cyclone Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 He has been banned. But SCB made a mistake in the first post of this thread. A ban is for 14 days, not 28. It has been since at least 2005. It hasn't suddenly been invented. All the best Rob It most certainly was NOT only 14 days in 2005, ask Kylmakorpi when he quit Peterborough when he wasn't getting paid that year. Or Zagar at Reading in 2096. Or Hans in 2009 (Also Peterborough). Or Matej Kus when he raced in the Czech Rep in 2011. Or Thomas Johnasson at Swindon in 2010. Or Jurica Pavlic at Swindon in 2009. Or Lebdevs at Lynn in 2013. KK at Brum in 2011. David Howe at Scunthorpe in 2012. Hampel at Ipswich in 2008. Coventry were told in 2014 if MJJ didn't ride at BV, he'd get a 28 day ban. I can keep going if you like? It's madness to suggest that next week Auty could sign for Newcastle and ride do them while Scunthorpe in the same meeting have a facility for..... Scunthorpe! He'd be declared in two teams at once, yeah right! It's Scunthorpe pulling a fast one. Wearing your asbestos underpants AGAIN Rob? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikebv Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 (edited) On David Howe's FB, he's also announced his retirement: "Unfortunately due to a family BBQ I cannot race next sat and will retire , I hope to be racing the next day at Peterborough" 28 day ban for witholding his sausages...?😁 Edited June 5, 2017 by mikebv 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whisperer Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 He has been banned. But SCB made a mistake in the first post of this thread. A ban is for 14 days, not 28. It has been since at least 2005. It hasn't suddenly been invented. All the best Rob And of course it's the BSPA Management Committee who invoke the ban, why on earth would they deviate from all the precedents set in the past to establish a new one for the future. Grossly unfair on all previously suspended riders particularly those who have withheld because they hadn't been paid for weeks and months. (Josh is not in this category before anyone jumps to conclusions). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucifer sam Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 It most certainly was NOT only 14 days in 2005, ask Kylmakorpi when he quit Peterborough when he wasn't getting paid that year. Or Zagar at Reading in 2096. Or Hans in 2009 (Also Peterborough). Or Matej Kus when he raced in the Czech Rep in 2011. Or Thomas Johnasson at Swindon in 2010. Or Jurica Pavlic at Swindon in 2009. Or Lebdevs at Lynn in 2013. KK at Brum in 2011. David Howe at Scunthorpe in 2012. Hampel at Ipswich in 2008. Coventry were told in 2014 if MJJ didn't ride at BV, he'd get a 28 day ban. I can keep going if you like? It's madness to suggest that next week Auty could sign for Newcastle and ride do them while Scunthorpe in the same meeting have a facility for..... Scunthorpe! He'd be declared in two teams at once, yeah right! It's Scunthorpe pulling a fast one. You're confusing a rider wanting to join another club, and a rider returning to the same club. When a rider returns to the same club, it's 14 days. This hasn't been just invented. Take a look back what happened with Henka at Oxford in 2005. Admit it, you got it wrong, and confused two different situations. All the best Rob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigcatdiary Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 Admit it, you got it wrong, and confused two different situations. All the best Rob Yes of course it is, Godfrey is on the MC who make the decision, totally above board as always. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted June 5, 2017 Author Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 You're confusing a rider wanting to join another club, and a rider returning to the same club. When a rider returns to the same club, it's 14 days. This hasn't been just invented. Take a look back what happened with Henka at Oxford in 2005. Admit it, you got it wrong, and confused two different situations. All the best Rob Except 4 of those in my list returns to their club and two only didn't as 28 days meant their season was over. You get a 28 day facility as the riders is banned for 28 days. It's the way it has always worked. Until now obviously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucifer sam Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 It's the way it has always worked. But it's not the way it's always worked, is it? How many days was Henka Gustafsson banned for in 2005? Simply answer me that question. It will give you a clue how long a 14-day-ban has been in place. All the best Rob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Star Lady Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 (edited) But it's not the way it's always worked, is it? How many days was Henka Gustafsson banned for in 2005? Simply answer me that question. It will give you a clue how long a 14-day-ban has been in place. All the best Rob You keep quoting Henka but can you quote any other instance? SCB hasn't just quoted a single instance unlike yourself. I await your reply All the best Edited June 5, 2017 by Star Lady 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waiheke1 Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 And of course the scb rule book seems totally silent on the matter. Unless anyone can spot something I've missed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idanthyrsus Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 Surely to God we should be looking in the rulebook for the length of a ban, not a single incident from 12 years ago? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fozzie4388 Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 As SCB said earlier http://www.speedwaygb.co/news.php?extend.4290 Pavlic was banned for 28 days then he RETURNED to Swindon's line up in 2009 so the rule obviously hasn't been in since 2005. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucifer sam Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 (edited) As SCB said earlier http://www.speedwaygb.co/news.php?extend.4290 Pavlic was banned for 28 days then he RETURNED to Swindon's line up in 2009 so the rule obviously hasn't been in since 2005. Reading that, Pavlic only agreed to return after the 28-day-facility had expired. Had he wished to, he could have returned within 14 days, which would have been the actual length of his ban. You keep quoting Henka but can you quote any other instance? SCB hasn't just quoted a single instance unlike yourself. I await your reply All the best Star Lady, well I’d never leave you waiting for a reply It’s because it’s the comparable example where a rider hasn’t switched clubs, but has actually remained with his original club, and where the original club wants him back and where the rider wants to come back. Which isn’t your typical example. Of course, it happens less often, so people are more used to seeing the 28-day-ban. But both 28 and 14 days have been about in the same years. Let’s take 2005. Klymakorpi moves from Peterborough to Coventry, Peterborough are given a 28-day-facility in order to replace him, and therefore he can’t appear for Bees until that facility is expired. And yet what the Henka Gustafsson example from later that year demonstrates is that had Klymakorpi wanted to return to Peterborough rather than move elsewhere, then he could have do so within 14 days. All the best Rob Edited June 5, 2017 by lucifer sam 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Johnson Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 Im guessing most if not all these riders MISSED meetings. ie, decided to ride for another team abroad, went grasstracking instead, missed a flight home, where as josh decided to stop riding altogether,,, im also guessing 28 day bans are for the first type and 14 days for joshs case? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Max Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 regardless of 14/28 days, it should come down to matches missed, ban should be for 4 completed matches, or 8 completed matches (ie 2 per 7 day period) Assuming 14 days is the ban length you have a ludicrous situation of a rider realising he has 1 meeting in the next 14 days at a track which he hates, so he "retires" team get facility to replace him he does U-turn and reappears after his bogey track is out of the way. Now - which team might pull a trick like that 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KEITH M Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 So what happened to his retirement from speedway, did he try a real job and find it too hard to do! He didn't really retire, he just didn't fancy Newcastle away 😉 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucifer sam Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 Yes of course it is, Godfrey is on the MC who make the decision, totally above board as always. Was he on the MC when Peterborough's Hans Andersen was handed a 14-day-ban rather than a 28-day-ban in 2008? All the best Rob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Star Lady Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 Reading that, Pavlic only agreed to return after the 28-day-facility had expired. Had he wished to, he could have returned within 14 days, which would have been the actual length of his ban. Star Lady, well I’d never leave you waiting for a reply It’s because it’s the comparable example where a rider hasn’t switched clubs, but has actually remained with his original club, and where the original club wants him back and where the rider wants to come back. Which isn’t your typical example. Of course, it happens less often, so people are more used to seeing the 28-day-ban. But both 28 and 14 days have been about in the same years. Let’s take 2005. Klymakorpi moves from Peterborough to Coventry, Peterborough are given a 28-day-facility in order to replace him, and therefore he can’t appear for Bees until that facility is expired. And yet what the Henka Gustafsson example from later that year demonstrates is that had Klymakorpi wanted to return to Peterborough rather than move elsewhere, then he could have do so within 14 days. All the best Rob So you can't actually quote another example of a rider only getting a 14 day ban and it actually only being 14 days. Let me ask something else. How long was the facility granted to Scunthorpe. 28 days or 14 days? I'm not having a go simply trying to get my head round it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucifer sam Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 (edited) So you can't actually quote another example of a rider only getting a 14 day ban and it actually only being 14 days. Let me ask something else. How long was the facility granted to Scunthorpe. 28 days or 14 days? I'm not having a go simply trying to get my head round it. Tomasz Piszcz and Hans Andersen are another couple of riders. I could produce a big, long list of them, but what's the point. 14 or 28 days are clearly both options. Facility to Scunthorpe was for 28 days. Rider can return (to same club) after 14 days. All the best Rob Edited June 5, 2017 by lucifer sam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allthegearbutnaeidea Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 Well I hope you get a trophy and I really hope it's wooden Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fozzie4388 Posted June 5, 2017 Report Share Posted June 5, 2017 Well I hope you get a trophy and I really hope it's wooden It's quite likely they've already proved they're a better team when Auty isn't in the side. 1 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.