Jump to content
British Speedway Forum

Mildenhall -v- Cradley Off


Recommended Posts

today's meeting is off.

 

I'm looking forward to hear the reasons for this. Sounds like a lot of petty antics from mildenhall promotion. All though it's best to wait for mildenhall press release

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can imagine Mr Yawnthorne and his Spoon mates will be on over drive now on the NL facebook page :nono:

 

Well dont they have every right to be ?. My take on all of the goings on today is that Speedway once again shoots itself in the foot, is it on or off ? The Mildenhall Team Manager was saying it was off at around 9-30ish, but his assistant and PO was saying at 11-00ish that it was on, whatever the reasons are its done no good for the Sport in general, and shows why its losing fans year in year out and seems utterly incapable of doing anything to stop it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering the tough stance the SCB took on Belle Vue over the famous "burst pipe" fake call off, they're going to have to come down like a ton of bricks on Mildenhall as this is far worse.

 

You can't have clubs spitting the dummy and calling meetings off because they don't like the opposition's choice of guest. That would be setting a dangerous precedent.

There's got to be a big fine, docking of 3 points, and a sanction on Mildenhall not calling off meetings without an SCB officials permission for 2 years.

 

And looking at how David Hemsley was treated for his conduct, I'd be sweating about whether I'd be able to keep my promoters' licence if I was Kevin Jolly.

Feel some sympathy for Mildenhall. Kevin Jolly is obviously upset, I don't blame him. Not sure if this is the correct way to go about things though

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to know how Cradley were looking to get a facility because one of their riders doesn't have machinery.. Read that Mildenhall were going to loan out an engine too...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why?

 

As long as the guest is legal and has a lower average than the rider he is replacing, what right has Jolly got to try to choose the opposition guest rider? What right has he got to call a meeting off because he wants to have a tantrum?

 

I had some sympathy for Belle Vue over burst pipe gate. They faced a huge financial loss if they ran a one-sided meeting without top stars due to an unfortunate missed flight.

Mildenhall haven't done this due to facing a financial loss (in fact it was an attactive fixture which would draw a big crowd). They have done it purely due to having a tantrum.

 

If Mildenhall thought there was anything wrong with the eligibility of the guest, they should have ridden under protest.

Why? I don't like Cradley supporters

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to know how Cradley were looking to get a facility because one of their riders doesn't have machinery.. Read that Mildenhall were going to loan out an engine too...

 

In the NL you can have a facility for any reason. At the end of last season we had a guest (or may have been R/R) for, funnily enough, Luke Chessell and he was in the pits supporting the Raiders.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why?

 

As long as the guest is legal and has a lower average than the rider he is replacing, what right has Jolly got to try to choose the opposition guest rider? What right has he got to call a meeting off because he wants to have a tantrum?

 

I had some sympathy for Belle Vue over burst pipe gate. They faced a huge financial loss if they ran a one-sided meeting without top stars due to an unfortunate missed flight.

Mildenhall haven't done this due to facing a financial loss (in fact it was an attactive fixture which would draw a big crowd). They have done it purely due to having a tantrum.

 

Because there's no way on this earth you should be allowed a guest because a rider doesn't have machinery (although according to the Mildenhall facebook page there was a bike waiting for him at West Row). That's beyond reason, and makes the use of guests (already a major sore point with a large number of speedway fans) farcical.

 

What makes matters worse is that Jon Armstrong's wife recently had a baby that was some months premature. I don't think there was any serious risk to the child, but clearly there was some hospital treatment over and above the norm that was necessary. Not surprisingly, Armstrong wanted to be with his wife.

 

Mildenhall were refused a guest and had to run with rider replacement.

 

How can you justify allowing a guest for a rider without a bike - when in actual fact he has one - when you refuse to do so for a father with a new born child ?

 

Its just another appalling example of the shocking and irresponsible decision making that the sport is subject to, and one thing is certain - we won't find out who made the decision or why.

 

As far as I am concerned, Shads has it just about spot on. Kevin Jolly has every reason to be furious, but he shouldn't have called the meeting off because he'll be poleaxed for it and it looks like little more than spitting a dummy.

 

I should add this is all speculation; the actual reason for postponement hasn't been made public.

Edited by Halifaxtiger
  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Halifax Tiger is spot on. The Armstrong incident is probably why Kevin Jolly has behaved in this way. I fear for Mildenhall Speedway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Because there's no way on this earth you should be allowed a guest because a rider doesn't have machinery (although according to the Mildenhall facebook page there was a bike waiting for him at West Row). That's beyond reason, and makes the use of guests (already a major sore point with a large number of speedway fans) farcical.

 

What makes matters worse is that Jon Armstrong's wife recently had a baby that was some months premature. I don't think there was any serious risk to the child, but clearly there was some hospital treatment over and above the norm that was necessary. Not surprisingly, Armstrong wanted to be with his wife.

 

Mildenhall were refused a guest and had to run with rider replacement.

 

How can you justify allowing a guest for a rider without a bike - when in actual fact he has one - when you refuse to do so for a father with a new born child ?

 

Its just another appalling example of the shocking and irresponsible decision making that the sport is subject to, and one thing is certain - we won't find out who made the decision or why.

 

As far as I am concerned, Shads has it just about spot on. Kevin Jolly has every reason to be furious, but he shouldn't have called the meeting off because he'll be poleaxed for it and it looks like little more than spitting a dummy.

 

I should add this is all speculation; the actual reason for postponement hasn't been made public.

 

The NL allows a facility for any reason. One rider missing it's R/R, 2 or more missing and it's R/R and guests. Like it or not, both decisions are correct.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The NL allows a facility for any reason. One rider missing it's R/R, 2 or more missing and it's R/R and guests. Like it or not, both decisions are correct.

 

I stand corrected, Alan (I 'd like to thank Neil Watson for doing so by pm).

 

I suppose 'I got wrecked last night, am hungover and don't fancy riding but will be in the bar having a few beers in the stadium bar instead' is reasonable grounds to allow a guest, isn't it ?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yet the Armstrong situation is exactly the same as the Chessell situation. Both riders were missing for reasons other than injury or doubling up, and both teams allowed a facility for the riders.

 

The opposition didn't spit the dummy over Mildenhall having a facility for Armstrong. So why are Mildenhall spitting the dummy over Cradley having a facility for Chessell?

Mildenhall haven't been allowed a facility for Jon they have had to use rider replacement.There had been a hope I think that Jon would move to No.1 and then he would have a facility but there seemed to be an anomaly with the re declaration of averages preventing it.

Edited by TMW
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy