidence as seen through your own eyes suggest it was adequate. A bunch of quotes fro 18 riders now realizing they are in the sh!t are worthless

[Star Lady]

Interesting, I've not heard anything about this yet. Do you know who they spoke to?

Sorry no, but he often goes on organised trips so if he did this time could be the tour organiser.

[iris123]

Let's face it,what you aren't going to get is a quote from a rider saying "i thought the track wasn't as bad as some we have ridden on.I wanted to continue,but the others were adamant,so I respected their opinions".Batch has already pretty well given us his good reason and it would go for Jonsson in particular as well.If the meeting carried on they would only fall further behind with points.Not really sure why if Jonsson had already pulled out of the meeting,he was asked and included in the riders who voted for it to be called off?

And you ain't going to get a quote from Jim Lawrence saying "I made a right cock up in a couple of those early heats....."

 

Phil hasn't expanded on just what the media have falsely reported........maybe it was the fact that the stadium was handed over on the 12th,but work didn't start until two days later.Maybe this wasn't the case,but as Olsen seems to be in the firing line and Phil mentioned there were promises that lessons had been learnt from previous mistakes,i guess this isn't false.I wonder what is.......

 

The other thing that really gets me peeved in all this is the lack of planning for such an outcome.BSI have by now enough experience in cock ups.They should know how to react and have a plan,especially as by Friday it was looking dodgy.But no,they don't have a plan and the fans are left in the dark.Bad enough on the night,but unacceptable days afterwards when people still don't know if and when they are getting a refund or will they have to accept a ticket for next years GP!!!!! All BSI can say is they have a good record and will continue doing what they do as long as fans want them to.......

[Starman2006]

There were a few interesting quotes from riders in SS:-

 

Chris Harris: Everyonewas in agreement that the track wasn't raceable and for safety reasons the right call was made. Everybody could see that the track wasn't great . We didn't want anyone seriously hurt.

 

Matej Zagar: I even refused to practice. I knew the track wasn't ideal ......I did my best to take points from 3 heats. But rider safety comes first. I totally agree with this. We made a common decision. Everybody has there own opinion but common sense won.

 

NKI . We ne ed to look at safety before anything else. It would have been the wrong decision to continue because people were falling off by them selves. When it's like that I tells you everything about the conditions. I think it was the right decision to call it off, but it's really disappointing

 

 

Jason Doyle: The track was very dangerous for myself........the right decision was made in the end. Something went wrong with the track and it was like walking on cushions......It wasn't that we didn't want to ride, it was just how dangerous the track was.

 

Nicki Pedersen : The surface was unstable. It was very inconsistent and just moved around all the time when they did the preparation and grading.

 

I put the riders quotes out for what they are worth, to be put in the melting pot of opinion. What is not in dispute is that the track had been giving problems from the first practice session. Maybe in theory the track could have been improved after maintenance and maybe the combined hassle of the practice sessions, the starting gate, and Batch and Holders crashes were the last straw. I don't know. I tend to agree with Peter Oakes when he says that whether the full story of what went wrong will ever come out is hard to say at this juncture. What is clear though is that the bulk of the eveidence suggests that the track was less than "perfectly adequate" as Oldace would have as believe.

Riders will give anything a go, but there comes a point where it becomes to dangerous. You cannot argue with them, they ride the track, the So called track curators come experts who sit in the stands don't.

Anybody who has thrown his or her leg over a speedway bike will know the feeling with all that power between your legs, and you hit a really bad rut at that sort of speed you'l be through the airfence and in most cases through the chicken wire and come out the other side as chips. Now, im not for one minute saying that the riders are totally exhonerated, but i still say it was a poor poor show for the fans that were in the stadium, and reguardless of what heat it finished for the purposes of a result whether its to keep the takings and appease the riders the bookmakers, which those who backed the outright winner or one for the frame would have lost their money. you could say its the equivelent of a 16 runner h'cap reduced to 15 so first 4 suddenly becomes first 3, how many times do you see that ?

From a bookmakers perspective theres not a lot you can do about it, but those in the stadium have been vastly short changed, and i still believe if those patrons have kept their credit card details or ticket stubs they should be compensated in some way or another by the organisers. problem nowadays is, money comes into everything.

Edited April 23, 2015 by Starman2006