Dave Jones Posted July 11, 2015 Report Share Posted July 11, 2015 (edited) Call a match off when the track was raceable from heat 1?? No wonder the sport stinks more and more with each passing season. It happens regularly these days. Workington have done it just today. The only difference really is that the Cov - Poole match was on sky, and GSI lied about trying to contact the bees beforehand IMO. Edited July 11, 2015 by Dave Jones 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevebrum Posted July 11, 2015 Report Share Posted July 11, 2015 No they didn't. Plenty said it on social media, wrongly. It happens regularly these days. Workington have done it just today. The only difference really is that the Cov - Poole match was on sky, and GSI lied about trying to contact the bees beforehand IMO. No wonder some clubs struggle to get people too attend anymore. Sad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brummies_Ste Posted July 16, 2015 Report Share Posted July 16, 2015 THE Speedway Control Bureau have issued the following statement regarding the Coventry v Poole Elite League match that was staged on Monday June 1;COVENTRY v POOLE (Monday 1st June 2015)Coventry Promoters, Mick Horton & Neil Watson attended a Meeting with the Members of The Speedway Control Bureau on Thursday 9th July to answer a charge of not complying to Speedway Regulation SR 4.1.9.This non-compliance arose at the above Meeting, when the Coventry Team Manager, for whom the Coventry Promotion are jointly responsible, instructed the Coventry Riders scheduled to ride in Heat 10, Chris Harris & Joonas Kylmakorpi not to participate.This action had the effect of withdrawing from a Meeting, as the Riders failed to meet the 2-minute time allowance facility on more than one occasion.The SCB Members viewed video footage supplied by the Coventry and also SKY TV footage.Following a long discussion “in camera” the SCB Members agreed that the Fines imposed by the Meeting Referee upon the Team Manager, Gary Havelock and the Riders involved, would stand and in addition the Promotion would be fined £3000.All Parties have a Right of Appeal to the Auto Cycle Union. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve0 Posted July 16, 2015 Report Share Posted July 16, 2015 THE Speedway Control Bureau have issued the following statement regarding the Coventry v Poole Elite League match that was staged on Monday June 1; COVENTRY v POOLE (Monday 1st June 2015) Coventry Promoters, Mick Horton & Neil Watson attended a Meeting with the Members of The Speedway Control Bureau on Thursday 9th July to answer a charge of not complying to Speedway Regulation SR 4.1.9. This non-compliance arose at the above Meeting, when the Coventry Team Manager, for whom the Coventry Promotion are jointly responsible, instructed the Coventry Riders scheduled to ride in Heat 10, Chris Harris & Joonas Kylmakorpi not to participate. This action had the effect of withdrawing from a Meeting, as the Riders failed to meet the 2-minute time allowance facility on more than one occasion. The SCB Members viewed video footage supplied by the Coventry and also SKY TV footage. Following a long discussion “in camera” the SCB Members agreed that the Fines imposed by the Meeting Referee upon the Team Manager, Gary Havelock and the Riders involved, would stand and in addition the Promotion would be fined £3000. All Parties have a Right of Appeal to the Auto Cycle Union. I can't say I'm surprised with the additional fine for the promotion. However, no reference is even made as to whether the meeting should have started at all and that is the crux of the following actions! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mdmc82 Posted July 16, 2015 Report Share Posted July 16, 2015 (edited) Absolute sham but then no surprise with a member of Poole on the board. Sadly this will not be the last time this happens. Still no answers though to why the meeting was made to go ahead or why they wouldn't inspect the track. Terrible when riders are fined for putting their safety first and yet Redcar gain points by using an illegal RR against Somerset and no action is taken. Shocking Edited July 16, 2015 by mdmc82 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pirate Nick Posted July 16, 2015 Report Share Posted July 16, 2015 Absolute sham but then no surprise with a member of Poole on the board. Sadly this will not be the last time this happens. Still no answers though to why the meeting was made to go ahead or why they wouldn't inspect the track. Terrible when riders are fined for putting their safety first and yet Redcar gain points by using an illegal RR against Somerset and no action is taken. Shocking You obviously have never met the man. One of the straightest people I have met within the sport. Always open and honest. You need to get that Poole chip off your shoulder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mdmc82 Posted July 16, 2015 Report Share Posted July 16, 2015 You obviously have never met the man. One of the straightest people I have met within the sport. Always open and honest. You need to get that Poole chip off your shoulder. A lot of Poole fans say the same about Ward don't they. You must see the point, it would be like Fergie voting on a issue between Man Utd & Man City. Hardly Independant is it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamieE Posted July 16, 2015 Report Share Posted July 16, 2015 (edited) What a joke ruling from the SCB and stinks of penny pinching to me. I assume the £3000 will at least be going to riders benevolent fund? Perhaps Sky should be paying into it too in the aftermath of that meeting, given that they were so keen to get the meeting on and completed in those conditions? Edited July 16, 2015 by JamieE 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Najjer Posted July 16, 2015 Report Share Posted July 16, 2015 Terrible when riders are fined for putting their safety first and yet Redcar gain points by using an illegal RR against Somerset and no action is taken. Shocking That was my first thoughts. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Posted July 16, 2015 Report Share Posted July 16, 2015 THE Speedway Control Bureau have issued the following statement regarding the Coventry v Poole Elite League match that was staged on Monday June 1; COVENTRY v POOLE (Monday 1st June 2015) Coventry Promoters, Mick Horton & Neil Watson attended a Meeting with the Members of The Speedway Control Bureau on Thursday 9th July to answer a charge of not complying to Speedway Regulation SR 4.1.9. This non-compliance arose at the above Meeting, when the Coventry Team Manager, for whom the Coventry Promotion are jointly responsible, instructed the Coventry Riders scheduled to ride in Heat 10, Chris Harris & Joonas Kylmakorpi not to participate. This action had the effect of withdrawing from a Meeting, as the Riders failed to meet the 2-minute time allowance facility on more than one occasion. The SCB Members viewed video footage supplied by the Coventry and also SKY TV footage. Following a long discussion “in camera” the SCB Members agreed that the Fines imposed by the Meeting Referee upon the Team Manager, Gary Havelock and the Riders involved, would stand and in addition the Promotion would be fined £3000. All Parties have a Right of Appeal to the Auto Cycle Union. If the rule were to ride all 15 heats before a result could be called this type of situation would be stopped in an instant. As a neutral I feel sorry for Gary Havelock and Coventry as the meeting should probably not have started or continued bar a few heats. You cant blame Poole for wanting to ride Ht10 as they were following rules and used them to there advantage. The ref said the track was raceable for Ht10 but then called off the meeting immediately. What happened to the track in those three minutes that turned it from raceable to unraceable. Only the ref would know. Coventry should not have been fined another 3000 as they suffered a low gate and had some justification not to ride.. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz01 Posted July 16, 2015 Report Share Posted July 16, 2015 (edited) Redcar get let off using an illegal rider yet when the Bees manager was worried about rider safety he, 2 riders and the promotion are fined. What about an investigation into what happens for a sky meeting with a poor forecast? It cannot be right that a promotion doesn't have an option to call it off in the morning because it's on Sky, Wolves and Lakeside (?) did because they had the option the Bees didn't have the same option. Why can a promotion only call a meeting off 48 hours before the start of a meeting, it's just scandalous. Just to add the statement made no mention of the word safety. Was there an investigation over the meeting coordinator stating he will inspect the track after heat 9? Once that didn't happen whoever the manager was would have had every right not to send riders out. It's just basic health and safety, someone raises an issue you inspect it. If the inspection had happened then I'd agree Bees riders should have rode but it just did not happen. Safety wasn't the officials 1st priority when it should be everytime. Edited July 16, 2015 by woz01 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mdmc82 Posted July 16, 2015 Report Share Posted July 16, 2015 Redcar get let off using an illegal rider yet when the Bees manager was worried about rider safety he, 2 riders and the promotion are fined. What about an investigation into what happens for a sky meeting with a poor forecast? It cannot be right that a promotion doesn't have an option to call it off in the morning because it's on Sky, Wolves and Lakeside (?) did because they had the option the Bees didn't have the same option. Why can a promotion only call a meeting off 48 hours before the start of a meeting, it's just scandalous. Belle Vue's sky meeting was called off 2 hours before it was due to be shown on sky. This was the only meeting where a 48 hour rule was mentioned but then it seemed to disappear again. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz01 Posted July 16, 2015 Report Share Posted July 16, 2015 Belle Vue's sky meeting was called off 2 hours before it was due to be shown on sky. This was the only meeting where a 48 hour rule was mentioned but then it seemed to disappear again. That's was the referees decision, Belle Vue probably wasn't allowed to call it off either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted July 16, 2015 Report Share Posted July 16, 2015 (edited) People are getting this all wrong. The issue is not that the track was unsafe at heat 9. It's that Coventry knew that suddenly the track would be unsafe at heat 10, meeting over and Coventry lose. so Coventry either had to abandon it or get to heat 15, they couldn't get to heat 15, they knew it would be called off at 10 so they had to stall and get it called off. Why did Coventry know it would be called off at 10? Because they had done it exactly 4 weeks earlier vs Lakeside while winning and also at Swindon last season. Seems a bit rich to start bleating now. IF meeting HAD to go to heat 15, this wouldn't be happening. My solution would be for meetings to get to heat 15, exceptions being if the losing team concedes the meeting. OR if after giving the losing team a 4-2 in every heat left the result cannot be changed from a win to one team or the other. So at heat 10, you have to be 12 up. Quite how the SCB can be so sure the track was fine at heat 9 and not at heat 10 though, I don't know! Seem pretty difficult to me to be so sure that they can fine people for it. Edited July 16, 2015 by SCB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamieE Posted July 16, 2015 Report Share Posted July 16, 2015 Redcar get let off using an illegal rider yet when the Bees manager was worried about rider safety he, 2 riders and the promotion are fined. What about an investigation into what happens for a sky meeting with a poor forecast? It cannot be right that a promotion doesn't have an option to call it off in the morning because it's on Sky, Wolves and Lakeside (?) did because they had the option the Bees didn't have the same option. Why can a promotion only call a meeting off 48 hours before the start of a meeting, it's just scandalous. Just to add the statement made no mention of the word safety. Was there an investigation over the meeting coordinator stating he will inspect the track after heat 9? Once that didn't happen whoever the manager was would have had every right not to send riders out. It's just basic health and safety, someone raises an issue you inspect it. If the inspection had happened then I'd agree Bees riders should have rode but it just did not happen. Safety wasn't the officials 1st priority when it should be everytime. That's what makes the ruling seem so petty and so typically British Speedway. Absolutely no thought or consideration about improving the sport from previous mistakes and looking at the wider issues, just the usual bury their heads in the sand and coin the easy money out of Coventry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz01 Posted July 16, 2015 Report Share Posted July 16, 2015 (edited) That's what makes the ruling seem so petty and so typically British Speedway. Absolutely no thought or consideration about improving the sport from previous mistakes and looking at the wider issues, just the usual bury their heads in the sand and coin the easy money out of Coventry. The officials would be in a hell of a lot of trouble if Bees sent riders out in heat 10 and an accident occured due to conditions after promising an inspection. Havvy was absolutely right covering his, the promotion and his riders arses by not sending them out until a promised inspection took place. Edited July 16, 2015 by woz01 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BANANAMAN Posted July 16, 2015 Report Share Posted July 16, 2015 Brummies_Ste, on 16 Jul 2015 - 1:08 PM, said: THE Speedway Control Bureau have issued the following statement regarding the Coventry v Poole Elite League match that was staged on Monday June 1; COVENTRY v POOLE (Monday 1st June 2015) Coventry Promoters, Mick Horton & Neil Watson attended a Meeting with the Members of The Speedway Control Bureau on Thursday 9th July to answer a charge of not complying to Speedway Regulation SR 4.1.9. This non-compliance arose at the above Meeting, when the Coventry Team Manager, for whom the Coventry Promotion are jointly responsible, instructed the Coventry Riders scheduled to ride in Heat 10, Chris Harris & Joonas Kylmakorpi not to participate. This action had the effect of withdrawing from a Meeting, as the Riders failed to meet the 2-minute time allowance facility on more than one occasion. The SCB Members viewed video footage supplied by the Coventry and also SKY TV footage. Following a long discussion “in camera” the SCB Members agreed that the Fines imposed by the Meeting Referee upon the Team Manager, Gary Havelock and the Riders involved, would stand and in addition the Promotion would be fined £3000. All Parties have a Right of Appeal to the Auto Cycle Union. I Reckon £3000 is a small price to pay to ensure the safety of your riders for the rest of the season . .Take it on the chin pay up & carry on !! You never know you may end up having the last laugh at the end of September . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz01 Posted July 16, 2015 Report Share Posted July 16, 2015 I Reckon £3000 is a small price to pay to ensure the safety of your riders for the rest of the season . .Take it on the chin pay up & carry on !! You never know you may end up having the last laugh at the end of September . You shouldn't have to be fined to ensure riders safety. It's the 1st job for an official. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BANANAMAN Posted July 16, 2015 Report Share Posted July 16, 2015 woz01, on 16 Jul 2015 - 3:30 PM, said:You shouldn't have to be fined to ensure riders safety. It's the 1st job for an official. Totally agree ,but doesn't it give you a good feeling that you have done the right thing ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starman2006 Posted July 16, 2015 Report Share Posted July 16, 2015 People are getting this all wrong. The issue is not that the track was unsafe at heat 9. It's that Coventry knew that suddenly the track would be unsafe at heat 10, meeting over and Coventry lose. so Coventry either had to abandon it or get to heat 15, they couldn't get to heat 15, they knew it would be called off at 10 so they had to stall and get it called off. Why did Coventry know it would be called off at 10? Because they had done it exactly 4 weeks earlier vs Lakeside while winning and also at Swindon last season. Seems a bit rich to start bleating now. IF meeting HAD to go to heat 15, this wouldn't be happening. My solution would be for meetings to get to heat 15, exceptions being if the losing team concedes the meeting. OR if after giving the losing team a 4-2 in every heat left the result cannot be changed from a win to one team or the other. So at heat 10, you have to be 12 up. Quite how the SCB can be so sure the track was fine at heat 9 and not at heat 10 though, I don't know! Seem pretty difficult to me to be so sure that they can fine people for it. Thats not the issue, the issue is your riders did not show for heat 10. Our riders were happy to ride 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.