lucifer sam Posted September 2, 2016 Report Share Posted September 2, 2016 No Rob, regs are (for once) crystal clear. 18.9.2 says: In heat 4 the number 7, unless certified by the medical officer ... Hi Arnie, cheers - agreed that is crystal clear. All the best Rob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavyH Posted September 2, 2016 Report Share Posted September 2, 2016 Hi Arnie, cheers - agreed that is crystal clear. All the best Rob I dunno Rob, I thought you knew the rules!!! Being serious though this would seem to be sensible in allowing a change for injury but not tactical reasons, Guess the BSPA will change it overnight then on the grounds of excessive commonsense? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lewy Posted September 2, 2016 Report Share Posted September 2, 2016 Can anyone tell me how kevin whelan was allowed to guest for edinburgh when hes not in a declared 1-7 as far as i know? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavyH Posted September 2, 2016 Report Share Posted September 2, 2016 Because we make the rules?? No idea, but perhaps he was named as a #8. Kevin probably wouldn't be up to a place in anNL yet but hopefully tonight has gave him a boost. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruffdiamond Posted September 2, 2016 Report Share Posted September 2, 2016 Can anyone tell me how kevin whelan was allowed to guest for edinburgh when hes not in a declared 1-7 as far as i know? 'in the best interests of speedway' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lewy Posted September 2, 2016 Report Share Posted September 2, 2016 Its crap innit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lewy Posted September 3, 2016 Report Share Posted September 3, 2016 Cyclone you have good knowledge of the rules as lucifer sam learnt,could you explain how kevin whelan was eligible to guest for the monarchs when hes not in a declared 1-7 hate to think edinburgh were breaking the rules thanks in advance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucifer sam Posted September 3, 2016 Report Share Posted September 3, 2016 Cyclone you have good knowledge of the rules as lucifer sam learnt,could you explain how kevin whelan was eligible to guest for the monarchs when hes not in a declared 1-7 hate to think edinburgh were breaking the rules thanks in advance. Nice attempt at a wind up, Lewy old chap, but the only thing I found out is that the word "Cyclone" and the phrase "good knowledge of the rules" are mutually exclusive. Rules have been stretched all ways over the years for the second half of a double-header after injuries in the first half... I suspect this is the latest instance. All the best Rob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edmon Posted September 3, 2016 Report Share Posted September 3, 2016 Under art.18.10 Edinburgh were entitled to a Guest. Art.18.11.3 defines a guest as being someone who "must be in a current Team Declaration" Therefore Kevin Whelan was not eligible to fill the no6 spot. BUT Ruffdiamond was almost right, although I would say it was more in the best interests of the spectators to have 4 riders at the tapes in every race. Whelan would not have been expected to score any points and was only gifted his 2 points due to Devils riders coming to grief. Should the Authorities decide to amend the score the difference will only be a reduction of 2 in the match score from Edinburgh with no addition to Plymouth. Common sense was applied - hang on this is speedway when did common sense ever come into things? 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lewy Posted September 3, 2016 Report Share Posted September 3, 2016 So in plain english edinburgh DID break the rules always amazes me how some clubs getaway with this "in the interest of british speedway" bo**ocks! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruffdiamond Posted September 3, 2016 Report Share Posted September 3, 2016 Under art.18.10 Edinburgh were entitled to a Guest. Art.18.11.3 defines a guest as being someone who "must be in a current Team Declaration" Therefore Kevin Whelan was not eligible to fill the no6 spot. BUT Ruffdiamond was almost right, although I would say it was more in the best interests of the spectators to have 4 riders at the tapes in every race. Whelan would not have been expected to score any points and was only gifted his 2 points due to Devils riders coming to grief. Should the Authorities decide to amend the score the difference will only be a reduction of 2 in the match score from Edinburgh with no addition to Plymouth. Common sense was applied - hang on this is speedway when did common sense ever come into things? Taking all that into account, would it be too much to ask to have local rider, available at every match that could take the place of any rider, for either team if injury prevents 4 riders 'at the tapes' ? Its not what I would agree with, and sure others wouldn't either, but if it keeps some happy, why should it be a problem? am sure there is plenty second halfers that would jump at the chance of being involved in a real match,,, 'this post is not to be confused with speculating on injuries, (cyclops) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edmon Posted September 3, 2016 Report Share Posted September 3, 2016 I would agree that the rules were not applied correctly and that you clearly would have been happy for Edinburgh to have run with 6 riders. Should this have happened at Plymouth I suspect you would not have been complaining. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruffdiamond Posted September 3, 2016 Report Share Posted September 3, 2016 So in plain english edinburgh DID break the rules always amazes me how some clubs getaway with this "in the interest of british speedway" bo**ocks! what 'amazes' me, is how the hell did 'Lightning' get a double-max guesting as No.1,,, he's set a marker down now, if/when we meet in the play-offs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Stewart Posted September 3, 2016 Report Share Posted September 3, 2016 Although the rules do say that a guest must be in a team declaration, you might presume that if there is no guest available (as was the case) you then drop to the "no facility" provision. This allows a NL guest and that is defined as “a rider eligible for a NL Team who has never achieved an actual PL MA of 4.00 or above.” So Kev was OK under that provision. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lewy Posted September 3, 2016 Report Share Posted September 3, 2016 I would agree that the rules were not applied correctly and that you clearly would have been happy for Edinburgh to have run with 6 riders. Should this have happened at Plymouth I suspect you would not have been complaining. The rules should be applied consistantly through out the pl the inconsistancy is the problem and some teams do get the benifit of doubt more than others. What a fiasco anyway having a doubleheader when you have a curfew pity the meeting was called off from the original date under dubious circumstances when we had palavara lined up to guest.The sooner we have a north/south divide the better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheScotsman Posted September 3, 2016 Report Share Posted September 3, 2016 Agree with the last line Lewy. Devon should be cast adrift of the UK - just a load of moaners there!! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edmon Posted September 3, 2016 Report Share Posted September 3, 2016 The rules should be applied consistantly through out the pl the inconsistancy is the problem and some teams do get the benifit of doubt more than others. What a fiasco anyway having a doubleheader when you have a curfew pity the meeting was called off from the original date under dubious circumstances when we had palavara lined up to guest. The sooner we have a north/south divide the better. Bitter or what? If you had been at Armadale on that day or on any of the other seven that were rained off you would have understood why meetings were off. Do you really think the Edinburgh Promotion wanted these meetings off? You've been listening, too much, to our friends from the west, who are regularly on the wind up. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lewy Posted September 3, 2016 Report Share Posted September 3, 2016 I trust your friends from the west 100%😉 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SharpenRake Posted September 3, 2016 Report Share Posted September 3, 2016 Hope all goes well with no injuries or delays. Important for Edinburgh to get 2 wins to keep them high up the table and a better draw in the play offs. If they are running out of time will ref allow 1st match to be declared once Redcar can't win? I bet a good few fans last night thought, as I forecast , can we no stop the redcar match and get on with Plymouth. it would have been interesting to see what the score would have been over 15 heats - a wee bit closer than Redcar! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Blobby Posted September 3, 2016 Author Report Share Posted September 3, 2016 Well Redcar were pretty embarrassing at least Plymouth put up some sort of a fight. Hope young rob and Max are okay after their falls last night, the latter I must say is in some form at the moment. Special mention to our guest Lindgren not easy boots to fill are sams but he done it fantastically and looked like he enjoyed himself a lot. 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.