Jump to content
British Speedway Forum

Panthers Lodge Protest


Recommended Posts

When Simon Stead was interviewed on the roving mic and was asked about the situation with JPB he didn't wish to comment on it , I wonder why ?

I thought that was odd at the time, now I presume it's because he knew a protest had been lodged.

 

The second point I believe is around the length of ban JPB was served/serving. Sheffield think it was 28 days, but Peterborough are querying this as Auty only got 14 days for the exact same crime.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought that was odd at the time, now I presume it's because he knew a protest had been lodged.

 

The second point I believe is around the length of ban JPB was served/serving. Sheffield think it was 28 days, but Peterborough are querying this as Auty only got 14 days for the exact same crime.

This is where speedway shoots itself in the foot.

 

The length of the ban should just be a matter of fact. Sheffield should have in writing a formal notification from the ruling committee.

 

There should be nothing to query.

 

Also the regs are in this case recently (2/3 years ago) reworked to try to avoid post match changes. It is very clear the intention is for these decisions to be pre match and final.

 

Neil has highlighted the one part of the regs where there could be a challenge in this case. 👍

 

From that I would say this case depends on whether the decision to grant the facility was made with the full knowledge of JPBs riding intentions and whether these changed breaking the terms on which the facility was granted.

 

Of course Sheffield could argue even if his intentions changed which would break the terms of the facility this would be beyond their control. It would be the same ruling committee allowing him to ride outside the original terms and not Sheffield.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 

We all know and understand that protests have to be made within prescribed timescales. The fact remains that it was an incorrect use of the word "potentially" in that sentence.

 

And it was a snidey pop. You're regularly on Panthers' threads doing it; the inclusion of smileys are your convenient get-out.

Edited by PE7Panther
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are they crying you ride against who is in front of u.

If the meeting was rerun Sheffield would still win as they are the better team

People could say they cheated by building there team above the points limit

I'm sure you'll be able to back up that claim by quoting the rule we (& Ipswich) have broken?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When the new BSPA chairman took over , he promised to make the rule book less ambiguous and make the sport simple again . 18 months later here we are arguing over yet another grey area that nobody noticed at the time . Presumably Sheffield would have had to have declared their team a few days in advance , so does nobody at the sport's headquarters look at these things when they come in ?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When the new BSPA chairman took over , he promised to make the rule book less ambiguous and make the sport simple again . 18 months later here we are arguing over yet another grey area that nobody noticed at the time . Presumably Sheffield would have had to have declared their team a few days in advance , so does nobody at the sport's headquarters look at these things when they come in ?

They do look at these things and they said team was ok to go with.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are they crying you ride against who is in front of u.

If the meeting was rerun Sheffield would still win as they are the better team

People could say they cheated by building there team above the points limit

Pboro didnt cheat with the change.

It is a poorly witten/administered regulation but Pboro are not to blame for that.

We all know and understand that protests have to be made within prescribed timescales. The fact remains that it was an incorrect use of the word "potentially" in that sentence.

 

And it was a snidey pop. You're regularly on Panthers' threads doing it; the inclusion of smileys are your convenient get-out.

feel free to continue to have a pop at my choice of words -I have broad shoulders. Perhaps you could actually add to the debate instead but thats your choice.

 

I have also clarified my respect for Neils knowledge which is genuine. I have no gripe with Neil (never met him) and no comment has been degrogatory to him personally.

 

Nowhere have I said Pboro are in the wrong to protest or made any snidey comment regarding it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And just maybe when you have something constructive to say we will listen to your words of wisdom in the meantime do us all a favour and shut up.

nope, I can add comments whenever I like, if you don't like them thats fine.

You don't have to listen to them, but clearly you like to read them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From tge Sheffield Website:

"SHEFFIELD Tigers have been rocked by Jack Parkinson-Blackburn's decision to take a break from racing.

 

The talented teenager informed the club of his decision in the aftermath of a zero return in the thrilling cup win over Edinburgh.

 

Club bosses are disappointed with the decision but understand and will now seek a 28-day guest facility to cover for a rider withholding services"

 

I Really don't see what the problem is because Sheffield were given a 28 day guest facility to cover JPB's absence seems to me it's just Rathbone being a whinging arsehole yet again!

Edited by 1stBendTiger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peterboro have had the bspa tucked in their back pocket for a few years now,this being just the latest issue..... appeal upheld, no danger

 

Well after being shat on for many years: 1995 Tractor boys, Jesper B Monberg, events of 2010 etc being prime examples then it's nice to turn that around.

Edited by Crump99
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy