Glasgow V Edinburgh - Pl & Scottish Smug Trophy - Sunday 14th June 3pm

[Fromafar]

I'm sure"Al Stewart" would have consulted with Alex Harkness regarding that rule, which is obviously somewhere in the "how to interpretat the rule book" before he posted his post regarding this matter.Its time a gallon of petrol and a match were used on the rule book and start again.

Edited June 15, 2015 by Fromafar

[tyretrax]

 

Lawson wasn't happy about something don't know what and started chucking his bike at craig after the race had a few words before craig made a head butting motion towards Lawson. Sam then moved Lawson away and that was that. Added a bit of spice to the derby witch was good to see.

First, good job well done by the Monarchs.

 

On the Cook/Lawson spat, as they came out of the bend on the first lap Cook had a quick look back. As he got onto the straight he appeared to shut off momentarily causing the others to bunch up.

[highroad119]

almost an entire home side off form on the same day, we got off lightly IMO.

was surreal watching the visiting team reeling in the home riders, just knowing they were going to get past.

credit where its due.

Edited June 15, 2015 by highroad119

[cyclone]

 

if it is about assessed riders beind awarded a true average from less than 4 home 4away if a team redclares then its not about someone putting a spanner in the works with an old ruling.

It there and should be used.

Presumably this means that Glasgow want a new 7 pointer and with Kozza under that the new declaration needs to stay under 42.5 which it would with Sarjeant on 3 but not if his revised figure is used.

 

 

 

I'm sure"Al Stewart" would have consulted with Alex Harkness regarding that rule, which is obviously somewhere in the "how to interpretat the rule book" before he posted his post regarding this matter.Its time a gallon of petrol and a match were used on the rule book and start again.

 

As you will note from above Faf, our friend from Ipswich is also aware of the the wording.

 

Never mind, we'll make allowance for your ignorance on this subject and predictable dig at anything to do with the Monarchs

[Black Angus]

I looked in the rule-book:

 

16.2.9 An EL or PL Rider starting the season with an Assessed MA will have an Established MA

after 4 Home and 4 Away fixtures, becoming effective 7 days after the last qualifying Meeting.

Should an Established MA not be achieved in order to be effective from 1st May, then the MC

may issue a revised MA, based upon actual rides if the Team re-declares.

 

Seems pretty clear. Nice try.

[Lioness]

Not doubting anything here but whoever drew up that clause and used the word 'may' in the final sentence certainly left it open to accusations of applying the rules depending on the individual team concerned. Hardly makes professional or non ambiguous reading!

 

I certainly wouldn't call it 'clear'

 

 

I looked in the rule-book:

 

16.2.9 An EL or PL Rider starting the season with an Assessed MA will have an Established MA

after 4 Home and 4 Away fixtures, becoming effective 7 days after the last qualifying Meeting.

Should an Established MA not be achieved in order to be effective from 1st May, then the MC

may issue a revised MA, based upon actual rides if the Team re-declares.

 

Seems pretty clear. Nice try.

.

[baba]

 

I looked in the rule-book:

 

You deserve a pat on the head

[Halifaxtiger]

Not doubting anything here but whoever drew up that clause and used the word 'may' in the final sentence certainly left it open to accusations of applying the rules depending on the individual team concerned. Hardly makes professional or non ambiguous reading!

 

I certainly wouldn't call it 'clear'

 

 

.

 

Quite.

 

I must admit I was a little disappointed yesterday although I think that was my own fault because I expected it to be a classic in front of a packed house and it was neither.

 

The problem was that Monarchs were just too good and while they usually hit the starts when they didn't they did most of the passing (I thought the quality of the racing was good) as well. Morris would have made a difference but I think Edinburgh would still have won.

 

Cook was imperious, Sedgmen impressive (when he gated) and Riss could well be a trump card at reserve. Lawson aside, Glasgow simply weren't up to it - Sarjeant looked slow and Summers is still no more than a decent second or third heat leader.

 

One final comment : I was right in line with the starting gate and I didn't see Sarjeant move at the starts on any occasion (although he did anticipate it once or twice). Lawson, on the other hand, most certainly did.

Edited June 15, 2015 by Halifaxtiger

[SharpenRake]

Not doubting anything here but whoever drew up that clause and used the word 'may' in the final sentence certainly left it open to accusations of applying the rules depending on the individual team concerned. Hardly makes professional or non ambiguous reading!

 

I certainly wouldn't call it 'clear'

 

 

.

Totally agree. Glasgow are trying to replace a badly injured rider (hope all goes well with Kozza's recovery) using the rules. They are not trying to pull a fast one from what I can see.

[lucifer sam]

Sarjaent's new average will be 6.35:

 

http://www.speedwaygb.co/files/downloads/pl15_issue_14.pdf

 

So that's Berge at reserve from Friday onwards.

 

All the best

Rob

Edited June 15, 2015 by lucifer sam

[SharpenRake]

 

Quite.

 

I must admit I was a little disappointed yesterday although I think that was my own fault because I expected it to be a classic in front of a packed house and it was neither.

 

The problem was that Monarchs were just too good and while they usually hit the starts when they didn't they did most of the passing (I thought the quality of the racing was good) as well. Morris would have made a difference but I think Edinburgh would still have won.

 

Cook was imperious, Sedgmen impressive (when he gated) and Riss could well be a trump card at reserve. Lawson aside, Glasgow simply weren't up to it - Sarjeant looked slow and Summers is still no more than a decent second or third heat leader.

 

One final comment : I was right in line with the starting gate and I didn't see Sarjeant move at the starts on any occasion (although he did anticipate it once or twice). Lawson, on the other hand, most certainly did.

Agree it wasn't a classic but it looked busy to me. Presumably more Monarchs fans would have come through if Glasgow hadn't won on Friday but still a fair turn-out? Glad you agree about Sargeant. But again confused by referees differnet interpretation of the 'rules', which I still can't find in the rule book, and announcements. One week its announced you must stay stationery at the tapes before they go up or the race will be rerun. On sunday some riders moved and the race continued other races it got called back and at least 2 riders made cracking starts not having moved and they got called back as well. Causes arguments confusion amongst fans and the riders must be getting fed up not knowing what a refs going to do. Make it simple anything goes other than tape touching.

[Gazc]

 

 

I looked in the rule-book:

 

 

 

 

 

 

You deserve a pat on the head

 

 

Always get the keyboard commandos stating rules and making there own conclusions will never change no point really as thankfully it is not there decision to make.

[george.m]

Agree it wasn't a classic but it looked busy to me. Presumably more Monarchs fans would have come through if Glasgow hadn't won on Friday but still a fair turn-out? Glad you agree about Sargeant. But again confused by referees differnet interpretation of the 'rules', which I still can't find in the rule book, and announcements. One week its announced you must stay stationery at the tapes before they go up or the race will be rerun. On sunday some riders moved and the race continued other races it got called back and at least 2 riders made cracking starts not having moved and they got called back as well. Causes arguments confusion amongst fans and the riders must be getting fed up not knowing what a refs going to do. Make it simple anything goes other than tape touching.

James got a flyer in one heat and all 4 pulled back. From where I was standing he wasn't moving prior.

Maybe his history coming back to haunt him?

[MD]

James got a flyer in one heat and all 4 pulled back. From where I was standing he wasn't moving prior.

Maybe his history coming back to haunt him?

Its a fooking persistent history that.

[Fromafar]

As you will note from above Faf, our friend from Ipswich is also aware of the the wording.

 

Never mind, we'll make allowance for your ignorance on this subject and predictable dig at anything to do with the Monarchs

It is not a dig ,I am just pointing out that the Post was probably fact rather than a guess .The rules are very unclear in our sport.If you read my earlier comments on the thread you will see my point,I was pointing out that "Al" probably knew what he was talking about.Your ignorance on this subject also shows IMO.Your interpretation of my post is incorrect . Edited June 15, 2015 by Fromafar

[scotchopper]

Totally agree. Glasgow are trying to replace a badly injured rider (hope all goes well with Kozza's recovery) using the rules. They are not trying to pull a fast one from what I can see.

The ambiguity doesn't help anyone and any decision made under the discretion of the bspa will always get accused of bias although they should use elite league officials for these decisions.

 

My understanding is that this rule has been brought in to prevent a team gaining an unfair advantage due to a rider having an assessed average that is quite clearly wrong. The reason seargant doesn't have a proper average is because he has missed meetings due to doubling up and he should have had it a month ago. So this really doesn't have anything to do with kozza smith so it would be the right call.

 

Speedy recovery to kozza that is more important

James got a flyer in one heat and all 4 pulled back. From where I was standing he wasn't moving prior.

Maybe his history coming back to haunt him?

Speedway updates site said he went through the tapes in heat 12, was that wrong? Sounds like present day rather than history or is that site wrong?

Edited June 15, 2015 by scotchopper

[george.m]

The ambiguity doesn't help anyone and any decision made under the discretion of the bspa will always get accused of bias although they should use elite league officials for these decisions.

My understanding is that this rule has been brought in to prevent a team gaining an unfair advantage due to a rider having an assessed average that is quite clearly wrong. The reason seargant doesn't have a proper average is because he has missed meetings due to doubling up and he should have had it a month ago. So this really doesn't have anything to do with kozza smith so it would be the right call.

Speedy recovery to kozza that is more important

 

Speedway updates site said he went through the tapes in heat 12, was that wrong? Sounds like present day rather than history or is that site wrong?

Thanks. It wasn't that heat. Can't remember for the life of me which one it was.

[Paulco]

One more point about yesterday . One of the races , cant remember which one , there was an unsatisfactory start . The new rules prevent the riders returning to the pits . But what we had yesterday was all four riders sat at the pits gate and a posse of mechanics descended onto the track and all sorts of adjustments were then carried out . New ruling is pretty pointless then .

[Fromafar]

One more point about yesterday . One of the races , cant remember which one , there was an unsatisfactory start . The new rules prevent the riders returning to the pits . But what we had yesterday was all four riders sat at the pits gate and a posse of mechanics descended onto the track and all sorts of adjustments were then carried out . New ruling is pretty pointless then .

Agree, what is the point when all that happens now is to employ a fit mechanic.Another stupid rule that can be broken legally.

[Al Stewart]

My understanding is that this rule has been brought in to prevent a team gaining an unfair advantage due to a rider having an assessed average that is quite clearly wrong. The reason seargant doesn't have a proper average is because he has missed meetings due to doubling up and he should have had it a month ago. So this really doesn't have anything to do with kozza smith so it would be the right call.

That's exactly right. The reason the word 'may' is used in the rule is because an assessed average can also go down (eg from 7.00) so it depends what the situation is and the effect of changing / not changing the assessed rider's average and whether the other riders in the team have up to date averages.

 

This is surely as obvious an example as there could be of a situation when a rider should be moved on to a new average at the time of a re-declaration.