Points Awarded !

[Arson fire]

When Buster Chapman took over from the Dark Lord , did he not say it was time to rip up the rulebook and start again . Seems to be more confusing than ever now .

The dark lord is still a head honcho at the scb aint he..... who seem to have the final say😂😂

[Paulco]

The dark lord is still a head honcho at the scb aint he..... who seem to have the final say

Nah Buster's the Imperial Wizard , the Dark Lord just sits in the corner pulling the legs out spiders now .

[bigcatdiary]

When Buster Chapman took over from the Dark Lord , did he not say it was time to rip up the rulebook and start again . Seems to be more confusing than ever now .

Well let's be fair we are 18 months into office and as you say things are worse now than when he started.

 

Personally I would have started with the rulebook which to be fair is nothing but a rough guide which over half of the referees interpret differently and a lot of the club management don't know well enough.

[Weeyin]

right

ive just read the bspa statement on this and it puts a different twist on it

heat 10 would have only had both glasgow riders so almost certain it would be a 0-5 so there fore after heat 10 the score would have been 24 - 37

but i still dont actually agree with the subsection rule it states when the result is mathmaticcly sure another 5 heats to run so in theory redcar could have scored another 25 points or 28 if tac ride hadnt been used allready

tac ride had been used in heat 8 with Charles Wright who scored 4

[Gazc]

It isn't that I disagree with his viewpoint, it is that - in my opinion - the accusations behind the posting are so blatantly biased and false I take offence at them and as such I believe it is appropriate to challenge them and I think it is very relevant in this case to be transparent and state where ones loyalties lie.

 

For the record

1 I am a Redcar fan

2 I don't believe any underhand tactics were utilised during the incident

3 I think this whole debate has gone round and round and only responded to what I saw as a gross insult and slur on Redcar promotion and Coty Garcia

4 I actually think that Glasgow should be given the match win, however the ref should have had the authority to award the race and then no further debate necessary! There are far too many rules which state a variation to the given rule MAY be applied which causes all the arguments!

 

 

To be fair you do raise valid points this thread has now been done to death going over and over again.

Edited June 6, 2017 by Gazc

[slyfox]

when you had a Glasgow rider and their manager making a attempt at fixing the fence when the rest were standing looking at it then saying there was maybe 4 burst airbags when they only had 2 spare but somehow still managed to get it fixed and when the medics came over to Coty and Richard straight after they got back into the pits and both said they were ok and did not need anything but Coty did say he only had a sore ankle but nothing to bother about because he was moving it freely I was helping Coty in the pits at this time then the ref asked for the medics to take there place back on the track the next minute Coty is being led into the ambulance by the team manager everybody in the pits then new what was going to happen the track ambulance took him to the hospital after the meeting where he sat for hours before seeing anyone they X-rayed his ankle nothing broken then let out.

What a load of absolute rubbish. If Redcar had wanted to halt the meeting the air fence being repaired as quickly as it was would have been the obvious way to do it. If you were there then you would have seen the many Redcar track staff who worked on getting the fence repaired as quickly as possible. It was announced that Redcar have the required 3 air bags (as per the rules). It looked initially that at least 4 air bags were damaged and if you were at the meeting you would clearly have seen that. Maybe you were like the referee not watching or you would have seen that it was obviously Richard Lawson who caused the accident (even the Glasgow team manager has commented he was surprised that he was not excluded). Plenty of photos and video evidence to show this.

 

The accident was horrific and I am not surprised that after the adenine wore off Coty felt his true injuries. If you start to cast doubt on the medics credibility you should not be involved in Speedway in any way. Riders heath has to be put first.

[Gazc]

Gadget

 

 

 

As in Inspector to be fair i was using my phone and i didn't check the predictive and this was the result .

Agreed , though the opening poster is obsessed with Glasgow/ Peterborough / Somerset and needs no encouragement to let rip .

The opening poster is obsessed with everyone bar Workington.

[lucifer sam]

I know that , but had this been Redcar v Berwick , Jenga wouldn't even have noticed . But you're right , it sets a dangerous precedent . Awarding a meeting after heat 10 is nonsense enough , mitigating circumstances or not , it's not good starting to award meetings before that .

 

Agreed. It sets a very dangerous precedent.

Heat 10 had not been concluded. How long before a meeting is awarded that only takes place over 8 or 7 or even 6 races?

You can argue that Redcar had no riders left in Heat 10. But you could also argue that five 5-1s to Redcar in Heats 11 to 15 and the final score would be 49-42.

There’s a clear cut-off of 10 races. If that’s not reached, then the only other way a result should be awarded is if a team could not be caught over 15 races, not 10 races. For example, if the scoreline was 45-9 after nine races, that could be awarded.

Nothing was settled in the Redcar v Glasgow match. It should be re-run.

All the best

Rob

Edited June 6, 2017 by lucifer sam

[NeilWatson]

Are there any other meetings that have been given as a result after heat 9?

http://www.coventrybees.co/news.php?extend.3345

 

Coventry Storm v Rye House abandoned after 8 heats and subsequently awarded under Rule 15.12.

 

http://www.coventrybees.co/news.php?extend.3367

 

http://www.coventrybees.co/news.php?extend.3368

Edited June 6, 2017 by NeilWatson

[jenga]

Maggie Thatcher closed our pits and industries down and now Neil Vatcher is trying to close the u,k, speedway scene down with this stupid rule he has brought to light .

 

 

stop all this rubbish rule and give everyone a meeting to talk about for the right reasons .. British speedway is on it rs and now it looks like the rule guru has driven the final nail in the box ... utter cr4p .

[lucifer sam]

http://www.coventrybees.co/news.php?extend.3345

 

Abandoned after 8 heats and subsequently awarded under Rule 15.12.

 

32-19 after 8 races. Meaning a final score of 39-54 was still possible. Therefore it was wrong to award the result of the meeting.

 

In 2014, Scunny were leading Sheffield 30-18 after 8 races when it was abandoned. It wasn't long before the play-off deadline, but the club took it on the chin, reached the play-offs and restaged the Sheffield meeting at the end of the season.

 

Awarding results before Heat 10 has been completed is simply wrong. That night that Coventry called off the meeting after 8 races and yet the result was declared. I trust the fans were compensated for heat 10 having not been reached?

 

All the best

Rob

Edited June 6, 2017 by lucifer sam

[Falcon Hammer]

http://www.coventrybees.co/news.php?extend.3345

 

Coventry Storm v Rye House abandoned after 8 heats and subsequently awarded under Rule 15.12.

 

http://www.coventrybees.co/news.php?extend.3763

& Statement from SCB

 

http://www.speedwaygb.co/news.php?extend.29630

[waiheke1]

Maggie Thatcher closed our pits and industries down and now Neil Vatcher is trying to close the u,k, speedway scene down with this stupid rule he has brought to light .

 

 

stop all this rubbish rule and give everyone a meeting to talk about for the right reasons .. British speedway is on it rs and now it looks like the rule guru has driven the final nail in the box ... utter cr4p .

The rule itself is fine. It's the interpretation that it can be applied to the result after 10 heats rather than 15 which is the issue.

[mikebv]

When Buster Chapman took over from the Dark Lord , did he not say it was time to rip up the rulebook and start again . Seems to be more confusing than ever now .

His two watch words were also "integrity" and "credibility" and how he was going to bring both to the sport...

 

😅

😅

😅

😅

😅

 

To be fair to the BSPA though, they do take their role in protecting the environment very seriously, so lets credit them for that...

 

Hundreds of thousands more air polluting journeys would have taken place, often of hundreds of miles, if the sport was ran properly over the years so we should all thank them for that....

Edited June 7, 2017 by mikebv

[MANSE]

His two words were applied to this match and reason people stopped attending away meetings was the cost of fuel and crap away tracks like Redcar [ last couple of years as told by their own fans against Havelock ]

[Max the rebel]

Agreed. It sets a very dangerous precedent.

 

Heat 10 had not been concluded. How long before a meeting is awarded that only takes place over 8 or 7 or even 6 races?

 

You can argue that Redcar had no riders left in Heat 10. But you could also argue that five 5-1s to Redcar in Heats 11 to 15 and the final score would be 49-42.

 

Theres a clear cut-off of 10 races. If thats not reached, then the only other way a result should be awarded is if a team could not be caught over 15 races, not 10 races. For example, if the scoreline was 45-9 after nine races, that could be awarded.

 

Nothing was settled in the Redcar v Glasgow match. It should be re-run.

 

All the best

Rob

You can't tell me u think Redcar would have got 5 5-1 can i have some of what are on

Ask your self this Lawson summers and Worrall and Lunna all unbeaten up to heat 10

Ask your self this Suddenly Redcar going to stop then getting any wins in 5 heats

Don't think so score would have just got bigger and bigger

Right decision was made

Edited June 7, 2017 by TEAM LOGAN AND ERIKA

[BenR195]

You can't tell me u think Redcar would have got 5 5-1 can i have some of what are on

Ask your self this Lawson summers and Worrall and Lunna all unbeaten up to heat 10

Ask your self this Suddenly Redcar going to stop then getting any wins in 5 heats

Don't think so score would have just got bigger and bigger

Right decision was made

The rule doesn't say whether it is 'likely' that we'd of came back and won, it says 'mathematically possible', and it was still mathematically possible, so under that rule, it should of been reran, I'm not going to lie, on the night Glasgow were the better team and they deserved the win, but rules are rules and you can't go round bending them to suit

[Max the rebel]

The rule doesn't say whether it is 'likely' that we'd of came back and won, it says 'mathematically possible', and it was still mathematically possible, so under that rule, it should of been reran, I'm not going to lie, on the night Glasgow were the better team and they deserved the win, but rules are rules and you can't go round bending them to suit

U would have been 24-37 down after heat 10 sorry there is no way on the night Redcar bears were going to get 5 5-1's

Sorry was just not going to happen

They should have walked bikes round in heat 10 no noise at all then it would have been abandoned anyway

[Gazc]

The rule doesn't say whether it is 'likely' that we'd of came back and won, it says 'mathematically possible', and it was still mathematically possible, so under that rule, it should of been reran, I'm not going to lie, on the night Glasgow were the better team and they deserved the win, but rules are rules and you can't go round bending them to suit

What rules are we bending pray tell.

 

We lodged an appeal with SCB and we got the decision in our favour that's it in a nutshell really.

Edited June 7, 2017 by Gazc

[erimus11]

... and yet again he lets himself down.

Jeez, can't you answer straight forward questions?