Melbourne 2016

[RPNY]

Greg Hancock scored more points than anyone else and is the world champion end of story.

If people think he should be fined or whatever than that is fair enough. However having watched the meeting again last night if Greg is punished so should PAWLICKI for letting ZMARZLIK through. That could have cost Woffinden a Silver medal. Holder taking a point off Hancock made zero difference to the outcome anyway.

 

I understand some of the criticism of Greg on here. His no show in Manchester was certainly bang out of order and his reasons for not being there borderline insulting. However, he's 46, won a world title fair and square and has done a lot more good than bad over 27 years of racing in Europe. Let's all just be sensible about this...

 

[JoeW]

The punishment being advocated and legislated for Hancock is for walking out of the meeting and not for letting someone pass him! As things stand he has not been punished at all for his childish action.

Edited October 25, 2016 by brough

[foamfence]

Greg Hancock scored more points than anyone else and is the world champion end of story.

If people think he should be fined or whatever than that is fair enough. However having watched the meeting again last night if Greg is punished so should PAWLICKI for letting ZMARZLIK through. That could have cost Woffinden a Silver medal. Holder taking a point off Hancock made zero difference to the outcome anyway.

 

I understand some of the criticism of Greg on here. His no show in Manchester was certainly bang out of order and his reasons for not being there borderline insulting. However, he's 46, won a world title fair and square and has done a lot more good than bad over 27 years of racing in Europe. Let's all just be sensible about this...

 

But the point is it was done to aid someone who is sponsored by the same company (who pulls the strings?), it might have affected someone's betting and the subsequent walk out robbed spectators of what they had paid to see. Fair enough if you can see similar events by other riders but that doesn't justify what he did.

[RPNY]

This is true 2 wrongs dont make a right but he was excluded, punished now vilified, I just think it should be left at that..

[PHILIPRISING]

Except a reported 25,000 fans attended last year, so you might expect 25,000 to attend this season too.

 

If the crowds drop by another 4,000 next year, will you still be saying the same thing? Are crowds going down really something that's expected, and are the series organisers happy with that state of affairs?

CROWDS throughout 2016 have been excellent for what is sadly a minority sport with a very limited market attraction. The Etihad knew what they were taking on and obviously their sponsorship with the airline, who provide all the tickets for riders, etc, is a big plus.

 

Any lack of promotional work in Melbourne itself and around the stadium in particular is strange but, again, down to them.

 

I have never liked the idea of the series finishing in Australia and believe an opening two rounds in Oz and New Zealand would work much better but logistically that is currently proving impossible because of current usage of the Etihad.

[Odds On]

Hancock should be made an example of, the sport is bigger than any one rider.

[PHILIPRISING]

 

I don't 'advocate' any sort of action.

 

Their RULES do.

 

So what you are telling us is that rules don't matter?

NO but your interpretation of the rules doesn't coincide with theirs that a rider withdrawing is ineligible for the rest of that year's championship and not retrospectively thrown out of the whole year's title race.

[JoeW]

This is true 2 wrongs dont make a right but he was excluded, punished now vilified, I just think it should be left at that..

So he cheated in a race and, contrary to the regulations, walked out of the meeting in a huff. As I understand it his only punishment has been exclusion from the race in which he cheated!!! Makes you wonder who is actually in charge of the fiasco the Grand Prix series has become.

[g13webb]

I don't advocate all this talk of GH being stripped of his World Title. The rules are very ambiguous and can be interpretated various ways, but the truth being, he accumulated more points than the other riders and so is rightfully acclaimed as 2016 World Champion. However, acting in the self righteous way he did was wrong and should be penalised. To escape with a fine would be wrong. Banning him for the first 2 SGP's next year would be sufficient punishment and also a deterrent to any other riders thinking of doing similar in the future.

 

He more than any other should've know better. He has no defence for the way he let everyone down .......

[BWitcher]

NO but your interpretation of the rules doesn't coincide with theirs that a rider withdrawing is ineligible for the rest of that year's championship and not retrospectively thrown out of the whole year's title race.

 

Dear me. English really isn't some folks strong point. You've answered it again. He is INELIGBLE.

 

How can you win something you are ineligible for? It doesn't need interpreting, that is what the rule says.

[Humphrey Appleby]

Any lack of promotional work in Melbourne itself and around the stadium in particular is strange but, again, down to them.

But it's a familiar repeating and depressing pattern. How many times have we heard that IMG are 'raising the bar', 'taking the SGP to new venues' and 'improving the profile of the sport', and yet almost as soon as new venue gets put on the calendar, the process becomes about managing expectations and making excuses why crowds continue fall after the first GP. Then the recriminations start about the local venue/promoter, and it all ends in tears.

 

Whether or not local promotion is the responsibility of the local promoter, how can it be for good IMG/BSI's product, image, and ultimately profitability if there's a repeating pattern of failure of GPs? Far less what this is doing for the sport as whole.

 

Do you think Bernie Ecclestone just collects his staging fees and leaves host tracks to do their own thing? No, the staging promotions have to meet all sorts of requirements.

 

Of course speedway is a hard sell nowadays, and of course it's less than ideal to be having the last GP in Australia. However, an Aussie GP should still be a sufficient novelty to build on what was a reasonable starting point last season, yet it's apparent little or no effort has been made and the same old blame game has begun.

 

Well at least everyone will have a get out when the stadium changes hands shortly...

[JoeW]

NO but your interpretation of the rules doesn't coincide with theirs that a rider withdrawing is ineligible for the rest of that year's championship and not retrospectively thrown out of the whole year's title race.

He withdrew from the championship before the end of it. There was still, despite him having accrued enough points to win it, the remainder of the championship left ie Heats 10 to 20, two semi finals and the final. After his walkout he became ineligible for the championship for the remainder of the season which means he could not win it. There is nothing retrospective about it at all.

[IronScorpion]

Having now seen the meeting & read the posts on here, it seems Hancock's actions led to it being an entertaining meeting. There was some good racing right from the 1st heat on a well prepared track. In Hancock's 1st race he looked behind once, as he is normally hard to beat when in front, exiting the final bend of the last lap when he became the Champion. In his 2nd, he was racing at speed for 1st & never looked behind once on a supposedly dodgy bike with his clutch getting worse. After every 4 heats there is a track grade & with Hancock being out again in heat 9, already the champion, having a dodgy bike that was getting worse, then why did he not change it? His subsequent actions of helping a fellow Monster rider, leading to the protest, & withdrawal from the meeting meant other riders possibly helping out other similar Nationality riders but not as obvious as in Zmarzlik & Iversen. This could, also, have hindered the final placings of Woffinden & Doyle.

 

His punishment of his action in heat 9 was a surprise to some but others that were there & subsequent posts on here felt he was duly punished. His withdrawal from the meeting has not. By going unpunished, this could lead to other meetings, wether individual or team, where a meeting has been won & riders not coming out for their final heats. He needs to be punished, wether he is the Champion or not, of a ban of 2 GP's.

 

Pedersen, more than anybody, has had his fair share of disqualifications, rightly or wrongly, & been upset but he has never thrown his toys out of the pram & withdrawn from a meeting. Then again, he is not a Monster rider.

[norbold]

Breaking news...World Speedway Championship Final race rigged ...Oh hang on this was 1936

Except as it turned out it wasn't!

[RPNY]

If he was stripped of a world title he won then that would be utter stupidity!

 

So he cheated in a race and, contrary to the regulations, walked out of the meeting in a huff. As I understand it his only punishment has been exclusion from the race in which he cheated!!! Makes you wonder who is actually in charge of the fiasco the Grand Prix series has become.

 

I cannot understand how you can call the GP series a fiasco. This year has been superb. I can't remember one bad GP this year. Stockholm a bit mundane but still not awful. Mostly Good Crowds, great race tracks, competitive until the last round. What Greg did left a sour taste but it was still a superb meeting.

Edited October 25, 2016 by RPNYC

[BWitcher]

If he was stripped of a world title he won then that would be utter stupidity!

 

 

 

Actually, it wouldn't, utter stupidity is ignoring rules.

 

Now, the rule itself is utter stupidity, that part I agree with.

[RPNY]

Hahaha Im lost but think we agree common sense should prevail!

[Humphrey Appleby]

Dear me. English really isn't some folks strong point. You've answered it again. He is INELIGBLE.

I think it's fair to say the wording of the rule is poor. If it simply said "Furthermore, he shall be considered as ineligible for the FIM Speedway Grand Prix World Championship" then it would be unambiguous. The qualifier 'for the remainder of the season' suggests it means ineligible for further rounds.

 

There's no specific statement on dealing with points already scored in the championship, and then you get into specific issues with in-meeting rather than pre-meeting withdrawals. Unless a rider packs their things up and physically leaves the stadium, then there's always arguments to be made about injury, illness or mechanical difficulties that are difficult to prove.

 

This is not to say there shouldn't be some penalty for that sort of behaviour.

Edited October 25, 2016 by Humphrey Appleby

[RPNY]

In some ways I'm glad the ref did what he did however it did open a big can of worms. We can all complain and moan till the cows come home, but this simple fact is this is nothing new. Doesnt make it right but that is the fact of the matter.

What I would say for the Anti Monster brigade on here, I didnt see any foul play when it looked like Doyle was on course to win.

[PHILIPRISING]

He withdrew from the championship before the end of it. There was still, despite him having accrued enough points to win it, the remainder of the championship left ie Heats 10 to 20, two semi finals and the final. After his walkout he became ineligible for the championship for the remainder of the season which means he could not win it. There is nothing retrospective about it at all.

BUT it doesn't. He could not score any more points but the regulations say nothing about taking away any he has already accumulated.

I am not defending Greg here, and publicly denounced his non-appearance in the latter stages of the SWC, but the fact is that none of us know 100 per cent or can prove without a shadow of a doubt that he allowed Holder to pass him.

 

Hancock has come up with a plausible explanation and one that a court of law might find hard to discount. Only he knows whether or not his bike suffered a mechanical failure. No one can definitively prove one way or another.

 

Guilty beyond all reasonable doubt?

 

He will and does argue that the FIM's decision to deduct his points from Heat 9 branded him a cheat without a fair trial. His withdrawal in protest at that alleged accusation was, I agree, ill-tempered and without thought for the speedway world at large but it did not risk him losing the title because there is nothing in the regulations, as seen by the FIM, to retrospectively take points away.