Panthers Lodge Protest

[Lukas]

Interesting to read in last night's program about Panthers lodging a protest over Shane's appearance for Sheffield last Sunday..and they fully expect to get the result overturned 👍.

[hans fan]

Interesting to read in last night's program about Panthers lodging a protest over Shane's appearance for Sheffield last Sunday..and they fully expect to get the result overturned .

be interesting to know what SCB thinks of the rules

Edited June 24, 2017 by hans fan

[TheScotsman]

Vatcher only dives out 4 pointers.

 

So Panters might get a bonus.

[dontforgetthefueltapsbruv]

Dont see there is any grounds for it at first thought.

 

All team line up protests have to be made potentially days prior to the meeting start.

 

I await Neil to inform us of reg 201.35 sub section 4 paragraph 3 that New Cross used in 1955 for a similar successful protest 😛

[PE7Panther]

Dont (sic) see there is (sic) any grounds for it at first thought.

 

All team line up protests have to be made potentially days prior to the meeting start.

 

I await Neil to inform us of reg 201.35 sub section 4 paragraph 3 that New Cross used in 1955 for a similar successful protest

 

Eh? How can protests be made "potentially" days before the meeting?

 

They either do have to be made a prescribed number of days beforehand, or they don't.

 

I suspect that you meant you're not sure, so "maybe" or "perhaps" or "possibly" or even "I think" would make more sense.

 

Shame your mangled English spoiled your clumsy attempt at a snidey little pop at Panthers/Neil Watson.

Edited June 24, 2017 by PE7Panther

[jenga]

what are they protesting about , the price of a good handbag ?

[Lukas]

Seemed to be pretty clear cut from what I read..2 rules had been broken..a 2 point plus rider replacing a 2pt rider who was witholding his services.. although is it 2 weeks now or 4?(ref Auty).

[dontforgetthefueltapsbruv]

 

Eh? How can protests be made "potentially" days before the meeting?

 

They either do have to be made a prescribed number of days beforehand, or they don't.

 

I suspect that you meant you're not sure, so "maybe" or "perhaps" or "possibly" or even "I think" would make more sense.

 

Shame your mangled English spoiled your clumsy attempt at a snidey little pop at Panthers/Neil Watson.

Used the word potentially as it depends when the rider is announced. The protest has to be made in specific timescales. It could be hours before the meeting but only if a change is made on the day.

No intention at a snidey remark about Neil (note the smiley). Infact I fully respect his knowledge as he is invariably correct with his information particularly about the regulations. So quite the opposite.

[arnieg]

Think this is the relevant rule:

 

3.9 Procedure and Time Limits for Protests to the BSPA MC, limited to Team Notifications Art. 16.4.4.

a) A Protest must be in writing, relate to a single issue only, be accompanied by the correct
fee and signed by the person directly affected.

b] A Protest against the legality of a Team Line-Up within the following timescale:

i) For Team Line-Ups notified / changed at any time up to 28 hours before the Meeting
Start Time, a Protest must be lodged at least 24 hours prior to the Meeting start Time.

ii) For Team Line-Ups notified less than 28 hours before the Meeting Start Time, a Protest
must be lodged within 4 hours of the notification being made, and in all cases, no later
than 2 hours prior to the Meeting start Time

And:

 

3.8.1
No Protest can be lodged against a Statement of Fact; these are specifically:

a) A Referee’s ruling on a heat result (Art 15.10)
b] A Referee’s ruling on a Technical matter (Article 10).
c) A BSPA ruling on a rider’s (re) Grading/Assessed MA (Art 16.2.2)
d) A BSPA / BSPA MC Member’s ruling on a Team Line-Up, prior to the start of a Meeting
e) A Referee’s ruling on a Team Line-Up, prior to the start of a Meeting, if not ruled at Art 3.8.1 (d)

 

 

So the protest must have been made before the meeting.

 

It must therefore have been ruled on by MC/referee

 

Once ruled on it was a non-appealable 'statement of fact'

 

Looks like Panthers will struggle with this one to me.

 

BTW what is the basis of the protest re Shanes eligibility?

Edited June 24, 2017 by arnieg

[Islander15]

Seemed to be pretty clear cut from what I read..2 rules had been broken..a 2 point plus rider replacing a 2pt rider who was witholding his services.. although is it 2 weeks now or 4?(ref Auty).

Shanes was on a 2.00 then though and what's the second rule allegedly broken?

[dontforgetthefueltapsbruv]

Seemed to be pretty clear cut from what I read..2 rules had been broken..a 2 point plus rider replacing a 2pt rider who was witholding his services.. although is it 2 weeks now or 4?(ref Auty).

 

That could make some sense. Did the piece say when the protest was made? Was it prior to the meeting in line with the set timescales? If so Shanes should not have been allowed to ride if that was decided to be the correct position. If the protest wasn't within the required timescale then it shouldn't be successful even if Shanes was illegal

[Lukas]

Something to do with JPB's availability I believe

[victor meldrew]

So what was Shanes Championship average on the day of the meeting ?

[SCB]

I'd argue that Shane's wasn't eligible. JPB isn't withholding his services so no guest is allowed (if he was he'd get a ban and not be riding for Birmingham). Shanes is not a NL guest as he's riding in the Premiership.

 

But as pointed out, appeal have to be made before the meeting.

[cityrebel]

Dont see there is any grounds for it at first thought.

All team line up protests have to be made potentially days prior to the meeting start.

I await Neil to inform us of reg 201.35 sub section 4 paragraph 3 that New Cross used in 1955 for a similar successful protest 😛

new cross never ran in 1955!!!

[NeilWatson]

Think this is the relevant rule:

 

 

 

3.9 Procedure and Time Limits for Protests to the BSPA MC, limited to Team Notifications Art. 16.4.4.

a) A Protest must be in writing, relate to a single issue only, be accompanied by the correct

fee and signed by the person directly affected.

 

b] A Protest against the legality of a Team Line-Up within the following timescale:

i) For Team Line-Ups notified / changed at any time up to 28 hours before the Meeting

Start Time, a Protest must be lodged at least 24 hours prior to the Meeting start Time.

 

ii) For Team Line-Ups notified less than 28 hours before the Meeting Start Time, a Protest

must be lodged within 4 hours of the notification being made, and in all cases, no later

than 2 hours prior to the Meeting start Time

And:

 

 

3.8.1

No Protest can be lodged against a Statement of Fact; these are specifically:

a) A Referees ruling on a heat result (Art 15.10)

b] A Referees ruling on a Technical matter (Article 10).

c) A BSPA ruling on a riders (re) Grading/Assessed MA (Art 16.2.2)

d) A BSPA / BSPA MC Members ruling on a Team Line-Up, prior to the start of a Meeting

e) A Referees ruling on a Team Line-Up, prior to the start of a Meeting, if not ruled at Art 3.8.1 (d)

 

So the protest must have been made before the meeting.

 

It must therefore have been ruled on by MC/referee

 

Once ruled on it was a non-appealable 'statement of fact'

 

Looks like Panthers will struggle with this one to me.

 

BTW what is the basis of the protest re Shanes eligibility?

Also:

 

15. RACING RULES.

 

15.10 The result of a Meeting can only be amended if: a) the Referee has made an error in the recording of a heat or the Meeting Results or b.) that an absent rider, having been given a Facility is found to have ridden elsewhere in contravention to the Facility so given.

Edited June 24, 2017 by NeilWatson

[parkendlass]

Vatcher has made his decision over the Panthers protest.

 

He has deducted Redcar 3 points and awarded Glasgow a 4 point away win. Ah well, that's Vatcher for you !!!

[dontforgetthefueltapsbruv]

new cross never ran in 1955!!!

damn - knew I shouldve just put 'insert year' 👍

[Islander15]

I'd argue that Shane's wasn't eligible. JPB isn't withholding his services so no guest is allowed (if he was he'd get a ban and not be riding for Birmingham). Shanes is not a NL guest as he's riding in the Premiership.

 

But as pointed out, appeal have to be made before the meeting.

JPB was classed as withholding his services as he got a 14 day ban which covered his Birmingham meetings too. Edited June 24, 2017 by Islander15

[Lukas]

Both the home meetings we have lost have been because of that damn Shane's as a guest!😬

...though that might change tomorrow.