TMW Posted August 2, 2015 Report Share Posted August 2, 2015 Lions didn't field their team nor did the Hammers so hardly a fair comparison. In reality with 50% of the combined line up being guests this meeting should have been listed as a challenge match so that at least after a long lay off the promotion had a meeting fro the fans to watch. Interestingly, Hammers had the larger portion of the guests which apparently was finally arrived at after rule bending (a polite way of saying they were allegedly allowed to cheat by another promoter) to allow Harris in as a guest meaning that 57% the Hammers final line up was made up of guests who collectively scored 65% of the teams total score. I am also prepared to say that Norrie in his role of team manager failed to field a suitably strong team particularly at reserve, where although hard to explain Richard Hall being seen as an up and coming rider Norrie was slow off the mark to book Hall for the Lions. Sorry but clearly 1 up to the Hammers management. Overall, a truly bad advert for British Speedway capped by a referee who had to admit publically that he did not fully understand the rules. I'm not sure how welcome Hal would have been as a Lion. Lions fans have long memories. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IainB Posted August 2, 2015 Report Share Posted August 2, 2015 Can somebody please explain what the problem was with the ref? What didn't he understand? his arse from his elbow 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted August 2, 2015 Report Share Posted August 2, 2015 Rather pathetic all these allegations about cheating with no evidence. Lakeside chose their guests well but unless someone can provide a relevant precedent I will not be throwing lazy allegations of cheating at Lakeside.TBF, he's right. Lakeside declared a team with AJ @1 replaced by Hans. And Nilsson at 5 as r/r. They were then allowed to swap Hans to guest for Nilsson and Harris for AJ. It's acceptable to change a guest if a rider gets injured but once you have declared, providing no injury you have declared and that's it. The other issue is that the SCB have allowed the BSPA to make a call. Last week some people on the Redcar/Somerset thread took great pleasure in mocking those complaining about the BSPA- well here we have an SCB decision made by the BSPA. Farce! OK Brady Kurtz and Aaron Summers - I assume that means the 9th May fixture v Coventry. So who were Leicester not allowed to track? they had already declared Summers as second string. Leicester wanted to move him to heat leader and use Kurtz as the second string. The SCB (note, not BSPA) refused this, correctly. As Summers was already declared at 2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E I Addio Posted August 2, 2015 Report Share Posted August 2, 2015 TBF, he's right. Lakeside declared a team with AJ @1 replaced by Hans. And Nilsson at 5 as r/r. They were then allowed to swap Hans to guest for Nilsson and Harris for AJ. It's acceptable to change a guest if a rider gets injured but once you have declared, providing no injury you have declared and that's it. The other issue is that the SCB have allowed the BSPA to make a call. Last week some people on the Redcar/Somerset thread took great pleasure in mocking those complaining about the BSPA- well here we have an SCB decision made by the BSPA. Farce!they had already declared Summers as second string. Leicester wanted to move him to heat leader and use Kurtz as the second string. The SCB (note, not BSPA) refused this, correctly. As Summers was already declared at 2. It was very similar at Lakeside on Friday. Swiderski was declared at No 5 for Lakeside and when Bech was injured they moved him up to No2 and used R/R for Nilsson. Swindon on the other hand declared Steve Worrall at No 2 and Craig Cook at No 3 but although neither Worrall nor Cook are injured as far as I know Swindon actually used Blackbird in place of Worrall and R/r for Cook at No 3, so in effect they used a guest for a guest and r/r for another guest. I've had a brief look at the rules they refer to "line ups" rather than riding order so it's not clear whether technically they have to declare them literal line up and nothing else or whether them term is meant to include riding order. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1 valve Posted August 2, 2015 Report Share Posted August 2, 2015 1 Valve- You mentioned Leicester being too slow off the mark to book Richard Hall as the guest my understanding is that Lakeside have had him booked for weeks well before Simon Lambert got injured and Josh Auty was ruled out. I don't agree if what went on the background with Lakeside team changes and lack of control by BSPA and SCB however on the day Leicester were beaten by a better team and Swiderski is not the backup to Doyle that is required. I am happy to stand corrected re Hall being booked by Hammers weeks ago...good research by them. also agree that Swiderski is not delivering as he needs to. Also agree that lions were beaten by a better team on the night....I just don't agree that Hammers should have been allowed to field Harris and that 4 guests in one team is simply too many. Yes Lions beaten by a better team, just that the team in question wasn't really "The hammers" just a line up who plundered the league points for the team in question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arnieg Posted August 2, 2015 Report Share Posted August 2, 2015 TBF, he's right. Lakeside declared a team with AJ @1 replaced by Hans. And Nilsson at 5 as r/r. They were then allowed to swap Hans to guest for Nilsson and Harris for AJ. It's acceptable to change a guest if a rider gets injured but once you have declared, providing no injury you have declared and that's it. The other issue is that the SCB have allowed the BSPA to make a call. Last week some people on the Redcar/Somerset thread took great pleasure in mocking those complaining about the BSPA- well here we have an SCB decision made by the BSPA. Farce!they had already declared Summers as second string. Leicester wanted to move him to heat leader and use Kurtz as the second string. The SCB (note, not BSPA) refused this, correctly. As Summers was already declared at 2. Now that I follow what has happened I think I agree with you on all material points. I think the key point is that Jonsson and Nilsson were already unavailable when Lakeside originally declared their team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemini Posted August 2, 2015 Report Share Posted August 2, 2015 Speedway is not a place for a dog and I hope the promotion think again,I heard someone make a comment about why would someone bring a dog here,so I knew you were there. I am a massive dog lover so not anti dogs just think it's wrong. Okay I'll stay at home then. If it's alright with you I'll still take her to Peterborough and Coventry where I don't feel unwelcome. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motherread Posted August 2, 2015 Report Share Posted August 2, 2015 his arse from his elbow Thanks for that iainb 😉. Any chance of a sensible answer?? Please Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrcts Posted August 2, 2015 Report Share Posted August 2, 2015 1 Valve- You mentioned Leicester being too slow off the mark to book Richard Hall as the guest my understanding is that Lakeside have had him booked for weeks well before Simon Lambert got injured and Josh Auty was ruled out. I don't agree if what went on the background with Lakeside team changes and lack of control by BSPA and SCB however on the day Leicester were beaten by a better team and Swiderski is not the backup to Doyle that is required. How can Leicester be beaten by a better team?It certainly wasn't a Leicester team nor was it a Lakeside team.......absolute joke! Speedway is not a place for a dog and I hope the promotion think again,I heard someone make a comment about why would someone bring a dog here,so I knew you were there. I am a massive dog lover so not anti dogs just think it's wrong. As to the meeting,it was a farce, certain teams can do what they want and get away with it. Why are you such a miserable git! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1 valve Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 (edited) Thanks for that iainb . Any chance of a sensible answer?? Please Heat 12. Lions (guest) Sarjeant brings down hammers (guest) Hall on the 3rd/4th bend of lap one and is excluded. Lions (guest) Greenwood returns to the pit entrance whilst Hammers rider Elis returns in to the pits. The referee excludes Ellis for leaving the track as per rule 15.2.2 which specifically states "no return into the pits is permitted" however this rule is applicable only when the race has been stopped and no riders have been disqualified i.e. a "flying start" Rule 15.2.3 which covers the situation where a rider is excluded and a re-run is required does not specify that riders cannot return to the pits and this is the rule that the referee should have used. Hence after being told by the Hammers manager and then another referee that he had used the wrong rule he reversed his decision of penalising Ellis. Edited August 3, 2015 by 1 valve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barrow boy Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 Nilsson's average is 6.88. Harris was allowed to replace him with an average of 7.09. Why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mdmc82 Posted August 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 Nilsson's average is 6.88. Harris was allowed to replace him with an average of 7.09. Why? He replaced AJ in the end and Hans replaced Nilsson. That's what upset Norrie, that they were allowed to change their team at the last minute when your meant to declare 48 hours before. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveLyric2 Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 Presumably Leicester lodged their official protest - with fee - before the meeting began and then rode 'under protest', rather than wait until they lost?! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foreverblue Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 Presumably Leicester lodged their official protest - with fee - before the meeting began and then rode 'under protest', rather than wait until they lost?! That is a very valid point as i would have thought all promoters would do that if they thought they had a case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barrow boy Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 He replaced AJ in the end and Hans replaced Nilsson. That's what upset Norrie, that they were allowed to change their team at the last minute when your meant to declare 48 hours before. So Lakeside's team was allowed to race illegally and Leicester should most definitely have ridden under protest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packerman Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 Presumably Leicester lodged their official protest - with fee - before the meeting began and then rode 'under protest', rather than wait until they lost?! Does it not matter as Lakeside still win by 2 points if you take Harris's points away! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Voice Of Reason Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 (edited) Let's get this into some perspective. At the end of the day, it was a speedway meeting between two cr@p teams, with our only real battle the avoidance of the wooden spoon. As there's no relegation process, the league points themself were quite immaterial otherwise. The fact is we were bolstered via guests. Without guests, and looking at our away record to date, we'd have probably got totally stuffed. If Norrie Allen felt that he had a reasonable case for complaint, then why not, as mentioned, put his money where his (quite big) mouth is, and raise a protest at the outset? All he appears to want to do is apportion blame towards all other departments, rather than accept his, and his team's, shortcomings. And I have little sypmathy for this bloke - he was pretty silent in 2014 (for once!) at the Beaumont Park debacle when Ben Morley was incorrectly excluded; and Adam Ellis removed (incorrectly) from the meeting. The bottom line is this meeting should have been re-arranged anyway. With 7 guests amongst 14 riders, is was nothing other than an utter farce. However, maybe he didn't think we'd get such strong guests, and it would be a 'banker home win'? However, it went ahead. If people that went saw a reasonable meeting, then in all honesty, what does it really matter? Edited August 3, 2015 by The Voice Of Reason 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motherread Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 Thank you 1 valve 👍 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedibee Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 I'm not sure how welcome Hal would have been as a Lion. Lions fans have long memories. Sure have , they can remember when Mullets were fashionable along with throwback war cries and thing it was this week , some of them might even remember when Leicester had a team worthy of being in the top division , Maybe if they could put their long memories aside for a while and stop using them as excuses , they could move onto the 21st century with eyes wide open and see things from a realistic point of view , don't hold your breath though ... Give us an ................. L Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrcts Posted August 3, 2015 Report Share Posted August 3, 2015 I'm fed up with struggling to get decent guests because we ride on Saturdays. I'm hoping when Coventry shut that we can use Friday nights as our race night. 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.