SCB Posted April 25, 2015 Report Share Posted April 25, 2015 (edited) The system was brilliant, Most heat 15s mattered for both sets of fans.Apparently they changed the system that you get 3 points for any home win because Jon Cook felt some fans were going home disappointed with only 2 points and not 3. That leaves us in the totally crap situation where having won a meeting, you can now give the opposition a point if you like. The issue you have is people don't know about it. Coventry fans left last night thinking they had dropped a point,some quite angry with the choice for heat 15. If you're going to change the rule to please the home fans then tell the home fans FFS! I wonder if after Lakeside home loss last night Jon Cook will be suggesting 3 points for the home team eveyr meeting because his fans went home disappointed last night? The old system worked. The new one doesn't. Change it back ASAP! Edited April 25, 2015 by SCB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheScotsman Posted April 25, 2015 Report Share Posted April 25, 2015 Agreed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grachan Posted April 25, 2015 Report Share Posted April 25, 2015 Absolutely. Even when they get things right they still change it. Most fans are home fans who don't give a stuff if the away team get an extra point anyway so it means nothing. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Leslie Posted April 25, 2015 Report Share Posted April 25, 2015 Can't fault a word of SCB's post. Fans were going home disappointed that they didn't get 3 points? Well tough....that's life. The idea is you battle to try to get maximum points, and sometimes you're successful and sometimes you're not. If you follow Jon Cook's silly notion to its logical extreme you should give both teams 4 points regardless of the score and everyone can go home happy and stadiums will be full. Nonsense. If one team is battling to steal a point, then the other team should be battling equally to save that point. Otherwise its open to fiddling. Imagine if we get to the last match of the season before the play-offs and Coventry need 3 points to make the play-offs and Poole need one point...guess what score that match will finish..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aces51 Posted April 25, 2015 Report Share Posted April 25, 2015 C Imagine if we get to the last match of the season before the play-offs and Coventry need 3 points to make the play-offs and Poole need one point...guess what score that match will finish..... 49-41 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Leslie Posted April 25, 2015 Report Share Posted April 25, 2015 49-41 Matt Ford finds your lack of faith disturbing https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onhFH7jpq2c Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanr1 Posted April 25, 2015 Report Share Posted April 25, 2015 Apparently they changed the system that you get 3 points for any home win because Jon Cook felt some fans were going home disappointed with only 2 points and not 3. / Or more to the point because Jon Cook puts out a team every year that wins at home but are useless away. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Science Posted April 25, 2015 Report Share Posted April 25, 2015 The system was brilliant, Most heat 15s mattered for both sets of fans.Apparently they changed the system that you get 3 points for any home win because Jon Cook felt some fans were going home disappointed with only 2 points and not 3. That leaves us in the totally crap situation where having won a meeting, you can now give the opposition a point if you like. The issue you have is people don't know about it. Coventry fans left last night thinking they had dropped a point,some quite angry with the choice for heat 15. If you're going to change the rule to please the home fans then tell the home fans FFS! I wonder if after Lakeside home loss last night Jon Cook will be suggesting 3 points for the home team eveyr meeting because his fans went home disappointed last night? The old system worked. The new one doesn't. Change it back ASAP! The weakness of the new scoring system was shown Friday night as Coventry with the points in the bag declined not to pick their best 2 riders,resulting in a Belle Vue 5-1 gifting the away team a point they would have had to work a lot harder for given a stronger line up for the home team. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted April 25, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 25, 2015 So in just over 7 hours the post has 14 likes (plus me making 15) and not one reply disagreeing with the change. I wonder if the BSPA will admit they were wrong?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrycuda Posted April 25, 2015 Report Share Posted April 25, 2015 (edited) Post removed Edited June 2, 2015 by Barrycuda Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob B Posted April 26, 2015 Report Share Posted April 26, 2015 Yes this new points system is ridiculous. I liked the old bonus point for winning on aggregate, That made home teams need to win by as many as possible and away teams wanting to keep it close even if 20 points down, always something to ride for. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz01 Posted April 26, 2015 Report Share Posted April 26, 2015 The system was brilliant, Most heat 15s mattered for both sets of fans.Apparently they changed the system that you get 3 points for any home win because Jon Cook felt some fans were going home disappointed with only 2 points and not 3. That leaves us in the totally crap situation where having won a meeting, you can now give the opposition a point if you like. The issue you have is people don't know about it. Coventry fans left last night thinking they had dropped a point,some quite angry with the choice for heat 15. If you're going to change the rule to please the home fans then tell the home fans FFS! I wonder if after Lakeside home loss last night Jon Cook will be suggesting 3 points for the home team eveyr meeting because his fans went home disappointed last night? The old system worked. The new one doesn't. Change it back ASAP! Opens up the chance of 'fixing' too. The old way was very good and I can see no reason for the change! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wessex Wanderer Posted April 26, 2015 Report Share Posted April 26, 2015 Agree totally with the criticisms of the new match points system. Earlier this year the F1 bosses had a meeting to look at ways to make F1 more interesting. So a sport with a huge following and massive commercial backing is conscious of the need to keep things interesting. At the same time the Speedway bosses get together and contrive to make their obscure, commercially ignored and poorly supported sport LESS interesting. The reasons given were the same as those for dropping the aggregate bonus point (if I remember correctly). So two rules which added a whole lot to meetings, especially the final heats, are changed because of a pretty juvenile attitude of "we should get all the match points even if we didn't deserve them". Like someone said, why not just give all teams 4 points each and not bother with the actual match score. Is it any wonder that our wonderful sport is sliding further and further into oblivion? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bagpuss Posted April 26, 2015 Report Share Posted April 26, 2015 It's like the BSPA try their hardest each year to give people more reasons to not attend. Bonkers. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The White Knight Posted April 26, 2015 Report Share Posted April 26, 2015 So in just over 7 hours the post has 14 likes (plus me making 15) and not one reply disagreeing with the change. I wonder if the BSPA will admit they were wrong?! I very much doubt it SCB. Happiness is 40-38. :party: :party: 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWitcher Posted April 26, 2015 Report Share Posted April 26, 2015 I very much doubt it SCB. Happiness is 40-38. :party: :party: Yeah, that's good.. 2 heats less. Marvellous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The White Knight Posted April 26, 2015 Report Share Posted April 26, 2015 Yeah, that's good.. 2 heats less. Marvellous. The Thirteen Heat Formula worked well for years. Then they changed it - and we lost our Second Halves. They changed it and we lost TWO Races. (If I remember correctly there were 4 Races in the Second Half). TWO Races added in the Fifteen Heat Formula and FOUR Heats dropped from the Second Halves equals a deficit of TWO Heats of Racing. As you say - MARVELLOUS!!! Oh, and British Speedway went in to decline didn't it - because there were no Second Halves for the youngsters to get in some meaningful Racing Practice. The decline in youngsters riding Speedway is due, at least in part, to the dropping of the Second Halves. Old argument - yes it is. That doesn't change the fact that it is correct though - does it? As you say MARVELLOUS!!! 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWitcher Posted April 26, 2015 Report Share Posted April 26, 2015 (edited) The Thirteen Heat Formula worked well for years. Then they changed it - and we lost our Second Halves. They changed it and we lost TWO Races. (If I remember correctly there were 4 Races in the Second Half). TWO Races added in the Fifteen Heat Formula and FOUR Heats dropped from the Second Halves equals a deficit of TWO Heats of Racing. As you say - MARVELLOUS!!! Oh, and British Speedway went in to decline didn't it - because there were no Second Halves for the youngsters to get in some meaningful Racing Practice. The decline in youngsters riding Speedway is due, at least in part, to the dropping of the Second Halves. Old argument - yes it is. That doesn't change the fact that it is correct though - does it? As you say MARVELLOUS!!! Ah the good old second halves.. that AT LEAST 75% of the crowd had gone home and didn't watch. Once again you're digging up a relic of a bygone relic. "2nd halves" as you like to remember them were gone. Riders weren't interested in them, hence they were dropped and junior racing took its place. Clubs can still run junior racing now if they wish, nothing has changed there. So no its not correct. The mere notion of suggesting cutting league matches 2 heats short is nothing but absolute insanity. Edited April 26, 2015 by BWitcher 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted April 26, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 26, 2015 Coventry run 15 heats in 90 minutes Friday. They then had a full junior meeting and a few demo races for the junior juniors in the next hour. We actually got to see about 25 races all together. So it can be done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Humphrey Appleby Posted April 26, 2015 Report Share Posted April 26, 2015 (edited) Then they changed it - and we lost our Second Halves. They changed it and we lost TWO Races. (If I remember correctly there were 4 Races in the Second Half). TWO Races added in the Fifteen Heat Formula and FOUR Heats dropped from the Second Halves equals a deficit of TWO Heats of Racing. I think a speedway meeting was generally 20 heats - 13 heat match + 7 heat 'second half' of which a couple were usually junior races. The 7 heat 'second half' was largely replaced by a junior match in the BL from about 1985 onwards (albeit with an additional 'Golden Sash/Snowball' race for two highest scorers from each side), with the main match being extended to 15 heats in 1988 (after a trial in the KOC in 1987) and the junior match being reduced to 5 heats (extended to 6 heats the following year). This state of affairs lasted until 1993 when the main match was extended to 18 heats and junior match scrapped. This is turn lasted just a season before the main match was progressively reduced to 16 and back to 15 heats with no corresponding compensatory extra races (although some tracks did put on some junior races). The NL was a bit different. I recall they had 16 heat matches from the early-80s, but I think there was still some sort of mini second-half. It should be perfectly possible (and was) to run 20 heats + interval in under a couple of hours. People have just got so used to meetings being pointlessly strung out to make them seem better value for money. I'm not suggesting a return to 13 heats, but 'second halves' could have been linked into some sort of national competition to give them more relevance. It sort of happened with the pointless 'Golden Sash', but that didn't count towards anything meaningful and wasn't taken seriously by anyone. Edited April 26, 2015 by Humphrey Appleby 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.