Jump to content
British Speedway Forum

Scunthorpe V Redcar 2/7/17


Recommended Posts

Call it sour grapes... I think Rob was only venting his frustration like the rest of us.... Ultimately; withdrawals, engine failures and falls cost us... but we we're never gonna win after some of the decisions that went against us.. In my opinion the 'refs' ruined the meeting as a contest with some proper dodgy and unfair decisions. Redcar were riding pretty well and would probably won in anyway... but lets have a level playing field. A call for fairness and common sense needed!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sour Grapes from Mr. Godfrey. Perhaps he should have words with his underperforming rider's.

 

Harsh.

 

Even if you allow that the decision to exclude Auty was correct - and a couple of my mates on the home straight said it most certainly was not - Scunny very much got the sharp end of some poor refereeing yesterday, and that was without the injury to Aarnio and the bike problems suffered by Kerr & Palm Toft.

 

As far as I was concerned, I agreed with everything Rob said.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Harsh.

 

Even if you allow that the decision to exclude Auty was correct - and a couple of my mates on the home straight said it most certainly was not - Scunny very much got the sharp end of some poor refereeing yesterday, and that was without the injury to Aarnio and the bike problems suffered by Kerr & Palm Toft.

 

As far as I was concerned, I agreed with everything Rob said.

Sorry HT, I normally agree with most things that you say, but the Barker / Auty incident, happened right in front of me and Auty piled into Barker who was in front and on the outside line, ref right decision. Charles Wright exclusion, he went deep into the corner from gate1. to block the outside run. He gave Tero some room but not much, but Tero kept coming and he lost it on the outside, there was no contact, I was perfectly placed to see that aswell. Wright excluded, harsh but the right decision from the ref. The Wilko exclusion, virtually two bends completed, hardly first bend bunching. Robbo out in front got to the outside, but Wilko trying the outside run had plenty of time to see what was evolving and make a cut to the inside. He didn't, he kept it on, there was no contact, but on the grippy outside he came down. My view was clear, its harsh but the ref made the right decision, to award a rerun with all four would have been a fudge. Lewis Kerr's exclusion, I could see from my position on turn 1 that he clearly jumped the start. I don't know about the second start, it was not as obvious as the previous one, but the ref thought he jumped. Reading Godfrey's comments I don't know where he is coming from. The Redcar management knew from the start how that track was going to play out. Speedway is a cut and thrust business and Redcar fought for every inch on that track, There were some tough decisions to be made by the referee, but I am sure he came to the right conclusion every time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry HT, I normally agree with most things that you say, but the Barker / Auty incident, happened right in front of me and Auty piled into Barker who was in front and on the outside line, ref right decision. Charles Wright exclusion, he went deep into the corner from gate1. to block the outside run. He gave Tero some room but not much, but Tero kept coming and he lost it on the outside, there was no contact, I was perfectly placed to see that aswell. Wright excluded, harsh but the right decision from the ref. The Wilko exclusion, virtually two bends completed, hardly first bend bunching. Robbo out in front got to the outside, but Wilko trying the outside run had plenty of time to see what was evolving and make a cut to the inside. He didn't, he kept it on, there was no contact, but on the grippy outside he came down. My view was clear, its harsh but the ref made the right decision, to award a rerun with all four would have been a fudge. Lewis Kerr's exclusion, I could see from my position on turn 1 that he clearly jumped the start. I don't know about the second start, it was not as obvious as the previous one, but the ref thought he jumped. Reading Godfrey's comments I don't know where he is coming from. The Redcar management knew from the start how that track was going to play out. Speedway is a cut and thrust business and Redcar fought for every inch on that track, There were some tough decisions to be made by the referee, but I am sure he came to the right conclusion every time.

 

I'm refrained from commenting on yesterday's refereeing 'display' (I can think of other descriptions) since I realise that I'm a bit biased in such matters... OK very biased! As the above proves, you're also a 'bit' biased... in the opposite direction. :wink:

 

I prefer to point people in the direction of the neutrals. Squall is a Sheffield fan, and on Live Updates gives his honest opinions. He called it "pathetic reffing" yesterday. And then we have HT, who always calls it exactly how it is.

 

Fair play to Redcar yesterday, and congratulations on the win. Good luck on your quest to reach the play-offs.

 

All the best

Rob

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'm refrained from commenting on yesterday's refereeing 'display' (I can think of other descriptions) since I realise that I'm a bit biased in such matters... OK very biased! As the above proves, you're also a 'bit' biased... in the opposite direction. :wink:

 

I prefer to point people in the direction of the neutrals. Squall is a Sheffield fan, and on Live Updates gives his honest opinions. He called it "pathetic reffing" yesterday. And then we have HT, who always calls it exactly how it is.

 

Fair play to Redcar yesterday, and congratulations on the win. Good luck on your quest to reach the play-offs.

 

All the best

Rob

I don't think I am biased, I had a perfectly good view of those incidents. If I was biased I would have complained about the Charles Wright incident. I didn't, it was in the context of all the other decisions, tough calls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I try to have an unbiased view on decisions... Sitting next to the ref in the box, I have to... I don't always agree with their decisions, I accept them but don't necessarily agree with them ... as proved yesterday.

 

Refs have a difficult job, I feel for them..its their call, they have to make decisions based on a stupid rule book.... The sports damaged in that respect! To have to exclude someone when there's no specific blame is unfair. In my opinion, the Auty/Barker incident proved that... pure racing incident, whatever decision was gonna be unfair. Redcar fans would be in similar uproar had it been Barker excluded.

 

I like to think I got an excellent view of all the incidents... Wright certainly made contact with Tero and was correctly excluded (imo).. Wilko correct not to be excluded... The starts were a shambles though...Ayres moved but punished himself, should've resulted in the race continuing but no... Barker got away with flyers all night whilst Kerr got punished for similar.. Basically Starts are ruining speedway... The sooner we get a better method of starting the better.

 

I'm almost at the point of giving up, I go to watch four riders race over four laps...we should be talking about what a good meeting it was, instead we're talking about decisions that influenced the result and ruined a good contest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've also stood or sat alongside countless referees over many years and can totally agree with Albert's comments. In my day I was a licensed timekeeper which involved much more than operating a stopwatch. While nothing like as complex as today's incident recorder duties we had to keep records of the race positions at the end of every lap and, crucially, we were technically responsible for declaring the race result!

 

Thankfully that was something that wasn't applied and referees would take the responsibility but they could refer to you. There was many a time I dreaded being asked the question after a very tight finish. After a while you did get an 'eye' for it and now I can usually get most close finishes right without action replays. It helped if the box was in line with the finishing line. Many, including my old box at Rye House weren't.

 

If you then widen it out to making decisions over racing incidents it becomes fiendishly difficult, especially when you don't have the benefit of video replays, and even then a different angle of view tells a hugely different story.

 

Until speedway has much bigger budgets (if only!) we have to rely on the human frailties of the referee who will make mistakes. As long as they are honest mistakes taken without bias and not excessive then it is acceptable. You cannot expect perfection and I have seen far too many tough decisions made to know just how hard it is.

 

Of course if a referee is constantly making mistakes then they have to be reviewed. The problem I suspect is that there are too few coming forward to start ditching the weaker examples.

 

I've worked with refs in complete control of meetings and who have explained to me their reasoning while fans below were baying for their blood. One of the frustrations of announcing was that you were not allowed to pass such information on.

 

On the other hand there were those who frightened me due to their lack of control. You could see them mentally tossing a coin. One used to have spectacle chains and used to suck on the chains while he dithered. There was another, an ex-rider who was a total gentleman, but just had no control.

 

Another would constantly change his mind. Added to this utter confusion he was also very arrogant. He got me so wound up at one meeting that as I headed down to the track at the interval to do some on-track presentation I missed all the stairs. I still have problems with the shoulder so it's not just ex-riders that have old speedway injuries. He's still refereeing by the way!

 

Another used to be accompanied by his wife to protect him from the fans - and he was a copper! I've known those who lived too close to the track and clearly favoured the away side to protect themselves from accusations of being a 'homer'.

 

I once travelled up to Coatbridge with Rye House. It must have been about 1977. In those days the Scottish refs had a reputation for 'green light, go!' - releasing the tapes as soon as the green light went on. The home captain made a point of telling the Rockets. Why? "Well it's boring not to have a proper race".

 

At Eastbourne they used to have a mechanical linkage to release the tapes. This involved the referee striking a very large lever that could be clearly seen from the track and the home number one used to watch for the referee's shoulder moving. One very senior ref prided himself on hitting the lever without moving his shoulder so defeating the rider.

 

At another track I used to watch at the ref's box was at the back of the stand. I sat alongside one night and realised he couldn't see gates three or four! Rolling starts ruled!

 

The point of all this waffle is that refereeing is NOT a precise science, it involves humans with all their strengths and frailties and until we can afford to improve on the human being we're stuck with what we have!

 

As one manager once told me "Yes, the referee cost us the match.......but we should never have let the opposition get close enough for a refereeing mistake to affect us!"

 

Sometimes you have to accept that humans make mistakes and move on, unless they keep making them......

 

I do hope the Scorpions' luck picks up and I was saddened to see Sunday's score.

 

I hope I've given a small insight. Working with refs, warts and all was a huge part of my enjoyment when I was involved on the serious side of the sport. It's about the only thing I miss as I now blissfully just watch and enjoy - when I can.

Edited by Rob McCaffery
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry HT, I normally agree with most things that you say, but the Barker / Auty incident, happened right in front of me and Auty piled into Barker who was in front and on the outside line, ref right decision. Charles Wright exclusion, he went deep into the corner from gate1. to block the outside run. He gave Tero some room but not much, but Tero kept coming and he lost it on the outside, there was no contact, I was perfectly placed to see that aswell. Wright excluded, harsh but the right decision from the ref. The Wilko exclusion, virtually two bends completed, hardly first bend bunching. Robbo out in front got to the outside, but Wilko trying the outside run had plenty of time to see what was evolving and make a cut to the inside. He didn't, he kept it on, there was no contact, but on the grippy outside he came down. My view was clear, its harsh but the ref made the right decision, to award a rerun with all four would have been a fudge. Lewis Kerr's exclusion, I could see from my position on turn 1 that he clearly jumped the start. I don't know about the second start, it was not as obvious as the previous one, but the ref thought he jumped. Reading Godfrey's comments I don't know where he is coming from. The Redcar management knew from the start how that track was going to play out. Speedway is a cut and thrust business and Redcar fought for every inch on that track, There were some tough decisions to be made by the referee, but I am sure he came to the right conclusion every time.

 

The way you saw the Barker/Auty incident was precisely how I saw it but, being on the back straight, I didn't have a good view and that was why I referred to what two of my mates saw (they were in the home straight stand).

 

You can say that Wilkinson not being excluded would have been a fudge and I dare say a few would agree. However, in my experience when a rider runs out of room on the first - or second - bend after a start that's almost always all four back and I have no doubt that is what it should have been.

 

Kerr definitely moved at the start (by this time I was on the home straight) but I didn't see anything wrong second time. One of the aforementioned mates definitely did, though.

 

Ayres moving at the start, leaving the tapes stone last and the race being called back because he had moved effectively gave him another chance when he was at fault. If a rider gains advantage through moving then the race comes back. If he does not, there's no way that should happen - that's nothing less than ridiculous and Rob Godfrey was right to make comment on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody has been screwed by refs Eric more than Redcar, in the end you just have to get on with it even if you have been Vatchered,

 

Regarding starts , as long as the tapes are not touched let them go if they have to pull back tough..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Get over it scunthorpe redcar are better than you!

It's swings and roundabouts look what happened Redcar v Glasgow a couple of weeks ago, and now unfortunately for Scorpions it appears it's your turn . Looks like it's going to be a dog fight between yourselves and Berwick for the wooden spoon. Time to start planning ahead for next season.

  • 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