John Scrutton Posted August 27, 2017 Report Share Posted August 27, 2017 So do I Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevebrum Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 I agree which makes it all the more concerning that 3 members of the Management Committee attempted to persuade the referee to do just that. It doesn't say a lot for the integrity of the MC does it. agreed. hang on Steve, you say the Poole match was cancelled before it took place.. the 2nd meeting could (should) have been as well. Fans and riders were in the stadium and had spent extra money for both matches. Huge difference to calling the match off in advance . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tellboy Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 agreed. Fans and riders were in the stadium and had spent extra money for both matches. Huge difference to calling the match off in advance . I think the 2nd meeting should have been called off.It done more damage to the sport running it than calling it off.When the riders and promotions were willing to call it off that says something to me.Plus the fans would have been happy to see it called off all we want to see is a more competetive match. You citing riders and fans were in the stadium having paid their money.What happens when the same has occured and then it rains,match is called off and you get you money back,it's that simple. Only one person it seems was truly happy for it to carry on.Maybe this why they decided before the 2nd meeting just to go to ht 10. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dump that clutch Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 agreed. Fans and riders were in the stadium and had spent extra money for both matches. Huge difference to calling the match off in advance . no difference whatsoever, Buster wanted to reimburse the fans as it should have been the right thing to do. Apparently CVS & Buster wanted this but was wrongly over ruled IMO. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevebrum Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 I think the 2nd meeting should have been called off.It done more damage to the sport running it than calling it off.When the riders and promotions were willing to call it off that says something to me.Plus the fans would have been happy to see it called off all we want to see is a more competetive match. You citing riders and fans were in the stadium having paid their money.What happens when the same has occured and then it rains,match is called off and you get you money back,it's that simple. Only one person it seems was truly happy for it to carry on.Maybe this why they decided before the 2nd meeting just to go to ht 10. both would have created a farce by calling it off, particularly as one club held no fault. The only fair thing would have been to declare the 2nd meeting 0-75 to wolves and offer refund if the referee is able to but surely that's down to BSPA officials and not the referee. No way should the visiting team have to be penalised (by missing vital league points due to the cut off date). either way it's all a complete farce. no difference whatsoever, Buster wanted to reimburse the fans as it should have been the right thing to do. Apparently CVS & Buster wanted this but was wrongly over ruled IMO. No one team or fans can do anything about a rain off, so there is indeed difference between the 2. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dump that clutch Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 No one team or fans can do anything about a rain off, so there is indeed difference between the 2. who said a rain-off, you said "But that was before a meeting took place, cancelled by the promotion citing 'damaging business' and not under the control of an official." Having run that particular meeting, for me it has damaged their business so its exactly the same, albeit Kings Lynn had a valid reason to cancel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tellboy Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 No one team or fans can do anything about a rain off, so there is indeed difference between the 2. No one team or fans can do anything about the amount of injuries neither. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevebrum Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 who said a rain-off, you said "But that was before a meeting took place, cancelled by the promotion citing 'damaging business' and not under the control of an official." Having run that particular meeting, for me it has damaged their business so its exactly the same, albeit Kings Lynn had a valid reason to cancel Sorry tellboy mentioned rain offs. I agree the precedent set by a Dorset club opens this all up to question now. The difference before was that the BSPA agreed to that cancellation (bizarrely) but didn't this time. At least no travelling fans were inconvenienced in the precedent cancellation. Still a difference to me. However we know the fans aren't important! No one team or fans can do anything about the amount of injuries neither. So what's the answer? Cancel any meeting when more than one rider is missing? We would hardly have half a dozen fixtures ridden if we did that! What happened with injuries was unfortunate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Star Lady Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 The difference before was that the BSPA agreed to that cancellation (bizarrely) but didn't this time. Very strange if you believe what some BV fans tell us about Buster and his all ranging powers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevebrum Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 Very strange if you believe what some BV fans tell us about Buster and his all ranging powers Very strange is what I'd describe some BV fans! Thankfully they are mostly in the minority tho. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aces51 Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 (edited) Very strange if you believe what some BV fans tell us about Buster and his all ranging powers Not really, he did try to get it called off when there was no reason to do so within the rules but at that point the referee was in control and he had no authority. The referee, rightly, would not agree to act contrary to the rules. It is a slippery slope once referees, or anyone with authority agree to do so. We might all agree that it would have been common sense to call it off but who is responsible for the rules as currently drafted, those same people who wanted them to be ignored. Perhaps if another broken promise had been kept, to completely redraft the rule book last winter, somebody might just have thought it would be necessary to include a rule to cover the minimum number of riders needed to enable a meeting to start. I doubt it but you never know. The idea of drafting rules is that you consider all possibilities and then design the rules to deal with them. Edited August 28, 2017 by Aces51 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Star Lady Posted August 28, 2017 Report Share Posted August 28, 2017 Not really, he did try to get it called off when there was no reason to do so within the rules but at that point the referee was in control and he had no authority. The referee, rightly, would not agree to act contrary to the rules. It is a slippery slope once referees, or anyone with authority agree to do so. Agree rules have to be adhered to. We might all agree that it would have been common sense to call it off but who is responsible for the rules as currently drafted, those same people who wanted them to be ignored. Perhaps if another broken promise had been kept, to completely redraft the rule book last winter, somebody might just have thought it would be necessary to include a rule to cover the minimum number of riders needed to enable a meeting to start. I doubt it but you never know. The idea of drafting rules is that you consider all possibilities and then design the rules to deal with them. Come on this is speedway we are talking about here, that is far too sensible Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.