Championship Fours 06/08 Peterborough

[LagutaRacingFan]

but you could argue like in league racing they should not have been allowed a replacement for holder whos rides should have been left blank ?

 

The fours format allows you to pick a reserve, Holder could have been named as a starter and Lambert as reserve.

 

It wouldn't have made a difference as Lambert could have replaced Holder in every single race.

Edited August 6, 2017 by Jeremy Corbyn Fan

[Shadders]

but you could argue like in league racing they should not have been allowed a replacement for holder whos rides should have been left blank ?

You could argue that, but this wasn't a league fixture, different rules apply.

It seems that Peterborough allowed Holder to race in Poland contrary to the rules of the competition, but by no stretch of the imagination can anyone claim they were attempting to gain an advantage.

[Crump99]

I thought they got thro it fairly efficiently. There were times I was still filling in the prog when the next four were at the tapes.

 

 

I wasn't there today but they are becoming good at getting on with things. They were out real sharpish at the last couple of league matches. I'm all for it. There is no excuse for unnecessary delays between heats.

[Pinny]

Cant actually believe what I am reading here!!!!??

 

Their number 1 who absolutely flies around Peterborough replaced by a journeyman in Lambert and people are accusing them of cheating!! They were severely weakend.

 

As for scheiln, another class A whinger and always has been.

[Halifaxtiger]

I'd only have given Cook 20 quid for his efforts today.

 

Shame, he's got the makings of a good rider, but badly needs to work with a sports psychologist to try and improve his mental ability to be a sportsman.

 

I suspect a fair few riders would be happy with £200 a point.

 

From what I've heard Belle Vue suffers from over officious stewarding. I prefer the wide open spaces at the EOES. You can relax on a picnic chair, bring your own food and drink and move freely around all parts of the stadium.

 

 

I thought he was a Brit nowadays

 

The stewarding isn't quite as bad as that or as it used to be, and Peterborough wouldn't be as much fun if it started raining.

 

Having said that, after what we saw yesterday why would anyone want to move it from EOES anyway ?

 

No, he has the correct concept, it is you who has a 'bizarre' concept.

 

Peterborough knowingly broke the rules. As such they cheated. It isn't even a debate.

 

You probably didn't notice that Peterborough only had 4 riders out yesterday. Effectively, Holder was in the team and his rides were covered by the reserve.

[bigcatdiary]

I suspect a fair few riders would be happy with £200 a point.

.

I suspect your right but this was £200 for the whole meeting.

 

The track was slicker than usual but Peterborough were not allowed to rip up the outside because track prep was under the control of the BSPA, having said that the racing in the final was top drawer.

 

Riders Missing (for various reasons)

 

Berwick - Nick Morris, Nicolai Busk Jakobsen & Lee Paine

Edinburgh- Sam Masters

Glasgow - Richie Worrall

Ipswich - Kyle Newman

Newcastle- Robert Lambert

Peterborough- Jack Holder & Bradley Wilson Dean

Redcar - None

Scunthorpe- None

Sheffield - Lasse Bjerre

Workington - Matt Williamson

 

That was the first time since 1998 that Peterborough have won the Fours in this competition, admittedly we have staged it a few times when not having a team entered.

Edited August 7, 2017 by bigcatdiary

[iris123]

 

You have a bizarre concept of cheating because I don't think I have ever heard of someone being accused of it where they have substantially weakened their chance of success.

 

 

Not for the first time, we agree and I suspect that those pointing fingers about how long it took weren't even there.

 

I loathe unnecessary delay and rant about it constantly but there simply wasn't any today. It was hot and windy so there was a lot of track work, but it was vital that that was undertaken. Nor did it seem drawn out at any time at all.

 

Probably because some of the racing - particularly in the final - was just superb.

 

I might be a neutral, but I'd accept the home advantage that Peterborough have every time to see something quite as good as that.

 

 

Cheating implies gaining an advantage from an unfair act. In no way can you argue replacing Holder with Lambert was beneficial to their chances.

Surely in speedway terms cheating can also mean not trying your best?You can get excluded for not trying your best and the SWC can also see riders attempting to finish behind someone else and that was frowned upon by the authorities.

[Lukas]

...that's ridiculous..we gave everyone an advantage by not using a top rider (which I was fuming about) and then we lose our next one in line so we end up using a reserve and still win it. How the hell is that cheating??...ask Lambert because for him it was a fairytale and I'm chuffed to bits for him.

[Shadders]

Surely in speedway terms cheating can also mean not trying your best?You can get excluded for not trying your best and the SWC can also see riders attempting to finish behind someone else and that was frowned upon by the authorities.

Not relevant in this case. Every Peterborough rider was busting a gut yesterday.

Edited August 7, 2017 by Shads

[iris123]

It is being clever after the event.The fact is they went into the meeting with a weaker side.

[arnieg]

It is being clever after the event.The fact is they went into the meeting with a weaker side.

So wouldn't that imply Chelsea cheat in almost every match by selecting from their squad instead of their strongest 11.

 

Peterborough did not cheat, they did however let the sport down by failing to treat a BSPA marquee event with due respect.

 

But the BSPA is a long way from the moral high ground it should occupy before it starts lecturing the Peterborough promotion.

[iris123]

So wouldn't that imply Chelsea cheat in almost every match by selecting from their squad instead of their strongest 11.

 

Peterborough did not cheat, they did however let the sport down by failing to treat a BSPA marquee event with due respect.

 

But the BSPA is a long way from the moral high ground it should occupy before it starts lecturing the Peterborough promotion.

Football is another sport.I think clubs did have trouble with the FA before for not picking even a decent 11 for the FA Cup.Not though much you can do in fooball because if they say they are resting someone,then they are resting,not playing for another club.

 

Peterborough certainly did cheat the paying public.It seems quite likely they were financially compensated,but what about the fans that wanted to see Holder?I know myself that i choose the meetings i want to go to based on which riders are appearing.If Holder is advertised then i expect him to be there unless he is injured........

[Super Blue]

It may be some time since Peterborough won a 4's event and everyone can argue till the cows come home but I seriously doubt that their side would have even qualified for the final at virtually any other track in the country.

 

Fair play to them though, they were clearly the best side on the day and took the trophy. You can't take it away from them.

[Gavan]

Its not rocket science

 

There are rules for the BSPA events.

 

Rules are there for a reason and should not be broken

 

Peterborough clearly broke the rules by their own promoter taking some sort of brown envelope no doubt.

 

The fact that Peterborough weakened their team by breaking the rules is irrelevant. Otherwise what is the point of having any rules for any competition if they can quite clearly not be adhered to.

 

Jack Holder could have rode, and obviously he is a better rider that Lambert.

 

But Lambert got 5 from 3 in the final only being beating by King, Wright and Josh G (twice),...............nobody can say 100% what Holder would have scored, engine failure , a fall, who knows.

 

So yes Peterborough were weakened but they broke rules , cant see why people say its ok to do that if it doesnt benefit you.........whose to say it didnt benefit them in the end???

[CoolPanther]

Whatever the right and wrongs are of this situation, one thing stood out, the sportsmanship, professionalism, clubmanship, the grit and determination and brilliance of Chris Harris.

[dontforgetthefueltapsbruv]

To those saying that it was not cheating as they weakened the side so didnt gain advantage.

 

In this case it seems the advantage was financial. They took the Torun money. The revenue from this meeting was not Peterboroughs it was a shared event.

 

To me that could be seen as worse than looking to gain a points advantage....

[Baldyman]

So now the precedent has been set for riders to race abroad on that day instead, with the clubs blessing of course. There is going to be not much but reserves and second strings next time.

[Lukas]

To those saying that it was not cheating as they weakened the side so didnt gain advantage.

 

In this case it seems the advantage was financial. They took the Torun money. The revenue from this meeting was not Peterboroughs it was a shared event.

 

To me that could be seen as worse than looking to gain a points advantage....

And was that money used to gain an unfair advantage in this scenario?..no so you are talking rubbish again..what is it with you Ipswich lot?..whinging Rory certainly joined the right club.

[salty]

Cheating/breaking the rules - whatever. Not the big issue for me. The big issue is Attitude. For years the shared "showcase" events have been hit by rider absences (particularly at the top level). These shared events used to be seen as good income generators but attendances have been in decline. Promoters all need to be speaking with one voice hence the rule stating a teams top 4 need to be the 4 on duty.

 

Then we have the staging promoter taking 30 pieces of silver (so we are led to believe)to allow one of his top riders to skip the meeting. Even worse than that the same promoter also flags up the fact he could turn up without the same rider for two forthcoming away fixtures. Again we presume it his intention to turn up with a NL guest so as not to attract a ban for Holder. I am not surprised that his fellow promoters are taking a very dim view of Rathbone's plans. It just remains to be seen what sanctons are taken against the promotion and/or Holder. In the latters case I think the permission issue should not be relevant and a 28 day ban should still happen, though I concede that is unlikely to happen.

[crazyb]

 

No, he has the correct concept, it is you who has a 'bizarre' concept.

 

Peterborough knowingly broke the rules. As such they cheated. It isn't even a debate.

 

What about Louis trying to change the Witches line-up and when told it was wrong he said he knew that. He didn't cheat, but he tried to. And he was strengthening not weakening. They're all at it, some get caught, some don't