bigcatdiary Posted September 10, 2017 Report Share Posted September 10, 2017 Harris was told by the SCB to do the Grass Track meeting rather than the speedway. Something to do with qualifying for next years FIM Longtrack. Sorry to spoil a nice conspiracy 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New era Panthers Posted September 10, 2017 Report Share Posted September 10, 2017 (edited) Harris was told by the SCB to do the Grass Track meeting rather than the speedway. Something to do with qualifying for next years FIM Longtrack. Sorry to spoil a nice conspiracy I think it's time to put this thread to bed as there is no charge to answer for. For all those looking just to stir more mischief you'll have to try a bit harder next time , and it would be good if you get the facts correct before making accusations in future. Edited September 10, 2017 by New era Panthers 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fromafar Posted September 10, 2017 Report Share Posted September 10, 2017 Harris has qualified for next years Longtrack,is that what you mean? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Long Eye Posted September 10, 2017 Report Share Posted September 10, 2017 dont think anybody actually disputes that Neil. What puzzles most is why a facility has been granted when he is riding in a non championship grasstrack invitational meeting.... It was the British Championship meeting today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigcatdiary Posted September 10, 2017 Report Share Posted September 10, 2017 Harris has qualified for next years Longtrack,is that what you mean? I was told the top 8 qualify. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fromafar Posted September 10, 2017 Report Share Posted September 10, 2017 I was told the top 8 qualify.Harris is already in the Top 8 from this years Longtrack GP therefore has Already qualified before today !! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dontforgetthefueltapsbruv Posted September 10, 2017 Report Share Posted September 10, 2017 Thank you for your replies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fromafar Posted September 10, 2017 Report Share Posted September 10, 2017 I think it's time to put this thread to bed as there is no charge to answer for. For all those looking just to stir more mischief you'll have to try a bit harder next time , and it would be good if you get the facts correct before making accusations in future.While some may be stirring others are just asking why he was he was giving permission to miss the meeting,is this going to the norm excuse,to save any trouble ? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phillipsr Posted September 10, 2017 Report Share Posted September 10, 2017 Yet more back handed agreements.. why have rules just have the one 1. Do whatever the f**k you want 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackadder Posted September 10, 2017 Report Share Posted September 10, 2017 Although it is not in the SCB Rule Book, I'm sure that facilities have been granted for the Masters in the past. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bringbackHalifax Posted September 10, 2017 Report Share Posted September 10, 2017 It should be a national league guest or 28 day ban. They are the only two options in the rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
False dawn Posted September 10, 2017 Report Share Posted September 10, 2017 ....and it would be good if you get the facts correct before making accusations in future.Getting the facts straight by reading the Peterborough / ACU / SCB / BSPA website you mean? Oh, that didn't work. Or is the average fan supposed know the rules governing such cases? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moomin man 76 Posted September 10, 2017 Report Share Posted September 10, 2017 As it is the national championship, I believe that the British Masters is the only domestic grasstrack meeting, for which a facility is permitted for riders who would have domestic speedway fixtures on the same day. Chris Harris is not the first, nor I would imagine be the last rider to be absent for this reason. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New era Panthers Posted September 10, 2017 Report Share Posted September 10, 2017 Getting the facts straight by reading the Peterborough / ACU / SCB / BSPA website you mean? Oh, that didn't work. Or is the average fan supposed know the rules governing such cases? Lack of correct information can't be excused I have to admit but some people on here always see the sinister side of things and are too quick to make accusations especially when it's concerned with Peterborough who I might add did nothing wrong and followed the rules as did Chris Harris . 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted September 10, 2017 Author Report Share Posted September 10, 2017 As it is the national championship, I believe that the British Masters is the only domestic grasstrack meeting, for which a facility is permitted for riders who would have domestic speedway fixtures on the same day. Chris Harris is not the first, nor I would imagine be the last rider to be absent for this reason. "You believe"? Based on what? Certainly not the rule book. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
False dawn Posted September 10, 2017 Report Share Posted September 10, 2017 Lack of correct information can't be excused I have to admit but some people on here always see the sinister side of things and are too quick to make accusations especially when it's concerned with Peterborough who I might add did nothing wrong and followed the rules as did Chris Harris .Sinister? Where no information is forthcoming, can you blame anyone for drawing their own conclusions? The Chris Harris situation is a little complex in that the Longtrack championship is involved. Not something the average speedway fan would relate to, especially when it comes to participation in a domestic grasstrack event. A three line explanation and the reason a rider replacement facility was granted before today's meeting would have defused any speculation. Given the other recent absence, I would have thought Peterborough would be quick to keep fans in the loop. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted September 10, 2017 Author Report Share Posted September 10, 2017 (edited) Lack of correct information can't be excused I have to admit but some people on here always see the sinister side of things and are too quick to make accusations especially when it's concerned with Peterborough who I might add did nothing wrong and followed the rules as did Chris Harris .They have not followed the rules. The rules don't allow a facility for grasstracking. It didn't matter how many times people say it, it's not true. Notice, no mention of grasstracking. 16.5 FACILITIES 16.5.1 A Team may utilise a "Facility" to cover the absence of a Rider(s) who: a) is on FIM World Speedway Championship duty. is on FIM Europe U21 Championship duty c) is engaged elsewhere at a BSPA shared or purchased Meeting. d) is recalled by his own FMN in accordance with the FIM ISLB Regulations. e) has been injured whilst speedway racing, within 48 hours of the injury occurring , if no evidence is available, a Medical Certificate must be sent to the SCB; failure to do so will result in the mandatory suspension of the riders SCB Registration for the next home fixture. NB. The BSPA MC cannot overrule the suspension. f) is sick or carrying a non-speedway injury for which a Medical Certificate must be supplied to the SCB within 48 hours of the sickness / injury occurring in which case the Rider may only return within 7 days (including his Teams next home Meeting) with the express permission of the MC. However, failure to provide a Certificate will nevertheless result in the mandatory suspension of the riders SCB Registration for the next home fixture. NB. The BSPA MC cannot overrule the suspension. g) has been suspended by the FIM, ACU, SCB or riders FMN. h) is in dispute with his Club, provided that the circumstances have been accepted by the MC, who will determine the Facility and period of the riders inactivity. i) is on FIM Longtrack Championship duty (for the day of the Meeting only; no facility is permitted for practice day). j) being a Championship rider whose own FMN does not have a current Agreement with the BSPA and is competing in another National Development League or Open Meeting. This will result in the riders SCB Registration being suspended for 1 (one) season and the Team will be automatically granted a facility for a maximum period of 28 days, after which they must re-declare. k) is awaiting medical clearance from the riders FMN. l) is absent for any other reason (applicable to the NDL only) As for jumping to conclusions, I've tweeted Peterborough Speedway three times asking what rule they have used. I've not had a reply but in tat time they were able to tweet twice about some old couples wedding anniversary. Makes me think they have something to hide! Edited September 10, 2017 by SCB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
False dawn Posted September 10, 2017 Report Share Posted September 10, 2017 (edited) A three line explanation and the reason a rider replacement facility was granted before today's meeting would have defused any speculation. Makes me think they have something to hide!See what I mean? Edited September 10, 2017 by False dawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crump99 Posted September 10, 2017 Report Share Posted September 10, 2017 They have not followed the rules. The rules don't allow a facility for grasstracking. It didn't matter how many times people say it, it's not true. Notice, no mention of grasstracking. As for jumping to conclusions, I've tweeted Peterborough Speedway three times asking what rule they have used. I've not had a reply but in tat time they were able to tweet twice about some old couples wedding anniversary. Makes me think they have something to hide! Facebook and Twitter are used for fluffy bunny information, not for stuff as pointed as that. I'm surprised that you expected a reply to be honest. The club website gives an e-mail address. You could try that and be equally ignored I guess? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New era Panthers Posted September 10, 2017 Report Share Posted September 10, 2017 They have not followed the rules. The rules don't allow a facility for grasstracking. It didn't matter how many times people say it, it's not true. Notice, no mention of grasstracking. As for jumping to conclusions, I've tweeted Peterborough Speedway three times asking what rule they have used. I've not had a reply but in tat time they were able to tweet twice about some old couples wedding anniversary. Makes me think they have something to hide! Perhaps the dear old couple as you describe them was considered more important than replying to you. If the referee can't see a problem with Peterborough using R/R then they obviously haven't broken any rules and if you are not happy with that then you need to take it up with ACU , BSPA or SCB 2 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.