0-0 ?

[mikebv]

8 hours ago, hagonshocker said:

Absolutely bonkers!!! That's being a jobs worth of the highest order.....how can you race without an opponent? Lol crazy

I seem to remember he pulled wheelies down every straight to keep the crowd entertained as they watched the less than edge of the seat spectacle of one rider completing four laps all alone..

Obviously the ref didn't appreciate his efforts..

Or lack of them as he saw it... 

You have to remember though that the crowd were primarily there to watch him referee, not to be entertained by the show the riders were putting on for them... 

[R87]

Think I remember seeing one at Brandon.  Last rider was Chris Manchester, who decided to pull a wheelie all the way down the back straight, and was promptly excluded for not racing properly.

 

The referee was Frank Edbon surprisingly

[DSC67]

1 hour ago, mb1990 said:

Think I remember seeing one at Brandon.  Last rider was Chris Manchester, who decided to pull a wheelie all the way down the back straight, and was promptly excluded for not racing properly.

 

The referee was Frank Edbon surprisingly

I think I can remember reading about that particular one 

[Dave Goddard]

On 9/3/2019 at 12:20 AM, teaboy279 said:

Greaves rode to the pits after someone  fell bend 2 (thinking the race was gonna be stopped)and was excluded. Then Ayres and Phillip's either fell or had mechanicals and both set off to push for 3 laps, both were excluded for not completing the race in 3 mins.

I've got that one on a DVD and it's like something out of a circus.  In the first running Ayres knocks off Jason Garrod and both fall off, for some reason Garrod is excluded.  In the rerun Ayres falls on his own, as he tries to get up the two Cradley riders knock each other off half a lap further on.  Greaves remounts but thinking the race has been stopped due to all the carnage rides back into the pits leaving the ridiculous sight of Ayres and Phillips trying to push start their bikes half a lap apart.  With the crowd laughing their heads off the referee waits for a bit and then excludes both of them for exceeding the time limit thus ending possibly the funniest and most ridiculous speedway race I have ever seen!

[Humphrey Appleby]

On 9/1/2019 at 7:59 PM, False dawn said:

And I agree with you. How can a ref exclude a rider for not racing when he's the only competitor left in the race?

Quite aside from 'not making a bona-fide attempt to race', a heat has a time limit of 3 minutes. So the last rider could have an engine failure and not have time to push home, although not sure whether that would be actually classified as an exclusion or 'retired'. 

The last rider might also miss the two minute warning or touch the tapes with no reserve replacement available. In fact, all four riders in a race could conceivably be excluded this way. 

Another way would be for the last rider to fall themselves whilst 'genuinely making an attempt to race' and thereby be excluded as the primary cause of the stoppage. 

Edited September 11, 2019 by Humphrey Appleby

[False dawn]

3 hours ago, Humphrey Appleby said:

Quite aside from 'not making a bona-fide attempt to race', a heat has a time limit of 3 minutes. So the last rider could have an engine failure and not have time to push home, although not sure whether that would be actually classified as an exclusion or 'retired'. 

The last rider might also miss the two minute warning or touch the tapes with no reserve replacement available. In fact, all four riders in a race could conceivably be excluded this way. 

Another way would be for the last rider to fall themselves whilst 'genuinely making an attempt to race' and thereby be excluded as the primary cause of the stoppage. 

All valid eventualities, sort of. But the example I was alluding to was a rider who found himself the last "survivor" in a "race". Rather than complete 4 laps in around 60 seconds, decided to entertain the crowd by pulling a few wheelies. His race time would have been a few seconds longer, certainly under 70 seconds. Despite all of that, the ref invoked the "not making a bona-fide"  clause and excluded him. I don't find that logical, by definition, since one can race when there is no one to race against?

[Humphrey Appleby]

39 minutes ago, False dawn said:

All valid eventualities, sort of. But the example I was alluding to was a rider who found himself the last "survivor" in a "race". Rather than complete 4 laps in around 60 seconds, decided to entertain the crowd by pulling a few wheelies. His race time would have been a few seconds longer, certainly under 70 seconds. Despite all of that, the ref invoked the "not making a bona-fide"  clause and excluded him. I don't find that logical, by definition, since one can race when there is no one to race against?

Depends how you interpret 'racing' but in its strictest application you'd probably say taking the most optimal racing line at usual race speeds.

I remember the Rick Miller case and it was over-zealous nonsense from the referee in the circumstances, but probably correct to the letter of the regulations. He was far from the only rider excluded for pulling wheelies whilst 'leading' though.

[teaboy279]

5 hours ago, Dave Goddard said:

I've got that one on a DVD and it's like something out of a circus.  In the first running Ayres knocks off Jason Garrod and both fall off, for some reason Garrod is excluded.  In the rerun Ayres falls on his own, as he tries to get up the two Cradley riders knock each other off half a lap further on.  Greaves remounts but thinking the race has been stopped due to all the carnage rides back into the pits leaving the ridiculous sight of Ayres and Phillips trying to push start their bikes half a lap apart.  With the crowd laughing their heads off the referee waits for a bit and then excludes both of them for exceeding the time limit thus ending possibly the funniest and most ridiculous speedway race I have ever seen!

One of the best things I ve seen live tbh, think I had the pleasure of updating the meeting as well.

[False dawn]

10 minutes ago, Humphrey Appleby said:

Depends how you interpret 'racing' but in its strictest application you'd probably say taking the most optimal racing line at usual race speeds.

I remember the Rick Miller case and it was over-zealous nonsense from the referee in the circumstances, but probably correct to the letter of the regulations. He was far from the only rider excluded for pulling wheelies whilst 'leading' though.

I think we're violently agreeing (note the date people - anything is possible!).

But I did look up the definition of "to race".....

To compete with another or others to see who is fastest at covering a set course or achieving an objective.

I guess the only race you can race on your own, is against the clock. It's interesting you say "at usual race speeds". The only time constraint in the rules is to finish the race within 3 minutes. You cannot define usual racing speeds. I would like, sometimes, to penalise riders who finish a race in last place at less than racing speeds but I cannot imagine how you would phrase such a rule.

Thankfully the 0-0, riders not trying etc. is a very rare occurrence. Enough said.

[Humphrey Appleby]

33 minutes ago, False dawn said:

I guess the only race you can race on your own, is against the clock. It's interesting you say "at usual race speeds". The only time constraint in the rules is to finish the race within 3 minutes. You cannot define usual racing speeds. I would like, sometimes, to penalise riders who finish a race in last place at less than racing speeds but I cannot imagine how you would phrase such a rule.

In many motor sports, being within 10% of the track record is considered to be an acceptable speed. 

The 3 minute time limit is just there to ensure that a race can't last indefinitely, such as if a rider is pushing around. You could however, equally achieve the same effect by excluding riders if they are no longer under power, or if they fail to finish within a certain percentage of time after the winner (assuming there is a winner!). 

[False dawn]

11 minutes ago, Humphrey Appleby said:

In many motor sports, being within 10% of the track record is considered to be an acceptable speed

No, that won't do. At Birmingham tonight, heat 3 was won in a time exactly 10% slower than the track record. Subsequent to that there were 4 heats even slower than that. So even the heat winners fail that test meaning those races would be declared 0-0. And there must have been many riders in other heats outside the 10% limit.

See how difficult it is to be prescriptive?

[steve roberts]

Ian Thomas in his book "Wheels and Deals" mentions that it happened once at Workington when the two away riders were excluded for offences and during the re-run he informed his riders not to take any chances...only to be excluded by the referee for not making a 'bona fide' attempt to race resulting in a heat score of 0-0.

Edited September 17, 2019 by steve roberts

[cityrebel]

Maybe someone statistically minded like Arnie could produce a list of all the 0-0"s since 1965. He did tell me the amount awhile ago, but my memory is not what it was!

[arnieg]

Just come across one in Poland.

 

Junior Team Championship, Leszno, 23 July 2019

Ht 7 Szczotka fell and the other three riders returned to the pits thinking the race had been stopped. It hadn't so the other three were excluded for leaving the track.

[boroboy25471]

On ‎9‎/‎1‎/‎2019 at 11:37 AM, False dawn said:

This might be all wrong. It's an age thing......

Wasn't it Rick Miller that was the only rider to finish a race at Brandon only to find he'd been excluded for not trying. He spent most of the race performing wheelies for the crowd. That was a 0-0.

I was at this meeting. It was Heat 2 of Coventry v Middlesbrough in the BSPA/Inter League KOC Cup in 1992. One of the Coventry riders was excluded for falling and the 2 Middlesbrough riders got excluded, all in separate reruns. Then like you said, Rick Miller pulled wheelies for most of the 4 laps and he never realised his exclusion light had come on at the time. Its the only 0-0 I've ever since in watching Speedway since 1976.

[boroboy25471]

On ‎9‎/‎2‎/‎2019 at 12:23 AM, Gemini said:

If we are including whole matches then I seem to remember going over to Long Eaton when the visiting team refused to ride so the Long Eaton riders got 5-0's in every race. I think the other team was Middlesborough.

Middlesbrough were never involved in anything like that and certainly not at Long Eaton.

[Gemini]

Apologies. Perhaps Newcastle then?  Was a long time ago and I can't remember. I can't even spell Middlesbrough correctly ~ probably all those Honda 70 journeys through Loughborough on the way to Station Road. 

[arnieg]

On 3/7/2020 at 10:34 PM, boroboy25471 said:

Middlesbrough were never involved in anything like that and certainly not at Long Eaton

No but Gem is nearly correct.

1986 Long Eaton won 65-0 in the circumstances she describes, against Mi...........

.

.

.

.

.

 

.....ldenhall  

[steve roberts]

1 hour ago, arnieg said:

No but Gem is nearly correct.

1986 Long Eaton won 65-0 in the circumstances she describes, against Mi...........

.

.

.

.

.

 

.....ldenhall  

Yes Mildenhall refused to race and the two Long Eaton riders took to the track over the thirteen heats to register a 65-0 'win'.

I'm sure that elsewhere on this thread it had been noted that the same scenario took place at Peterborough in 1976 against Oxford.

Edited March 9, 2020 by steve roberts

[Gemini]

16 hours ago, arnieg said:

No but Gem is nearly correct.

1986 Long Eaton won 65-0 in the circumstances she describes, against Mi...........

.

.

.

.

.

 

.....ldenhall  

Ah thank you very much Arnie. I thought it was a team that began with 'M' but that's as far as my brain cells responded.  I remember it being pretty boring watching the Long Eaton riders score 5-0 in every race.  What was the reason Mildenhall refused to race?