Shadders Posted April 10, 2017 Report Share Posted April 10, 2017 (edited) Does not really matterIt does when you post incorrect information in an attempt to ridicule someone. Do your research What's the actual story? Was it a cock up by the BSPA or did we allow Sheffield to use Branford? If we allowed them to use him it's an absolute disgrace and beggars belief. I reckon it's naivety and/or lack of knowledge from the Rye House management. John Sampfotd wouldn't have stood for it. From reports, Peter Schroeck was quite coy and skirted around It when asked on Saturday Needs to grow a pair and stand up to the bullies. They knew about this fixture clash one or two days before the meeting. Why on earth did it take until two days AFTER the event to get the difinitive ruling? Edited April 10, 2017 by Shads Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
startline sid Posted April 11, 2017 Report Share Posted April 11, 2017 What's the actual story? Was it a cock up by the BSPA or did we allow Sheffield to use Branford? If we allowed them to use him it's an absolute disgrace and beggars belief. read our website 'the big preview' posted on Friday - third sentence says it quite clearly what happened - could not believe the complacency - read further down about how Ben could put himself 'in the shop window for a premier or championship place somewhere' - no offence to Ben but there is a reason why he does not have a place - I am still convinced if Rob had been used we would have won the match Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy robin Posted April 11, 2017 Report Share Posted April 11, 2017 well well well, didn't see that result happening.. to be fair to the Robins, watching the defeat at home to Belle Vue i was going to change the defeat to 10 points , i was impressed with DB, AE had a nightmare home debut, he will come good, i have no doubt about it. yes, RR got us a few but whose to say Adam wouldn't have scored that much.. funny ol' sport this speedway lark eh..! I hope Adam does come good & remember who gave him a ride this season when no-one else would. Just makes you wonder when someone has rode for Poole the season before whether they want to be at their new club. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben91 Posted April 11, 2017 Report Share Posted April 11, 2017 read our website 'the big preview' posted on Friday - third sentence says it quite clearly what happened - could not believe the complacency - read further down about how Ben could put himself 'in the shop window for a premier or championship place somewhere' - no offence to Ben but there is a reason why he does not have a place - I am still convinced if Rob had been used we would have won the match Rob is a better rider than Ben but his inclusion wouldn't have changed the result in our favour. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammer1969 Posted April 11, 2017 Report Share Posted April 11, 2017 (edited) It does when you post incorrect information in an attempt to ridicule someone. Do your research I reckon it's naivety and/or lack of knowledge from the Rye House management. John Sampfotd wouldn't have stood for it. From reports, Peter Schroeck was quite coy and skirted around It when asked on Saturday Needs to grow a pair and stand up to the bullies. They knew about this fixture clash one or two days before the meeting. Why on earth did it take until two days AFTER the event to get the difinitive ruling? I know I am not alone in being disgusted by the decision re Rob last Saturday. I've just read the ruling posted on the Rye website. http://www.ryehouserockets.co /news.php?extend.1394 but win or lose I would rather it had been with our full team especially as it now appears re the SCB ruling we did actually have priority over Rob. Goody - we now have it sorted that we have priority over him in future - those fixtures lists were out weeks ago as was the 2017 rule book, I quite agree with other posters that this should have been sorted out days before the meeting NOT 2 days after. We have a Management team who with all good intentions are trying hard but if us fans can sit down and read the rules surely at the beginning of the season Managements of any team need to sit down, look at their riders who are doubling up, check out dates where there may be clashes and SORT OUT the priority before it becomes the farce that us fans had to put up with last week. The fact that Peter Schroeck said on the mike words to the effect that although Rob was riding at Sheffield "it was all good now". To us fans it wasn't all good he could at least have said something along the lines that "he thanks Ben for riding for us but that Rye would be taking the matter further on Monday as they were very unhappy about the situation" instead of being all nicey nicey about it. I have no problem with Ben Morley riding for us but if this was a case of our Management being happy to help Sheffield out thats 'not on' we pay our money to see our team ride not have guest riders unless it is absolutely essential, as in the case of injuries. Another point to make I know the rule book is over 60 pages long, no one can take all that in, but the riders should be responsible for checking machinery etc. rules. The Management and officials should be fully conversant with team rules, ie, doubling up, tactical rides etc BUT surely the riders if they are doubling up could have a look at the doubling up rules as well and work out for themselves who gets priority over them for meeting clashes then if they get phone calls from their clubs saying your riding for us not the other team this week they could also point out where feel they are riding. Edited April 11, 2017 by hammer1969 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted April 11, 2017 Report Share Posted April 11, 2017 It does when you post incorrect information in an attempt to ridicule someone. Do your research I reckon it's naivety and/or lack of knowledge from the Rye House management. John Sampfotd wouldn't have stood for it. From reports, Peter Schroeck was quite coy and skirted around It when asked on Saturday Needs to grow a pair and stand up to the bullies. They knew about this fixture clash one or two days before the meeting. Why on earth did it take until two days AFTER the event to get the difinitive ruling? Wasn't a fan of Schroeck last season, poor team manager for me. Afraid to take struggling riders out of heats, seems too matey with the riders and seems to lack knowledge of the sport/current riders. Seems a bit weak and if he allowed Branford to ride for Sheffield he should be stood down. Cost the club and riders money as now no extra meetings in the cup plus the damage of an early home defeat to the club. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
startline sid Posted April 11, 2017 Report Share Posted April 11, 2017 Rob is a better rider than Ben but his inclusion wouldn't have changed the result in our favour. don't be too sure about that - IF Rob was riding to form don't think Davey Watt would have had a 4th ride and he would have had his full share of rides as well - we only needed 4 more points to get a draw (Ben only had 3 Rob could have had 7 don't forget) seems ridiculous to build a team with Rob at reserve and then NOT use him when we can Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted April 11, 2017 Report Share Posted April 11, 2017 Wasn't a fan of Schroeck last season, poor team manager for me. Afraid to take struggling riders out of heats, seems too matey with the riders and seems to lack knowledge of the sport/current riders. Seems a bit weak and if he allowed Branford to ride for Sheffield he should be stood down. Cost the club and riders money as now no extra meetings in the cup plus the damage of an early home defeat to the club.Sounds like the perfect speedway team manager to me. Utterly useless! How are so many of them so bad? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadders Posted April 11, 2017 Report Share Posted April 11, 2017 (edited) read our website 'the big preview' posted on Friday - third sentence says it quite clearly what happened That's not clear at all. It says "agreed". That's not the same as gave permission. Could be taken that Sheffield stated that going by the rules, Rob had to race for them. Rockets management agreed without checking first with the BSPA. Not until after the meeting did they bother to check for the official ruling. Probably explains while the team manager was so evasive when interviewed on Saturday. He knew he'd been mugged off by the Tigers. I wouldn't be surprised if one of the Swindon lot told him what the actual ruling is. Edited April 11, 2017 by Shads 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
startline sid Posted April 11, 2017 Report Share Posted April 11, 2017 That's not clear at all. It says "agreed". That's not the same as gave permission. Could be taken that Sheffield stated that going by the rules, Rob had to race for them. Rockets management agreed without checking first with the BSPA. Not until after the meeting did they bother to check for the official ruling. Probably explains while the team manager was so evasive when interviewed on Saturday. He knew he'd been mugged off by the Tigers. I wouldn't be surprised if one of the Swindon lot told him what the actual ruling is. think we all knew the rules which quite clearly state Rob could ride for us Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JmeRay Posted April 11, 2017 Report Share Posted April 11, 2017 (edited) Pity John Sampford & Peter didn't work together. Edited April 11, 2017 by JmeRay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hob Nob Posted April 11, 2017 Report Share Posted April 11, 2017 (edited) Wasn't a fan of Schroeck last season, poor team manager for me. Afraid to take struggling riders out of heats, seems too matey with the riders and seems to lack knowledge of the sport/current riders. Seems a bit weak and if he allowed Branford to ride for Sheffield he should be stood down. Cost the club and riders money as now no extra meetings in the cup plus the damage of an early home defeat to the club. 100% agree made a huge mistake getting rid of John Sampford in favour of Schroeck, what were they thinking? Seems alot of brown nosing going on around the place. Shot themselves in the foot with that decision, unfortunately it's the fans & riders that miss out on extra meetings. Come on BMR sort it out I thought you were professionals 😃😃😃😃 Edited April 11, 2017 by Hob Nob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadders Posted April 11, 2017 Report Share Posted April 11, 2017 (edited) Wasn't a fan of Schroeck last season, poor team manager for me. Afraid to take struggling riders out of heats, seems too matey with the riders and seems to lack knowledge of the sport/current riders. Seems a bit weak and if he allowed Branford to ride for Sheffield he should be stood down. Cost the club and riders money as now no extra meetings in the cup plus the damage of an early home defeat to the club. 100% agree made a huge mistake getting rid of John Sampford in favour of Schroeck, what were they thinking? Seems alot of brown nosing going on around the place. Shot themselves in the foot with that decision, unfortunately it's the fans & riders that miss out on extra meetings. Come on BMR sort it out I thought you were professionals 😃😃😃😃 Funny how people's memories become clouded over time. The reason John Sampford was let go was because he was unwilling to drop underperforming riders. One of the criticisms of the Silver/Sampford era. I can only think of one rider who was replaced when not injured, Kurt Shields I'll say one thing for him, he knows the rule book inside out. He would've told Sheffield to bugger off when they came calling for Rob Branford last week Edited April 11, 2017 by Shads 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JmeRay Posted April 11, 2017 Report Share Posted April 11, 2017 Funny how people's memories become clouded over time. The reason John Sampford was let go was because he was unwilling to drop underperforming riders. One of the criticisms of the Silver/Sampford era. I can only think of one rider who was replaced when not injured, Kurt Shields I'll say one thing for him, he knows the rule book inside out. He would've told Sheffield to bugger off when they came calling for Rob Branford last week You forgot Doyley mate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadders Posted April 11, 2017 Report Share Posted April 11, 2017 You forgot Doyley mate He's no Steve Boxall 3 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.