lucifer sam Posted July 17, 2016 Author Report Share Posted July 17, 2016 Monarchs manipulating the rules nothing wrong with that apparently! Lewy, difference between manipulating them and breaking them. All the best Rob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheScotsman Posted July 17, 2016 Report Share Posted July 17, 2016 Did Tom Perry not average over 4 in the PL on the past? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fromafar Posted July 17, 2016 Report Share Posted July 17, 2016 Confusion about the rules,surely not !!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Posted July 17, 2016 Report Share Posted July 17, 2016 I thought Kerr won that one too but my view wasn't perfect so I asked someone at the tapes at the end. They said Clegg got it. I, too, thought Fisher should have been excluded. He was at 45 degrees across the track and it shouldn't take a crash for a rider to be disqualified. I also thought that Douglas caused Kerr to fall in heat 15 and he should have gone rather than Kerr. Mitchell Davey is declared in Coventry's NL team. As far as I can see he is an NL guest. I was in the box, had a great view of it... Kerr got it by a tyre width... Unfortunately the ref chose otherwise. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucifer sam Posted July 17, 2016 Author Report Share Posted July 17, 2016 Did Tom Perry not average over 4 in the PL on the past? It doesn't matter, because he's not a guest! Mitchell Davey's average was 4.23 at one point during 2009, as this reveals: http://www.speedwaygb.co/premierleagueteams09 Might have gone even higher than that at some point - I'm sure some Glasgow fans might have a full month-by-month summary of his averages. All the nest Rob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spt82 Posted July 17, 2016 Report Share Posted July 17, 2016 It doesn't matter, because he's not a guest! Mitchell Davey's average was 4.23 at one point during 2009, as this reveals: http://www.speedwaygb.co/premierleagueteams09 Might have gone even higher than that at some point - I'm sure some Glasgow fans might have a full month-by-month summary of his averages. All the nest Rob Did that average include bonus points which now they don't count now??🤔 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Stewart Posted July 17, 2016 Report Share Posted July 17, 2016 Re comment about Edinburgh allowing Bewley to ride at Buxton: as far as I am aware BV claimed him as Scunny was a rearranged fixture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Blobby Posted July 17, 2016 Report Share Posted July 17, 2016 7 years ago we're really clutching st straws here. Guaranteed there would of been no protest had Scunthorpe actually have won. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevePark Posted July 17, 2016 Report Share Posted July 17, 2016 7 years ago we're really clutching st straws here. Guaranteed there would of been no protest had Scunthorpe actually have won. Surely any protest must have been made before the meeting started? 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mac101 Posted July 17, 2016 Report Share Posted July 17, 2016 According to scunny they rode under protest from the start to protest must have been made at start of the meeting It doesn't matter, because he's not a guest! Mitchell Davey's average was 4.23 at one point during 2009, as this reveals: http://www.speedwaygb.co/premierleagueteams09 Might have gone even higher than that at some point - I'm sure some Glasgow fans might have a full month-by-month summary of his averages. All the nest He came in on a 5 as he was a Aussie them Rob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Stewart Posted July 17, 2016 Report Share Posted July 17, 2016 The defining factor must surely be that the NL green sheets are clearly marked neg for riders not eligible to guest. Mitchell Davey is not so marked therefore is eligible to guest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadders Posted July 17, 2016 Report Share Posted July 17, 2016 (edited) 7 years ago we're really clutching st straws here. Guaranteed there would of been no protest had Scunthorpe actually have won. Try 12 years in Richard Halls case. Edited July 17, 2016 by Shads Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damosuzuki Posted July 17, 2016 Report Share Posted July 17, 2016 Regardless of the facts, Edinburgh sadly must be deducted Mithchell Daveys points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
montie Posted July 17, 2016 Report Share Posted July 17, 2016 7 years ago we're really clutching st straws here. Guaranteed there would of been no protest had Scunthorpe actually have won. If that was the case..why were Scunny riding under protest before the result was known? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Johnson Posted July 17, 2016 Report Share Posted July 17, 2016 Lewi wouldnt of done his lap of honour if he thought he hadnt won Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucifer sam Posted July 17, 2016 Author Report Share Posted July 17, 2016 (edited) 7 years ago we're really clutching st straws here. Guaranteed there would of been no protest had Scunthorpe actually have won. Blobby, check here: http://scunthorpescorpions.co/?p=5917 “It was quite clear to us that his inclusion was illegal”, says Peet. “We rode under protest regarding his eligibility, so we’ll wait and see how that goes.” Scunny were riding under protest. All the best Rob The defining factor must surely be that the NL green sheets are clearly marked neg for riders not eligible to guest. Mitchell Davey is not so marked therefore is eligible to guest. I think you're clutching at straws Al. 18.10 e) has clearly been broken. All the best Rob Edited July 17, 2016 by lucifer sam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Johnson Posted July 17, 2016 Report Share Posted July 17, 2016 i must say that heat 7 was epic... i dont think anyone will see a race that good without any passing in it ever... hope it gets on youtube 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyclone Posted July 18, 2016 Report Share Posted July 18, 2016 You mean this one: 18.10 FACILITIES a1) Absent #1: G or RR a2) Absent D-U or EDR (if riding for the “other” team) G or RR b ) 1 Absent rider (2 – 5): RR c) More than 1 Absent rider (1 - 5) 1 x RR facility and G for all others d) Absent #6 or #7: G e) “No Facility”: NL G* NL G*: a rider eligible for a NL Team who has never achieved an actual PL MA of 4.00 or above A quick check of the BSPA website shows that Mitchell Davey's average has gone above 4.00 in the past. For example, I spotted that his GSA for October 2009 was 4.23. All the best Rob Well according to the BSPA Archives, PL Green Sheet Final Issue, dated 28th October, 2009, Davey's GSA is 3.77. http://www.speedwaygb.co/plgreensheets09 Tom Perry had achieved a GSA over 3 in previous Interim Green Sheets but was classified as a Category 4 PL rider, because his GSA in a Final Issue did not exceed the prescribed limit. It therefore appears that reference to historical Green Sheet Averages are based solely on the Final Issues for each Season, and as such, Mitchell Davey's Final GSA, based on all eligible matches for 2009 is 3.77 (i.e. meets criteria for 18.10.e) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Stewart Posted July 18, 2016 Report Share Posted July 18, 2016 I think you're clutching at straws Al. 18.10 e) has clearly been broken. All the best Rob For one thing I don't accept that 18:10(e) is the relevant rule because I think 18:10(d) applies. But even if it doesn't, the BSPA NL Green Sheet is the relevant document. They can't refute their own issued information! What else do people have to go on? Even if they decide that Mitchell should be ineligible when 18:10(e) is relevant, the only thing they can do is issue a new Green Sheet showing that, effective from now. It can't possibly be retrospective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halifaxtiger Posted July 18, 2016 Report Share Posted July 18, 2016 Well according to the BSPA Archives, PL Green Sheet Final Issue, dated 28th October, 2009, Davey's GSA is 3.77. http://www.speedwaygb.co/plgreensheets09 Tom Perry had achieved a GSA over 3 in previous Interim Green Sheets but was classified as a Category 4 PL rider, because his GSA in a Final Issue did not exceed the prescribed limit. It therefore appears that reference to historical Green Sheet Averages are based solely on the Final Issues for each Season, and as such, Mitchell Davey's Final GSA, based on all eligible matches for 2009 is 3.77 (i.e. meets criteria for 18.10.e) That is the end of season average. The rule says at any time, so Rob's reference (which was 2 weeks before) stands and Davey wasn't eligible. I think it will hinge on why Bewley rode for Belle Vue rather than Edinburgh. Its a little unfortunate that all this distracts from what was a superb speedway meeting. 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.