lucifer sam Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 Actually, Sky missed the Championship being won in '99 and 2000 too. In '99 their whole caboodle was at Saddlebow Road watching Poole miss out when Leigh Adams won heat 15 for the Stars whilst Panthers were quietly going about demolishing Belle Vue to win the title forty or so miles away. Then in 2000 Eastbourne won the title prior to the last match v King's Lynn when the Stars lost elsewhere in their penultimate match (caused by a very punishing schedule to ensure their last match was on that Monday night to fit in with Sky). Sky made absolutely sure they wouldn't miss out again. Er... wrong. It went down to the wire in both 1999 and 2000. In 2000, it was decided by the final Eastbourne vs King's Lynn fixture. Oxford won with one match to spare in 2001, after a draw at Ipswich in the penultimate fixture. After that, play-offs were brought in. All the best Rob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Blachshadow Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 (edited) Er... wrong. It went down to the wire in both 1999 Yes, Im not saying it didn't go down to the wire in '99 but Sky were at King's Lynn showing their match v Poole not at EoES where Peterborough beat Belle Vue to win the title on the same evening. Edited November 25, 2015 by Vincent Blackshadow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucifer sam Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 (edited) Yes, Im not saying it didn't go down to the wire in '99 but Sky were at King's Lynn showing their match v Poole not at EoES where Peterborough beat Belle Vue to win the title on the same evening. Wrong again. Sky showed all 30 heats from both meetings from that night. When it became obvious that Peterborough were crushing BV, they made sure Heat 15 of that match came first, therefore leaving everyone hanging on the final race at King's Lynn. Leigh Adams won the race for King's Lynn, ensuring Poole lost, at which point they cut back across to Peterborough to show the celebrations. Both the 1999 and 2000 showdowns were shown in full. It needed dual coverage of two meetings in 1999; in 2000, it only needed one, since the last meeting involved both championship protagonists. It's in 2001, that Sky miscalculated. They didn't show Oxford's penultimate match at Ipswich, assuming Oxford were going to lose, and instead the Cheetahs forced a draw to win the title, and the only coverage that Sky had was brief bulletins on Sky News. In 2002, the play-offs started. All the best Rob Edited November 25, 2015 by lucifer sam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 Yes, Im not saying it didn't go down to the wire in '99 but Sky were at King's Lynn showing their match v Poole not at EoES where Peterborough beat Belle Vue to win the title on the same evening. They had cameras at both tracks, like they do today with the play-off semis. The Eastbourne v King's Lynn title decider was actually on a Saturday, with Lynn needing a draw to win the league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Humphrey Appleby Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 (edited) Why do you think they don't run individuals, 4TT's etc.. Simply because the demand wasn't there! I think the biggest reason for the demise of open and alternative format meetings because the top riders started to be allowed to miss them, and that devalued them in the eyes of spectator. John Berry said that it was in those sort of meetings you actually needed your best riders to be involved more than even league matches. I think the occasional open meeting added variety to the fixture list, and some of the more prestigious ones were often well attended. I think alternative formats like 4TTs and Pairs are actually preferable to riding the same teams over-and-over again in league matches if you need to pad out the fixture list, and in fact, something like a 4TT would be a better format for an inter-league cup. I doubt they're popular with promoters though, as they're probably more expensive to stage than league meetings as they'll have to pay more riders at full cost, plus with something like a 3TT or 4TT get fewer home meetings in relation to away ones. Edited November 25, 2015 by Humphrey Appleby Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve roberts Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 This isn't 'my logic'. This 'logic' has been introduced by the anti playoff people who have decided that fans don't go because of the playoffs. I am yet to see one single good reason as to why that would be the case.. here you are telling us that fans have always attended regardless (although the evidence of course says otherwise), so why, if they attend when their team has no hope of finishing top, would they suddenly decide they don't want to go anymore if they still have something to race for? See, it's not my logic that is flawed, it's the logic of those desperately trying to link declining crowds to the play-offs. People are well within their rights to think that a straight league is a better way to decide the champions and in some respects I agree with them... but to try and justify that by blaming the playoffs for the continued decline in attendances is a fabrication. Once again you post has no logic to it. Fans aren't attending, so let's introduce more less meaningful meetings, how exactly do you think that will bring the fans in? Why do you think there are less meeetings? Why do you think they don't run individuals, 4TT's etc.. Simply because the demand wasn't there! Probably for the best as we're still waiting for you to come up with a single reason why crowds would INCREASE with no playoffs. Can't be bothered personally! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWitcher Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 Can't be bothered personally! Of course, that's the standard fall back line when you know you have no argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve roberts Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 Of course, that's the standard fall back line when you know you have no argument. For goodness sake what's the matter with you! I can't be bothered debating this subject any longer! All angles have been covered and I have better things to do with my time...just get a life will you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWitcher Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 For goodness sake what's the matter with you! I can't be bothered debating this subject any longer! All angles have been covered and I have better things to do with my time...just get a life will you! Nothing wrong with me, I'm not the one who has avoided answering a simple question, got his knickers in a twist and stormed out. Relax, you made a claim, you can't back it up. It's no big deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve roberts Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 Nothing wrong with me, I'm not the one who has avoided answering a simple question, got his knickers in a twist and stormed out. Relax, you made a claim, you can't back it up. It's no big deal. Are you sitting down? Now watch my lips...the original thread was whether the Play-Offs should be scrapped? Many contributors, including myself, have posted comments for and against the concept. You apparently have a problem accepting other people's opinions regarding this topic. I have no intention going over and over what's been discussed (despite your childish comment about 'getting one's knickers in a twist) and there comes a time, surely, that the debate has become exhausted. Can't you accept that notion? That's my final comment on this particular thread as I am finding your constant comments tiresome as I'm sure others do and would prefer to move on! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWitcher Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 Are you sitting down? Now watch my lips...the original thread was whether the Play-Offs should be scrapped? Many contributors, including myself, have posted comments for and against the concept. You apparently have a problem accepting other people's opinions regarding this topic. I have no intention going over and over what's been discussed (despite your childish comment about 'getting one's knickers in a twist) and there comes a time, surely, that the debate has become exhausted. Can't you accept that notion? That's my final comment on this particular thread as I am finding your constant comments tiresome as I'm sure others do and would prefer to move on! Still can't answer the question. I understand, you can't. An opinion is only as good as the rationale behind it. You were asked to quantify your rationale.. you couldn't. Not even made an attempt too. Just decided you don't want to discuss it anymore. That's fine, your decision. So the reality is, there's nothing to go over. You have failed in the entire thread to give one reason as to why crowds would increase if playoffs were scrapped. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColinMills Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 bw, on page 34 of this thread, you state they don't run 4tt, individuals because theres no "demand" for it.Personally, I see no demand for league racing from march til the play offs..! I openly admit crowds are larger for play offs, how can anyone deny that?. but again, when I last saw witches win the league in 98, it was against lowly Swindon. I recall a very very good crowd for that too, plus it was done the "proper" way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWitcher Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 bw, on page 34 of this thread, you state they don't run 4tt, individuals because theres no "demand" for it.Personally, I see no demand for league racing from march til the play offs..! I openly admit crowds are larger for play offs, how can anyone deny that?. but again, when I last saw witches win the league in 98, it was against lowly Swindon. I recall a very very good crowd for that too, plus it was done the "proper" way. So you have a belief that scrapping the playoffs would suddenly make people want to go to speedway again.. why is that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stratton Posted November 25, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 So you have a belief that scrapping the playoffs would suddenly make people want to go to speedway again.. why is that?Do you think if the play/offs were scrapped that people would wave there arms in despair and never go again.? I think you over value how important the Play/offs are, even with them the crowds are hardly booming are they. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColinMills Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 So you have a belief that scrapping the playoffs would suddenly make people want to go to speedway again.. why is that? i actually think, the people who go now, would go in any case. Speedway on the whole in Britain (league wise) is on its knees. im amazed any club can survive on 500-700 in a lot of cases. the play offs are much needed money making days, just like bank holiday fixtures. i fully accept teams winning the title through the play offs, as they are the rules, it doesn't mean i agree with the concept. to go back to 98, it would of been criminal for that witches side to be robbed of the title when they"d destroyed everyone. everybody who bothers on the bsf likes speedway, but we all have differing views. some people like doubling up riders/double points rule, i personally think they are both awful. im happy for the play offs to continue, but no one can persuade me different about thinking top team should be champions 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orion Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 Do you think if the play/offs were scrapped that people would wave there arms in despair and never go again.? I think you over value how important the Play/offs are, even with them the crowds are hardly booming are they. Do you if think if we have no plays offs the crowds be would bigger with nothing ride for the rest of the season for most sides ? unless you can other with some logic why the crowds would be bigger then it is quite right to value the play offs , As I said take Swindon season last year do you really think they would signed ward and then get the crowds they did ? of course not Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColinMills Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 Do you if think if we have no plays offs the crowds be would bigger with nothing ride for the rest of the season for most sides ? unless you can other with some logic why the crowds would be bigger then it is quite right to value the play offs , As I said take Swindon season last year do you really think they would signed ward and then get the crowds they did ? of course not kind of agree with that statement, as Plymouth signed eklof to make top 6. But any club should always strengthen to keep competitive, isn't that part of being in the business? if you go through the motions, expect the crowd to do the same? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The White Knight Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 Another post in favour of the playoffs. You cannot use the logic of more meetings that matter to argue against the playoffs... that is the very purpose of them, to INCREASE the importance of matches. If we follow your logic, then with no play-offs, once a team was unable to win the league the fans would stop going and wait till next year when they had a chance again. The logic is utterly flawed. The only team/s that 'might' be missing out are the ones at the top who would have been embroiled in a title race under the old system... but you don't see them complaining. The argument as to which system is fairest is a completely different one, you can believe one system is fairer than another, but where the fantasy comes in is when folk make deluded statements that a particular team were the 'TRUE' champions because they finished top of the league. They weren't, that's fantasy. Logical BW. You are not Mr. Spock in diguise are you. You are right about that - that is my main contention against the Play Offs - they are neither Fair nor Sporting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orion Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 You are right about that - that is my main contention against the Play Offs - they are neither Fair nor Sporting. ? all teams enter under the same rules are aware of those rules before the start ....nothing unfair or unsporting about it at all . 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWitcher Posted November 25, 2015 Report Share Posted November 25, 2015 Logical BW. You are not Mr. Spock in diguise are you. You are right about that - that is my main contention against the Play Offs - they are neither Fair nor Sporting. Incorrect again. They are completely fair and completely sporting as that is the agreed way of deciding the champions. 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.