RobMcCaffery Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 (edited) Totally over the top reaction. In any walk of life, if something goes wrong it is natural, and expected, that the person/persons/organisation responsible is identified to dealt with the aftermath. Totally complacent BSPA reaction. Yes there should be an investigation, but as usual it will be a witch hunt instead. The causes of Saturday's fiasco were too complex to be piled onto one person or group of individuals. Bad planning, poor management, ill-advised 'pr', rider abuse of power, but most of all, complacency. You live in a world of simple answers - sadly that's not the real one. I was advocating an intelligent approach so I shouldn't be surprised an ex-promoter struggles with the concept. It'll all be okay - just ignore everyone, what do they know, eh? Pathetic and a huge symptom of the problem the sport faces. Edited March 22, 2016 by rmc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markyb Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 had the meeting gone ahead . would you have had this money now ? of course not .so If i were a member of the Belle vue management at this moment in time ,I would be concentrating all my effort on salvaging what bit of credibiity i had left , and doing everything in my power to ensure that years of hard work bringing this venture in , undergoes no more major setbacks and does not compleltlely flounder . rather than worrying about refunding £20 to you . Holy moly - just read back and listen to yourselves (and my comments too !) I have not had as much fun after Saturday night for years and years trying to wind people up and my god it worked big time - better than Coronation Street in decades imo. Yeah, it was a disaster - it ain't the price I paid in monetary terms, but the lossed weekend after a week of crap at work that hurts. At the end of the day Mr Morton and Mr Gordon have, and are attempting to keep the sport, in its rightful home, alive. It will come good and so excited about regular trips to Manchester in the future as much as I did at the zoological gardens all those years ago. Massively embarrassed about the grief I gave in my messages - but "I don't get out much" as you can tell. From a speedway fan from Coventry, good luck guys - you tried big time, it didn't work on this occasion, but without doubt, it will. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triple.H. Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 (edited) So this could be a long running saga. It's not just about our refunds it's about the whole fiasco including wasted money on hotel bills and petrol and other stuff people wasted their earnt money on. My 15 year old son who hasn't been to Speedway for 5 years is totally disillusioned as this was his first meeting back. All the way home to Poole we were both gutted with all of this pathetic sad saga. Don't give us this crap that it is "just" £20 refunds cos it ain't. While the BV management and contractors and insurance nobs all try to regain credibility we are left out in the dark. No wonder the stadiums are getting emptier. So your son hasn't been to speedway for 5yrs from the age of 10 and you live in Poole. So IMO if riders such as Holder,Ward and Janowski plus numerous quality visitors every week can't get him through the turnstiles. How can he be disappointed by a postponement.Edit Though you and everyone else who did attend has the right to be mightily peeved. I wasn't there and I'm p*****d off as it makes a sport I love look a shambles along with Plymouth's sad closure today. Edited March 22, 2016 by Triple.H. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Sidney Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 My suspicion Pugwash is that it is far from a no brainer. I would think that Belle Vue might have specifically been advised not to accept liability at this point (just as your car insurers would tell you not to admit liability in the event of an accident even if it was clearly your fault). Philip has said that discussions are ongoing between the parties and I suspected it may be a while before there is clarity about who is liable. I wasn't there so I appreciate I haven't lost out. However, were Belle Vue held to be liable for all the costs people are suggesting they want compensation for I would think they might have some financial challenges. I have no idea of the finances of Belle Vue and I am in no way making comment onthat, but in some of the work I do I see companies that can't meet their liabilities, go into liquidation and the creditors don't get any money in any event. Once the anger has passed and the full story comes out I hope the speedway community comes together to support Belle Vue and the other clubs who are also looking for new facilities. I'm a Wimbledon supporter. Don't lose your club as I have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wigtoncomet Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 I UNDERSTAND that discussions are on-going between the building contractors, insurers and BV management to determine who is liable for the refunds. If the contractors handed over a track that wasn't fit for purpose, it could be them, which would in turn let the insurers off the hook too. Someone from the promotion must have accepted the work carried out to their satisfaction for it to be handed over. If the track was not fit for purpose as claimed it can't have been on the friday when bv riders were riding on it. Thus as far as I,m concerned its the promotion who's at fault for not calling it off. I,ve read lots of comments on here and people have lots of valid points. From my own point of view. I was at Warsaw for the Gp and Belle Vue last sat. It seems now that the riders have a lot more say about whether meetings should run or not. Those tracks were rideable After all ,these riders are some of the best in the world they should be able to ride them and put on a show for the paying public. Does this mean now that we can go to any track on a perfect day weather wise and find that riders won't ride because it could be over watered or too deep, too slick the list is endless for excuses. I know safety is paramount in all motor sports, All the riders no the risks that's part of the game. If they don,t want to take the risks involved they should maybe do another sport. Or should it be banned altogether as its now too dangerous. I fear for its existence if things carry on as it is. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LagutaRacingFan Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 Have to laugh at BV trying to get the money from the builders; sums up their tinpot and amatuer nature. Maybe that's why they allowed the fans to come in? In the hope that they can keep the £100k and the builders would have to cough up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikebv Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 Have to laugh at BV trying to get the money from the builders; sums up their tinpot and amatuer nature. Maybe that's why they allowed the fans to come in? In the hope that they can keep the £100k and the builders would have to cough up. Mozzer, one thing DG isn't is an 'amatuer'.... Fair do's though for the rest of your post.. Not often someone gets everything wrong..... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orion Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 Totally complacent BSPA reaction. Yes there should be an investigation, but as usual it will be a witch hunt instead. The causes of Saturday's fiasco were too complex to be piled onto one person or group of individuals. Bad planning, poor management, ill-advised 'pr', rider abuse of power, but most of all, complacency. You live in a world of simple answers - sadly that's not the real one. I was advocating an intelligent approach so I shouldn't be surprised an ex-promoter struggles with the concept. It'll all be okay - just ignore everyone, what do they know, eh? Pathetic and a huge symptom of the problem the sport faces. Complex ? what is complex about it ....Gordon was told not to run the meeting as the track was not up to standard but he then choose to carry on ....and cause what happened after ...and that on top of all the other stuff he got wrong ...he made mistake after mistake then wash his hands of any blame ...nothing to with a BSPA reaction but a common sense one . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fromafar Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 (edited) It's a no brainer. The BV promotion are 100% liable to refund any entrance money themselves whether they have a claim against contractors, insurers or not.Yep! For starters they could refund the admission money irrespective of any other outcome,someone has it in their pocket!!! Edited March 22, 2016 by Fromafar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouch Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 Rosco said it was the best surface he had ever seen whilst Terry Russell said anyone that can't entertain on that track needs to give up. They said if the new Swindon track was 25% as good they'd be over the moon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Science Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 I UNDERSTAND that discussions are on-going between the building contractors, insurers and BV management to determine who is liable for the refunds. If the contractors handed over a track that wasn't fit for purpose, it could be them, which would in turn let the insurers off the hook too. If the contractors handed over a track that was unfit for purpose but knowing this the promoters still went ahead with the meeting, Who is liable then ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColinMills Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 If the contractors handed over a track that was unfit for purpose but knowing this the promoters still went ahead with the meeting, Who is liable then ? the moment belle vue promotion let paying public through the turnstiles, I would suspect THEY were responsible 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILIPRISING Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 Complex ? what is complex about it ....Gordon was told not to run the meeting as the track was not up to standard but he then choose to carry on ....and cause what happened after ...and that on top of all the other stuff he got wrong ...he made mistake after mistake then wash his hands of any blame ...nothing to with a BSPA reaction but a common sense one . WHERE'S the evidence that "he was told not to run the meeting?" Do you seriously think they would have opened the gates, let everyone in, gone through the opening ceremony, seen the riders get changed and out on the track if he knew beyond doubt that it would not go ahead with all that entails. That defies logic. When I spoke to the referee before the meeting he was worried about the track but gave no indication that the meeting wouldn't proceed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orion Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 (edited) WHERE'S the evidence that "he was told not to run the meeting?" Do you seriously think they would have opened the gates, let everyone in, gone through the opening ceremony, seen the riders get changed and out on the track if he knew beyond doubt that it would not go ahead with all that entails. That defies logic. When I spoke to the referee before the meeting he was worried about the track but gave no indication that the meeting wouldn't proceed. Of course he would of ...it was quite clear that calling the meeting off days before would have cost him face and money ....anyone knew that there was problem with the track Havy knew it riders twitter feeds would full of it etc etc Dave Rowland has already confirmed they were told Wednesday not to carry on with it ... Gordon then choose to take a gamble hoping that the riders would ride on it and hope it would turn out ok and fudge some kind of a meeting ....a gamble that has backfired ..it makes perfect logic . Edited March 22, 2016 by orion 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColinMills Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 Of course he would off ...it was quite clear that calling the meeting off days before would have cost him face and money ....anyone knew that there was problem with the track Havy knew it riders twitter feeds would full of it etc etc Dave Rowland has already confirmed they were told Wednesday not to carry on with it ... Gordon then choose to take a gamble hoping that the riders would ride on it and hope it would turn out ok and fudge some kind of meeting ....a gamble that has backfired ..it makes perfect logic . trying to be political here, I think philrising is clearly going to be on the promotion side here for obvious reasons. but for the record, agree with orion, many people was aware of the situation, and they tried to hoodwink the public. it blew up in their face. simple in saying that, id like to think he represents his readers views just as fairly i had a cruise delayed one day last year, not only did i get that days payment back, i also got the nights hotel paid for as well.! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostwalker Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 Rosco said it was the best surface he had ever seen whilst Terry Russell said anyone that can't entertain on that track needs to give up. They said if the new Swindon track was 25% as good they'd be over the moon. Well nobody claimed that there was anything wrong with the actual surface but rather the base underneath the surface. As for riders refusingto ride, perhaps all these times they have ridden in "worse conditions then this" have made them a bit tired of being screwed over and feel that enough is enough? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColinMills Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 I cant recall the round, but a few years back, I seem to remember there was a gp with a rut in the 3rd bend, and whoever went over it, it flung them off..that meeting went ahead! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColinMills Posted March 22, 2016 Report Share Posted March 22, 2016 I find it odd that so 'many people was aware of the situation' yet nobody thought to use the bsf to mention it. Why? well its pretty damn obvious fans were un-aware! but theres a whole list of names that's cropped up, who WERE aware..keep up! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthur cross Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 (edited) All sorts of ways that very serious doubts (if not a face-saving early postponement) were being talked about leading up to Saturday's fiasco. Most notably, can anyone who was at Coventry on Friday confirm whether Graham Reeve was listed in the programme as that meeting's referee because, as far as I've been reliably informed, nearby referee Dave Watters took that duty at short notice after Mr Reeve was suddenly required to take his SCB-official (but not meeting-referee) hat to Belle Vue on the eve of their big night ... not surprisingly, that alteration in the Coventry ref's box sparked plenty of knowledgeable discussion in the pits and on the terraces. Edited March 23, 2016 by arthur cross Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sportmaniaphotos Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 On a positive, I got a couple of decent photos on the night. Scott Nicholls has used the photo for his Twitter profile @https://twitter.com/WirralCheshire https://twitter.com/WirralCheshire I don't know if I can add photos on these pages ? 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.