Cardiff Gp

[PHILIPRISING]

Slighly different in Cardiff this week though Philip- BSI are obviously interested in that track !!! (FIM said nothing to do with us guv !!!).

NOT quite the same thing Tim. Going back to Warsaw (sorry) ... it wasn't anyone from BSI who called the meeting off because of track conditions.

 

As for Cardiff this year ... BSI (unlike in Riga or Warsaw for that matter) were responsible for the laying of the track but it still required the SCB (in this case as it was not under their auspices not the FIM) last Tuesday to homologate and deem it worthy.

 

I am sure that if BSI thought there was anything to be gained at this stage in sending someone to Riga they would. For all I know they may actually be doing that.

 

But I go back to HA's point: they are not track experts. It is up to the FIM to determine a track's safety, etc, which is why they and not BSI carry out the various inspections (safety fence, starting gate (!), measurements, etc). I am sure that if Riga is on the cards the FIM will make sure all the boxes are ticked.

 

But let's not forget that the FIM licenced the Riga track 12 months ago and ultimately it was the weather that caused its downfall.

[Grand Central]

NOT quite the same thing Tim. Going back to Warsaw (sorry) ... it wasn't anyone from BSI who called the meeting off because of track conditions.

 

As for Cardiff this year ... BSI (unlike in Riga or Warsaw for that matter) were responsible for the laying of the track but it still required the SCB (in this case as it was not under their auspices not the FIM) last Tuesday to homologate and deem it worthy.

 

I am sure that if BSI thought there was anything to be gained at this stage in sending someone to Riga they would. For all I know they may actually be doing that.

 

But I go back to HA's point: they are not track experts. It is up to the FIM to determine a track's safety, etc, which is why they and not BSI carry out the various inspections (safety fence, starting gate (!), measurements, etc). I am sure that if Riga is on the cards the FIM will make sure all the boxes are ticked.

 

But let's not forget that the FIM licenced the Riga track 12 months ago and ultimately it was the weather that caused its downfall.

.

Let's also not forget that the Jury President who passed the Warsaw track as being fit before the event was Tony Steele.

The very same Jury President who then condemned it after 12 races 'for safety reasons'.

 

I am unsure as to whether this points him out to be good guide on track suitability.

Or the opposite.

 

But if it's the best BSI/FIM have got to go on then I suppose beggars can't be choosers.

 

I really am glad they they have taken such a different attitude over Cardiff.

I really do want that to be the most successful ever.

What happens in Latvia, concerns me - and BSI, clearly - much less.

.

Edited June 26, 2015 by Grand Central

[racers and royals]

NOT quite the same thing Tim. Going back to Warsaw (sorry) ... it wasn't anyone from BSI who called the meeting off because of track conditions.

 

As for Cardiff this year ... BSI (unlike in Riga or Warsaw for that matter) were responsible for the laying of the track but it still required the SCB (in this case as it was not under their auspices not the FIM) last Tuesday to homologate and deem it worthy.

 

I am sure that if BSI thought there was anything to be gained at this stage in sending someone to Riga they would. For all I know they may actually be doing that.

 

But I go back to HA's point: they are not track experts. It is up to the FIM to determine a track's safety, etc, which is why they and not BSI carry out the various inspections (safety fence, starting gate (!), measurements, etc). I am sure that if Riga is on the cards the FIM will make sure all the boxes are ticked.

 

But let's not forget that the FIM licenced the Riga track 12 months ago and ultimately it was the weather that caused its downfall.

The trouble is one can not really separate BSI`s involvement in certain tracks only from the whole series -BSI are the rights holders-they sell the TV contracts for the series. it`s them sub-contracting meetings out and then bearing no responsibility if things go wrong. Punters were seriously out of pocket because of last years fiasco.

[PHILIPRISING]

BUT you cannot ignore the role that the FIM still play in all this and what their responsibilities are.

[racers and royals]

BUT you cannot ignore the role that the FIM still play in all this and what their responsibilities are.

I`m not- the FIM certainly have responsibilities -however I`m not sure the FIM have a responsibility to the punters who buy the tickets-in that regard in my opinion that starts(and stops) with BSI. This weekend`s meeting would be a perfect opportunity for BSI to make a decision whether Riga is capable of holding a GP in 2016 by being there -even if someone is sat in the stands along with the paying public.

[PHILIPRISING]

I`m not- the FIM certainly have responsibilities -however I`m not sure the FIM have a responsibility to the punters who buy the tickets-in that regard in my opinion that starts(and stops) with BSI. This weekend`s meeting would be a perfect opportunity for BSI to make a decision whether Riga is capable of holding a GP in 2016 by being there -even if someone is sat in the stands along with the paying public.

RIGA is perfectly capable ... the stadium, etc, is fine. But the meeting itself this weekend will provide evidence of the state of the track. But you are still dismissing the fact that it was track's inability to handle the amount of rain that fell that was the root of the problem. What Tony Steele will be able to determine is whether new drains have in fact been laid and the quality of the surface which, after all, will be a permanent track and not there for just an annual or bi-annual SGP.

[racers and royals]

RIGA is perfectly capable ... the stadium, etc, is fine. But the meeting itself this weekend will provide evidence of the state of the track. But you are still dismissing the fact that it was track's inability to handle the amount of rain that fell that was the root of the problem. What Tony Steele will be able to determine is whether new drains have in fact been laid and the quality of the surface which, after all, will be a permanent track and not there for just an annual or bi-annual SGP.

Last year it didn`t even have permanent floodlights- looking at the photo`s which were published of the work creating the track it just seemed to be one last minute rush !!

[baldinhio]

RIGA is perfectly capable ... the stadium, etc, is fine. But the meeting itself this weekend will provide evidence of the state of the track. But you are still dismissing the fact that it was track's inability to handle the amount of rain that fell that was the root of the problem. What Tony Steele will be able to determine is whether new drains have in fact been laid and the quality of the surface which, after all, will be a permanent track and not there for just an annual or bi-annual SGP.

This is putting a lot of responsibility on Tony Steele particularly in light of his performance in Warsaw. I agree with Racers and Royals in believing BSI should ultimately be responsible to the punters as they are the ones making around £2m profit per annum from speedway. Can you clarify who you feel is ultimately responsible to the paying public when a meeting is abandoned due to poor preparation be it the track, starting gate or other controlled items (I acknowledge heavy rainfall may cause abandonment with no one to blame). At the same time any update you can provide on the long awaited enquiry into the Warsaw fiasco would be appreciated.

[PHILIPRISING]

THE decision to abandon a meeting as in Warsaw is the responsibility of the FIM. It wasn't Tony Steele's sole decision but after a collective verdict from the Race Director and the Clerk of the Course, who believed that the track conditions could not be improved, the FIM Jury (President, Referee and local FMNR delegate) and in light of the riders' refusal to ride they really had no option but to formally call it off. When riders claim, rightly or wrongly, that a track is dangerous and unsafe officials are left with nowhere to go.

 

You can huff and puff, threaten fines, suspensions all night long but if a rider did sustained serious injuries as a result of a crash deemed to have been caused by the track the repercussions would be endless.

 

At no stage were BSI involved in those discussions between riders and FIM officials on the Saturday night.

 

Who is ultimately responsible in Cardiff for providing a track which meets all the FIM requirements? BSI employ Speed Sport but it is also the role of the FIM to ensure that much of the structural work including fence, air barriers, starting gates (plural) and the track are in good working order. As Speed Sport are agents of BSI one can argue that BSI (as at Cardiff) are ultimately responsible if the track subsequently proves unfit for racing despite having been given the green light previously by the FIM.

 

In Warsaw it was the PZM who employed Speed Sport, admittedly at the behest of BSI, but the lack of a second starting gate, for example, is something that as far as I can ascertain right now is still under review. Olsen and Speed Sport will argue that they presented the FIM with a raceable track which was duly inspected, licenced and homologated. The FIM will probably counter that it was impossible to detect that the track would break up as it did and that was the fault of those commissioned to lay it, Speed Sport, and those who employed them, the PZM.

 

There are a lot of grey areas here and there is nothing concrete to emerge from the FIM as yet, at least not publicly, about Warsaw.

 

But I would say that the consensus of opinion is that in Warsaw it was an in-perfect storm. Track conditions were far from ideal, that cannot be denied, but many, including some of the riders who were there, believe that but for the interminable delays caused by the starting gate the meeting may well have reached its conclusion.

 

Had the malfunctioning gate been discarded immediately, and with no second gate, green light starts should immediately have been implemented in line with FIM regulations. Not ideal for riders used to looking left or right at a magnet but to exclude Jason Doyle on a green light start and then to rerun the heat with the tapes, which again didn't work, was borderline stupid in my opinion.

 

Not only that, all the time spent trying to rectify the starting gate and the personnel working on it could have been utilised better on the track itself which may have placated the riders. But while all these delays were going on the riders became more and more frustrated and the rest is history.

 

We are still left with the question of who is responsible at each individual SGP and might that be the promoters of each event, i.e those taking the ticket money , because ultimately it is they who have to make the refunds and incur compensation, should there be any.

 

Food for thought...

[Grand Central]

I would not argue with one single point in all that.

The 'perfect storm' characterisation does also neatly avoid the powers-that-be having to address the simple fact that a rider revolt was the only real reason for the abandonment. And everyone else is just powerless when that happens.

 

I think the 'Warsaw enquiry' should address the actual duplicity and conflict of roles though.

The fact that you are able to go through the detail of the various layers of jurisdiction is all fine.

But that is from a man closely involved for 40 years plus who also has in role in the show itself, on the night.

Not so easy for Joe Public to instantly know all this when handing over his wads of cash and sitting in the stand..

 

A clearer, simpler line of responsibilities at GPs would be a very good outcome of the enquiry, surely.

 

It was the continual messing around with the tapes and trying them again and again that was one of the daftest moves.

One thing that I have thought about a fair bit since Warsaw is how Green Lights starts could be made to actually work in place of starting tapes.

They did work well in Warsaw, that night, most of the time.

And in some ways it made the sport look 'leaner' and cleaner' ; perhaps even more modern

Starting tapes are really one of the most old fashioned looking parts of our sport,

 

A project worth pursuing I would have thought.

.

Edited June 26, 2015 by Grand Central

[Humphrey Appleby]

We are still left with the question of who is responsible at each individual SGP and might that be the promoters of each event, i.e those taking the ticket money , because ultimately it is they who have to make the refunds and incur compensation, should there be any.

BSI organise the series, organise the local hosts, and stipulate who has to build the track etc.. etc.. The FIM may have to formally sign off, but frankly what position are they in to refuse if 55k fans are expected to turn up in a couple of days? Quite simply BSI need to be ensuring that required standards are being met.

 

You can argue legalese till the cows come home, but who is going to turn up if the buck is continually passed when things go wrong? I might have been persuaded to go to the GP in Melbourne, but why should I take the chance if no-one will take responsibility for actually putting on a proper show and will hide behind small print?

[baldinhio]

THE decision to abandon a meeting as in Warsaw is the responsibility of the FIM. It wasn't Tony Steele's sole decision but after a collective verdict from the Race Director and the Clerk of the Course, who believed that the track conditions could not be improved, the FIM Jury (President, Referee and local FMNR delegate) and in light of the riders' refusal to ride they really had no option but to formally call it off. When riders claim, rightly or wrongly, that a track is dangerous and unsafe officials are left with nowhere to go.

 

You can huff and puff, threaten fines, suspensions all night long but if a rider did sustained serious injuries as a result of a crash deemed to have been caused by the track the repercussions would be endless.

 

At no stage were BSI involved in those discussions between riders and FIM officials on the Saturday night.

 

Who is ultimately responsible in Cardiff for providing a track which meets all the FIM requirements? BSI employ Speed Sport but it is also the role of the FIM to ensure that much of the structural work including fence, air barriers, starting gates (plural) and the track are in good working order. As Speed Sport are agents of BSI one can argue that BSI (as at Cardiff) are ultimately responsible if the track subsequently proves unfit for racing despite having been given the green light previously by the FIM.

 

In Warsaw it was the PZM who employed Speed Sport, admittedly at the behest of BSI, but the lack of a second starting gate, for example, is something that as far as I can ascertain right now is still under review. Olsen and Speed Sport will argue that they presented the FIM with a raceable track which was duly inspected, licenced and homologated. The FIM will probably counter that it was impossible to detect that the track would break up as it did and that was the fault of those commissioned to lay it, Speed Sport, and those who employed them, the PZM.

 

There are a lot of grey areas here and there is nothing concrete to emerge from the FIM as yet, at least not publicly, about Warsaw.

 

But I would say that the consensus of opinion is that in Warsaw it was an in-perfect storm. Track conditions were far from ideal, that cannot be denied, but many, including some of the riders who were there, believe that but for the interminable delays caused by the starting gate the meeting may well have reached its conclusion.

 

Had the malfunctioning gate been discarded immediately, and with no second gate, green light starts should immediately have been implemented in line with FIM regulations. Not ideal for riders used to looking left or right at a magnet but to exclude Jason Doyle on a green light start and then to rerun the heat with the tapes, which again didn't work, was borderline stupid in my opinion.

 

Not only that, all the time spent trying to rectify the starting gate and the personnel working on it could have been utilised better on the track itself which may have placated the riders. But while all these delays were going on the riders became more and more frustrated and the rest is history.

 

We are still left with the question of who is responsible at each individual SGP and might that be the promoters of each event, i.e those taking the ticket money , because ultimately it is they who have to make the refunds and incur compensation, should there be any.

 

Food for thought...

Thank you for the detailed response.

 

I am not convinced by your argument that BSI are not liable. Housebuilders such as Persimmon employ a number of sub contractors, purchase material from several suppliers and their work is monitored by the likes of NHBC and the Local Authority. Should the finished product prove defective it is Persimmon that is liable. Wicks proudly state "Its got our name on it" and back the quality with a money back guarantee. Reputable companies accept they are liable for the quality of their product and in most cases value their reputation. For BSI to hide behind the FIM, Olsen and the riders is disingenuous. Are we really to believe there was no contact with the riders (Nicki P appears to have been at the fore in getting Doyle excluded and the meeting abandoned) given:

 

Media interested in all aspects of either the FIM Speedway Grand Prix Series or Monster Energy FIM Speedway World Cup, including interviews with riders or other parties involved should contact:

Nicola Sands, Media Manager, BSI Speedway

[PHILIPRISING]

NOT sure of the relevance of your footnote... however, believe me or believe me not, there was no BSI contact with the riders in Warsaw after the start of the meeting.

 

When the riders retreated to a room just behind the pit area on a number of occasions the only people allowed in (and I was standing outside the door - not quite with my ear on it!) were FIM officials including the Race Director, members of the Jury, Track Racing Director Armando Castagna and a representative of the PZM.

 

Eventually the three Jury members drafted an official statement confirming that the meeting had been abandoned and it was only then that BSI were informed.

[emerald tyke]

ARE you sure there wasn't music between heats last year? I'm often stuck down in the pits where you cannot hear much but thought there was...

Yes Phil I can vouch for the fact that it was scarily silent and non atmospheric at last yrs gp, I know its for the speedway we pay our money but there was nothing to get the crowd involved, songs to sway to with fellow supporters behind or mexican wave or even the 'bongos' where the camera panns through the crowd trying to play the virtual bongos. It all adds to the experience...I had 5 newbies there with us and theyre going again this year so please sort out some music Phil

[Jacques]

Yes Phil I can vouch for the fact that it was scarily silent and non atmospheric at last yrs gp, I know its for the speedway we pay our money but there was nothing to get the crowd involved, songs to sway to with fellow supporters behind or mexican wave or even the 'bongos' where the camera panns through the crowd trying to play the virtual bongos. It all adds to the experience...I had 5 newbies there with us and theyre going again this year so please sort out some music Phil

 

Definitely some music, something to get the crowd going..But please, not the Mexican wave, dear god, it was done to death donkeys year ago

Edited June 27, 2015 by Jacques

[PHILIPRISING]

 

Definitely some music, something to get the crowd going..But please, not the Mexican wave, dear god, it was done to death donkeys year ago

WAS in full flow at one of the cricket ODIs the other day, although I would tend to agree with you.

[sommelier]

Stuart Robson did a very good talk on the practice at Coventry last night

[Trees]

What did he say?

[Gemini]

You're joking. He's from 'Up North' ~ couldn't understand a word he said.

[RAFA]

On Tuesday 23rd June there was a full official practice event at Cardiff’s Millennium Stadium does any one have the full heat details please or know where I can find them

Cheers