A Question For The Hardcore Stattos...

[daveallan81]

As anyone who has compiled speedway statistics will agree, the sport contains many instances where the waters become somewhat muddied. I would be interested to hear opinions regarding this one.

 

The scenario: a programmed rider falls and aggravates an existing injury on his way to the tapes for his first ride. He is forced to withdraw from the meeting and his rides are subsequently covered by the reserves.

 

The question: should this count as 1 match ridden, with a score of 0 points from 0 rides, in a rider's statistics?

[iris123]

Surely they haven't taken part in the meeting if they haven't even lined up at the tapes?It is like a player was injured warming up before a football match i was at yesterday and was replaced before the kick off....does that count as a match played?I would say,no,as he wasn't on the pitch at any time after kick off

[BL65]

On 29th May 1965 George Major fell at the first bend of heat 3 in his first race in the match between Cradley Heath and Wolverhampton. He was injured and could not take his place in the re-run, being replaced by the reserve, John Debbage. Major could take no further part but the official records show that he participated in the meeting, taking 0 rides and scoring 0 points. He rode in 21 other league meetings, but the records show a total of 22 for the season.

 

On 28th June 1970 both Cradley Heath reserves were injured in a heat 2 pile up and were unable to take any further part in the meeting against Newport. Mike Gardner was excluded and so had one ride for 0 points. Chris Bass did not take his place in the re-run but the records show that he participated in the meeting, scoring 0 points from 0 rides. Incidentally, Cradley Heath were allowed to replace Bass with Ken Wakefield in the re-run and to take his other rides, with the records thereby showing them as using 8 riders in the match.

 

In both these instances the injured riders had started a race, albeit the results did not count as they were re-run, Nevertheless, their participation in events formed part of the meeting record. This is clearly different to the circumstances where a rider does not even start a race and it could be argued that the rider concerned did not make an appearance in the meeting. However, perhaps the answer hinges on when the meeting starts and what the team line-ups are at that point. Does the meeting officially start as soon as the tapes rise for the first heat? If so, the riders in the declared teams all make an 'appearance' presumably. Hypothetically, if a rider was excluded under the two minutes rule having failed to make it out of the pits in each of his programmed rides and was then replaced by reserves he would presumably have participated in the meeting, with his outcomes recorded in the official results, but scoring 0 points from 0 rides. Maybe it is best explained by making a distinction between taking part in the meeting and taking part in races in the meeting.

Edited November 5, 2017 by BL65

[False dawn]

If a rider is in the declared team but does not compete in a race, he gets a wildcard for next year's World Championship

[norbold]

I would think the answer might hinge on whether his team could replace him with another rider rather than just reserves. I would guess not, in which case it must have to count as a meeting with 0 points. However, if the rules do allow for him to be replaced by another rider, either a promoted reserve and a new reserve brought in or a completely new rider, then it wouldn't. Or maybe by rider replacement. I would have thought there should be something in the rules to cover this situation and when the meeting actually starts.

[False dawn]

.....and when the meeting actually starts.

7:30?

7:45?

When the sun goes down?

Or when the ambulance arrives?

Take your pick.

Sounds like a Michael Miles moment eh?

[BL65]

I would think the answer might hinge on whether his team could replace him with another rider rather than just reserves. I would guess not, in which case it must have to count as a meeting with 0 points. However, if the rules do allow for him to be replaced by another rider, either a promoted reserve and a new reserve brought in or a completely new rider, then it wouldn't. Or maybe by rider replacement. I would have thought there should be something in the rules to cover this situation and when the meeting actually starts.

I remember when the rule book was simpler and unambiguous. The 1931 rules could be summarised in a handful of pages of a pocket book. In the 1950s the rule book was still reasonably straightforward, but has got progressively more complicated. The more rules there are the more they can be manipulated.

[norbold]

Having thought a bit more about this and read the speedway regulations for 2017, which are not specific on this point as you suggested, BL, I have come to the conclusion it would have to count as taking part in the meeting and therefore the averages would have to reflect no rides, no points but a meeting nevertheless. The reason I say this is because the meeting would start once the riders are called to the tapes. If the meeting only starts once the tapes go up, then there could be no two minute rule for the first race, which is clearly wrong.

[Guest compost]

The way I would treat such an incident (such as daveallen postulates) would depend on how it was reported. By that I mean if you look at pretty much any of the files on the Researcher website all you would see would be the riders name next to 'did not ride'. In that case I would record it as a 'DNR' against the rider which would mean 0 matches 0 everything else. If there was a report of the incident I would still treat it as all 0 as, to my mind, there would be no difference between that rider and a non-riding but named number 8 (for a team using r/r or res/r for instance) - and I have never seen a named non-riding no.8 'awarded' a match just by being named (!)

 

As an aside, you might want to consider the stats treatment of a named rider in a 1-7 who doesn't get a ride i.e. a rider who is withdrawn and replaced in each of his (or her) rides. A rare occurance but one that has happened. In this instance I think the treatment would still be 0 matches etc as the rider wasn't involved in a heat (I seem to recall the History of the British League mentioning a rider from a London team who made his team debut several years after being named in a 1-7 but was withdrawn from all his rides. I recollect that the books treatment was to show the rider in the rider list for that season but with 0 matches etc - I forget the details and don't have access to the book at present hence the uncertainty).

 

In the instance of a rider taking a ride which had to be re-run and the rider not being able to (through injury, rules or team decision) participate in the re-run and who took no further part in the meeting, then I would show 1 match and nil otherwise across the board (assuming it was the riders first race of course).

 

Lacking access to any official documentation on the correct treatment this is how I handle such issues. As far as the rulebook went I would have thought that it would have not been covered as there would have been no reason to cover this type of incident (at least until the advent of Team averages). In any case I would assume the rider who withdrew from the meeting to get attendance pay but nothing else.

 

I hope the above makes sense.

Having thought a bit more about this and read the speedway regulations for 2017, which are not specific on this point as you suggested, BL, I have come to the conclusion it would have to count as taking part in the meeting and therefore the averages would have to reflect no rides, no points but a meeting nevertheless. The reason I say this is because the meeting would start once the riders are called to the tapes. If the meeting only starts once the tapes go up, then there could be no two minute rule for the first race, which is clearly wrong.

 

I have always taken it that it is only on tapes up that a heat (or the meeting in the case of the first heat) has taken place. Postulate a meeting occurring in light rain (okay one in the past as today the meeting would have been called off hours before). The first 5 heats are run and completed but in increasingly heavy rain. As the riders go to the tapes for heat 6 it monsoons and the ref has to call the match off. in your example as the 2 minute horn has gone the heat could be deemed to have taken place but has it ? I doubt any spectators would be happy for the promoter to say 6 heats run no refund ! So I think in your example it has to be 0 matches etc.

 

I think the question is not has the meeting started but it is at what point in a meeting and in a heat has a riders participation been sufficient to 'officially' be included in it. Don't forget that at any point up to 'tapes-up' a rider could be replaced in a heat - I am sure that I have seen riders at the tapes revving up only for one to pull back and be replaced (and excluded under the 2 minute rule). Rare yes but not an impossibility. So has to be on 'tapes-up'.

[arnieg]

Ronan Tungate,who turned up at Somerset last season but withdrew injured before the start is probably the closest scenario from last season. Personally I would not count that as an appearance. However had he been announced as riding, and only withdrawn after the start of the meeting, but before his first ride then I am uncertain. Had he been announced as riding in heat 3 and then excluded under 2 mins then what?

 

In Poland it is possible for riders to be named in the main body of the team and not get a ride. PZM do credit such riders with an appearance. In Russia however such riders are not credited with an appearance in the averages I have seen published.

 

Another variant. What if a meeting is called off after heat 10 (so result stands) and before the rerun of a race from which a rider has been excluded. The race hasn't been completed so surely doesn't count. But that means the excluded rider won't be credited with a ride. So a rider could be excluded as the primary cause of the stoppage from heat 15 and still have a maximum per official figures!

[customhouseregular]

I would have thought the meeting starts officially once the Starting Marshall indicates to the Referee he is happy for heat 1 to get under way.

[norbold]

 

I have always taken it that it is only on tapes up that a heat (or the meeting in the case of the first heat) has taken place. Postulate a meeting occurring in light rain (okay one in the past as today the meeting would have been called off hours before). The first 5 heats are run and completed but in increasingly heavy rain. As the riders go to the tapes for heat 6 it monsoons and the ref has to call the match off. in your example as the 2 minute horn has gone the heat could be deemed to have taken place but has it ? I doubt any spectators would be happy for the promoter to say 6 heats run no refund ! So I think in your example it has to be 0 matches etc.

 

I think the question is not has the meeting started but it is at what point in a meeting and in a heat has a riders participation been sufficient to 'officially' be included in it. Don't forget that at any point up to 'tapes-up' a rider could be replaced in a heat - I am sure that I have seen riders at the tapes revving up only for one to pull back and be replaced (and excluded under the 2 minute rule). Rare yes but not an impossibility. So has to be on 'tapes-up'.

 

 

I think your heat six example is a different thing. Clearly the race did not take place, so cannot be counted as a race; that is different to withdrawing before the race starts and the race then taking place. It is a difference between the meeting starting and a race starting that seems to me to be the crucial issue. And the meeting has to start when the riders are called to the tapes, otherwise you couldn't enforce the 2-minute rule.

[Guest compost]

Norbold,

 

I am not quibbling about when a meeting starts but I am disagreeing with you in respect of whether or not a rider pulling out of a heat (under 2 minutes or not) should be counted as a ride (and possibly therefore a meeting).

 

As a statto, who tries to be as accurate as possible, I have always treated the presence of a rider who does not start a heat during a match but who is named as a member of one of the teams as a DNR (did not ride) - which would be a zero match, ride, point, BP. The reason for them not starting a heat is pretty much immaterial - the only exception would be a rider excluded from all their rides under the 2 minute rule which would result in 1 match 0 rides, points etc (though I would not allow them the match if they weren't present at the track as did happen). Equally if they start a heat but the heat is not completed and the rider takes no further part in the match (and has not previously not been involved in a completed heat) then they would be deemed to have participated in the match with a ride, point & BP of zero but a one added to the number of matched ridden.

 

My concern (confusion maybe) comes from what you are saying which is that you consider the 2 minute warning to be the start of a heat AND that a rider withdrawing (though injury ?) from that heat during that 2 minute period should be classed as having taken the ride (and be allowed a one to the number of matches ridden in). This would not be the way I have treated such incidents nor is it the way I have seen others treat them.

 

Under what I think you said then a non-riding number 8 should be 'awarded' a meeting as they will be as much present as would be a rider withdrawing from their first heat under 2 minutes but before tapes up - both riders would be 'named' but neither would (assuming the number 8 doesn't ride) who have ridden in a tapes up heat.

 

But each to their own as none of this is 'official' just a matter of interpretation.

 

Edited to amend last sentence

Edited November 6, 2017 by compost

[norbold]

I think a non-riding no.8 is also a different issue as he is there just as a name and there is no intention for him to ride.

 

Anyway, it is a fascinating subject for those of us into this sort of thing, and I have enjoyed reading the different opinions on it. Thank you to Dave for raising the subject, I just hope hope has managed to get something out of it!

[BL65]

One way of looking at the matter could be this. If a rider is programmed to take part in the meeting and is present at the track, with the intention to participate, to the extent that his machine is prepared ready to race and the rider is attired and ready to race but is then prevented from doing so, whether it be due to two minutes exclusions or a mishap on the way to the start (as in Dave's scenario), resulting in the rider being replaced by a reserve, then it counts as one meeting, no rides, no points. The reason for the reserve substitution(s) relates to events in the course of running the meeting and directly relate to the participation in events by the unfortunate rider.

[Guest compost]

Slightly off topic but anyone know why a 2 minute exclusion is not counted as a ride ? I've never understood the logic here as tape breaking is a heat exclusion and counts as a ride taken so why should not coming to the tapes be treated differently ?

 

In Dave's original example the injured rider could either; withdraw from the meeting and not be credited with the meeting, or, he could go back to the pits, be excluded under the 2 minutes limit, withdraw from the rest of the meeting but be credited with the meeting. Would there be any benefit for the rider or his team either way ?

 

Cheers

[arnieg]

Slightly off topic but anyone know why a 2 minute exclusion is not counted as a ride ? I've never understood the logic here as tape breaking is a heat exclusion and counts as a ride taken so why should not coming to the tapes be treated differently ?

 

In Dave's original example the injured rider could either; withdraw from the meeting and not be credited with the meeting, or, he could go back to the pits, be excluded under the 2 minutes limit, withdraw from the rest of the meeting but be credited with the meeting. Would there be any benefit for the rider or his team either way ?

 

Cheers

Interestingly Swedish and Polish averages generally do include 2 minute exclusions as a ride.

[BL65]

Slightly off topic but anyone know why a 2 minute exclusion is not counted as a ride ? I've never understood the logic here as tape breaking is a heat exclusion and counts as a ride taken so why should not coming to the tapes be treated differently ?

 

 

There has never been consistency or logic in the way that exclusions are treated in official records. For example, when exclusion for tape breaking was reintroduced in 1968 the exclusion did not count as a ride and was not reflected in the rider's average. This explains some discrepancies between official statistics from that time compared with some retrospective compilations where the statistician does include these exclusions.

[daveallan81]

Thank you all for your replies. The scenario is an account of what happened at the Glasgow v Oxford match 24th July 1981.

 

The rider in question was Kenny McKinna. He was riding, or attempting to, with a broken ankle. He was programmed at #3 and his first ride was in heat 4. Unfortunately I have no recollection or record of whether he was under the 2 minute allowance. He made a practice start on the back straight and, if I recall correctly, rode into the third bend at speed, as if to test the strength of his injured limb. Whether it gave out or he fell of his own accord (the latter being unlikely) he ended up in the fence. He then withdrew from the meeting and the reserves covered his rides.

 

In the Speedway Star Glasgow track review for 1981, Bryan Seery credits McKinna with riding in 37 matches out of a possible 38 (36 league & 2 KOC). As McKinna was ever-present throughout the rest of the season, the 'missing' match must be the Oxford one. However, the 1982 Yearbook credits him with a full house of 36 league matches and affords him a 0-0 score for the Oxford match.

 

Looking to other sources, the Glasgow programme averages do not credit him with the match. The Edinburgh programme of 18/09, with figures compiled by Dave Welch, follows suit.

 

It seems to be universally accepted that riders such as non-riding #8's or those who didn't arrive are not credited with an appearance. An example of a rider being present and named in the team but not riding would be Jim Beaton at Edinburgh in 1979. For reasons unknown Jim, named at #6, took no part in the match and Glasgow had to run 2 races with 1 rider only. Beaton receives no credit for that match.

 

The only comparable scenario to the McKinna incident I have to hand is from a junior challenge at Blantyre in 1980, where Bill Logan looped his machine performing a practice start prior to his first ride and suffered a dislocated shoulder. The yearbook reports simply 'did not ride'. In the same meeting, Ian Barney blew his machine in the pits and took no part in the match. Again he is afforded 'did not ride'.

 

My personal take is that McKinna should not be credited with riding in the match. There is no report of any exclusion under the 2 minute rule. That rule was radically different then to the klaxon-fest we suffer today - with McKinna on track and heading for the start I find it unlikely he would have been under warning. I may change my stance if it was to be proved that he was on 2 minutes and subsequently excluded while he received treatment. Similarly if the 2 minutes had been applied for him in later races, perhaps to give the reserve a breather.

 

With regard to the 'when a race starts' conundrum, I have always taken it to be when the green light comes on. Where abandonments are concerned, the carefully worded disclaimer used to be 'prior to the start of the sixth race in the programme'. If you were to get three Golden/Silver Helmet races, then three races of the following match before abandonment, then re-admission tickets would not be valid. A promoter once told me that was the reason for 'Event 1, Event 2' etc. - each meeting must have an official running order.

[iris123]

On a slightly,but only very slightly different take on this.I stumbled upon a bit of film from the BBC archive yesterday(probably doing the rounds)of Reg Luckhursts 'last' meeting.Well it was for the Dons in 1975 he went on to ride for Canterbury the next season.But in one race he is excluded and gets onto the phone to the ref to ask him to put a word in so he gets payed his 2 pound whatever start money for the heat!!!He was saying he didn't fall and layed the bike down.But it got me wondering why the hell wouldn't he get payed his money when he did actually start the heat?