John Leslie Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 Fair enough, bizarre Jonsson didn't go 15m back then, must have spat his dummy out and then refused to go in Heat 15. Not sure why DropACog is quoting the Midland Development League rules there. (21.11) ? Jonsson couldn't go back 15m if Zagar did. But I don't know why Zagar would get priority over Jonsson in choosing the 15m option if they both got excluded at the same time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E I Addio Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 Not sure why DropACog is quoting the Midland Development League rules there. (21.11) ? Jonsson couldn't go back 15m if Zagar did. But I don't know why Zagar would get priority over Jonsson in choosing the 15m option if they both got excluded at the same time. That is a strange sequence of events. Jonsson must have committed the offence first because he could not be delaying the start after Zagar touched the tapes. Arguably he delayed the start by moving and causing Zagar to jump first, after having been warned but his offence must presumably have been committed a fraction before Zagars. Who knows how referees minds work though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Leslie Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 That is a strange sequence of events. Jonsson must have committed the offence first because he could not be delaying the start after Zagar touched the tapes. Arguably he delayed the start by moving and causing Zagar to jump first, after having been warned but his offence must presumably have been committed a fraction before Zagars. Who knows how referees minds work though. I'd agree with your reasoning that Jonsson must have committed the offence first. (although you could argue then that at the time Jonsson delayed the start, Zagar hadn't touched the tapes, so Zagar shouldn't have been excluded). It could be that Jonsson was excluded first and Lakeside had the option of 15m or a reserve, and chose to use a reserve. In that case Zagar then had the choice of 15m or a reserve and opted for 15m. Had Lakeside opted for 15m for Jonsson, then Zagar would only be able to be replaced by a reserve. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevebrum Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 Good win for the Aces, back in the top 4 where they belong. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Leslie Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 If it was the refs decision then he was just making it up as he went along. If what was the referee's decision? The referees decision was to disqualify both of the riders. That's the simple bit. The rules allow either to be handicapped 15m or be replaced by a reserve, they can't both take the handicap because only one rider can start from 15m. The problem is, when 2 riders have been disqualified at the same time, who has first option on taking the handicap? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E I Addio Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 (edited) But still only seen 10 heats so still robbed. I'd agree with your reasoning that Jonsson must have committed the offence first. (although you could argue then that at the time Jonsson delayed the start, Zagar hadn't touched the tapes, so Zagar shouldn't have been excluded). It could be that Jonsson was excluded first and Lakeside had the option of 15m or a reserve, and chose to use a reserve. In that case Zagar then had the choice of 15m or a reserve and opted for 15m. Had Lakeside opted for 15m for Jonsson, then Zagar would only be able to be replaced by a reserve. The rule doesn't seem very clear to me. It talks about if the 15 metre gate is already occupied by a second or susmequent re-instatement a reserve switch is the only option, so one interpretation is that you don't get a chance to go off 15 metres if there is a subsequeNt offence. That would fit in with the scenario of Jonsson being at fault first and then Zagar second. I suppose you could also say if Jonsson was excluded for delaying the start, why was Zagar excluded at all? If Josson was moving the referee should have pulled him out there and then and Zagar would not be out at all. But who knows what the rule is really meant to mean and who knows how a referees mind works , or at this stage who really cares ? Edited July 30, 2015 by E I Addio Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Leslie Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 The rule doesn't seem very clear to me. It is clumsy grammar, but what it's trying to say is that you can only have a 15m handicap on gate four (gate d). And if someone has already been excluded and taken the handicap on gate 4, anyone subsequently getting excluded can only be replaced by a reserve. (i.e. gate 2 or 3 can't be used for a 15m handicap). What it doesn't legislate for is two riders getting excluded at the same time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan_Jones Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 It is clumsy grammar, but what it's trying to say is that you can only have a 15m handicap on gate four (gate d). And if someone has already been excluded and taken the handicap on gate 4, anyone subsequently getting excluded can only be replaced by a reserve. (i.e. gate 2 or 3 can't be used for a 15m handicap). What it doesn't legislate for is two riders getting excluded at the same time. One rider from each team can start off 15m using gates 3 & 4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Leslie Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 I think you might be making this more difficult than it actually is. No, I'm making it very simple. The referee disqualified two riders for a starting offence. - That was his decision. When a rider is disqualified for a starting offence, he can either be re-instated off 15m from gate 4, or replaced with a reserve. If someone is already occupying the 15m handicap off gate he can only be replaced with a reserve - That's the rules. However last night 2 riders were excluded at the same time. They can't both go off 15m, but the rules don't say which one gets to go off 15m if they both wanted it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E I Addio Posted July 30, 2015 Report Share Posted July 30, 2015 It is clumsy grammar, but what it's trying to say is that you can only have a 15m handicap on gate four (gate d). And if someone has already been excluded and taken the handicap on gate 4, anyone subsequently getting excluded can only be replaced by a reserve. (i.e. gate 2 or 3 can't be used for a 15m handicap). What it doesn't legislate for is two riders getting excluded at the same time. Yes I agree that applying logic to the clumsy grammar you are probably right, but it still doesn't explain how both came to be disqulaified. Not that it really matters now . No doubt in due course we will find that some other referee will apply a different interpretation. 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.