Leicester Lions Vs Swindon Robins 17/07/17

[racers and royals]

You could always come up with a reason why it was a bad decision ? I am likely to see about half a dozen refs on Saturday- I will ask them what they thought and let you know.

Didn`t quite see half a dozen yesterday but saw a couple to talk to- the first thing they said " Primary cause of the stoppage" and the ref on the night obviously thought that Riss was at fault for Przedpelski going through the fence- an opinion that I agree with. As for "it`s got to be someone from the other team"- they could hardly stop laughing at the very thought !!!!!

[dontforgetthefueltapsbruv]

Didn`t quite see half a dozen yesterday but saw a couple to talk to- the first thing they said " Primary cause of the stoppage" and the ref on the night obviously thought that Riss was at fault for Przedpelski going through the fence- an opinion that I agree with. As for "it`s got to be someone from the other team"- they could hardly stop laughing at the very thought !!!!!

fair enough r&r 👍

[Big Al]

If I see any refs tomorrow as I expect to I will ask them and post the answer !!!!

Pleased you seem prepared to have an adult discussion rather than gainsay.

The issue of who was primary cause will always be a subjective one of course.

Is a group of referees going to be impartial in judging a colleague? Are they more likely to close ranks?

 

Carter or Penhall? I've always agreed with Kittelsen's decision - Carter made a mistake of judgement, fell, and that was the primary cause of the race being stopped.

 

Apparently the referee apologized to Janowski yesterday for his error of judgement. Is that a first??

[racers and royals]

Pleased you seem prepared to have an adult discussion rather than gainsay.

The issue of who was primary cause will always be a subjective one of course.

Is a group of referees going to be impartial in judging a colleague? Are they more likely to close ranks?

 

Carter or Penhall? I've always agreed with Kittelsen's decision - Carter made a mistake of judgement, fell, and that was the primary cause of the race being stopped.

 

Apparently the referee apologized to Janowski yesterday for his error of judgement. Is that a first??

Funny isn`t it- in your post you said one bad refereeing decision- as if he definitely made an error. I said no it was right and you had a go at me !!! Now you are saying it`s subjective. Believe it or not the refs decision is final.

[Big Al]

Funny isn`t it- in your post you said one bad refereeing decision- as if he definitely made an error. I said no it was right and you had a go at me !!! Now you are saying it`s subjective. Believe it or not the refs decision is final.

It was an opinion, but always up for reasonable discussion. Every decision is subjective to differing extents - an interpretation and app!ication of rules.

Reiffel made a couple of howlers in the recent test match but nowadays officials can be cruelly exposed, and in his case the decisions definitely weren't final!

Anyway I'll have another look at the Riss/Predpelski (maybe a few times) when I get back later. You never know I may change my mind.

[Fromafar]

It was an opinion, but always up for reasonable discussion. Every decision is subjective to differing extents - an interpretation and app!ication of rules.

Reiffel made a couple of howlers in the recent test match but nowadays officials can be cruelly exposed, and in his case the decisions definitely weren't final!

Anyway I'll have another look at the Riss/Predpelski (maybe a few times) when I get back later. You never know I may change my mind.

having just watch the match on you tube,I must be one of the few who agree with you,don't think Riss did much wrong was in front and didn't deviate much from his usual racing line,Kelvin making a big deal about nothing IMO.For what it's worth!

[Barrow Boy 2]

having just watch the match on you tube,I must be one of the few who agree with you,don't think Riss did much wrong was in front and didn't deviate much from his usual racing line,Kelvin making a big deal about nothing IMO.For what it's worth!

 

By saying that Riss may have thought it was a Swindon rider trying to pass him wasn't he implying that he rode wide deliberately to fence him?

 

Also in this match Swindon were allowed to replace Batchelor in heat 15 with another eligible rider. Is this now a general rule to cover heat 15? I ask this because in the recent Ipswich /Newcastle match Schein was excluded in heat 15 for exceeding the 2 minutes but was not replaced by either another rider in their top 3 on the night or a top 3 rider in their averages but by a reserve. Were they prevented from doing so or was it allowable to use a reserve if one was available by choice.

[racers and royals]

 

By saying that Riss may have thought it was a Swindon rider trying to pass him wasn't he implying that he rode wide deliberately to fence him?

 

Also in this match Swindon were allowed to replace Batchelor in heat 15 with another eligible rider. Is this now a general rule to cover heat 15? I ask this because in the recent Ipswich /Newcastle match Schein was excluded in heat 15 for exceeding the 2 minutes but was not replaced by either another rider in their top 3 on the night or a top 3 rider in their averages but by a reserve. Were they prevented from doing so or was it allowable to use a reserve if one was available by choice.

See the injured riders thread in this same section and you will get your answer.

[Grachan]

 

By saying that Riss may have thought it was a Swindon rider trying to pass him wasn't he implying that he rode wide deliberately to fence him?

 

Also in this match Swindon were allowed to replace Batchelor in heat 15 with another eligible rider. Is this now a general rule to cover heat 15? I ask this because in the recent Ipswich /Newcastle match Schein was excluded in heat 15 for exceeding the 2 minutes but was not replaced by either another rider in their top 3 on the night or a top 3 rider in their averages but by a reserve. Were they prevented from doing so or was it allowable to use a reserve if one was available by choice.

 

I guess it's because Bachelor wasn't excluded but was unable to ride due to being injured after starting the race first time out.

[Skodaman]

having just watch the match on you tube,I must be one of the few who agree with you,don't think Riss did much wrong was in front and didn't deviate much from his usual racing line,Kelvin making a big deal about nothing IMO.For what it's worth!

I think that Riss should have not been excluded. There was room for Pawel on the outside and Riss did not deviate.

[arnieg]

 

I guess it's because Bachelor wasn't excluded but was unable to ride due to being injured after starting the race first time out.

 

Correct - as set out in 15.14.3

 

"In a re-run of heat 15 a non-disqualified rider who is unable to take part may be replaced by a reserve or another ‘qualified’ rider."

 

for a starting offence it's 15 metres or a reserve.

[Big Al]

Just looked at that incident again.

Have changed my mind. It wasn't a bad refereeing decision, just a wrong one.

 

Pawel had already embarked on a trajectory that was always going to result in him either going into or very close to the fence on bend 4. This was probably due to lack of knowledge of the track, coupled with the track prep which had created a corridor a grip on the outer half of the track. Losing control of his bike as it picked up grip merely hastened his journey to the fence.

 

Riss was in front, and there are no wing mirrors on the bikes, nor is there a requirement for riders to look around. Peter Collins once said that when another rider is close, you hear a buzzing noise but that it's impossible to tell whereabouts the other bike is, you don't know if he is on the inside or outside.

 

Riss was innocent!