*JJ Posted July 6, 2021 Report Share Posted July 6, 2021 19 hours ago, Boothers said: For goodness sake Birmingham do the right thing and concede the KOC to Redcar, at the moment you are just taking the mick and embarrassing everyone associated with the sport. Why? Birmingham came back from 10 down to win at Berwick by 12; and came back from 14 down at Redcar to lose by only two. Who is to say that they could not have won by more than two at Perry Barr? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ringitsneck Posted July 6, 2021 Report Share Posted July 6, 2021 4 minutes ago, *JJ said: Why? Birmingham came back from 10 down to win at Berwick by 12; and came back from 14 down at Redcar to lose by only two. Who is to say that they could not have won by more than two at Perry Barr? The point being made is that the first leg, at B’Ham, was a complete shambles due to the promoters lack of planning, no prior track preparation, inadequate equipment and the fiasco of COVID preparation with fans from both sides being sold seats at the same table !?! Now throw in even more poor planning when the Euro fixtures were always a bone of contention and even after England got through it took Birmingham over 48 hours to decide to postpone the fixture . Riss being injured having anything to do with this ? Yes, any team can pull off a victory but the B’Ham promotion have been found seriously wanting and showed no humility or respect with their press releases blaming Redcar at every opportunity. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yearbyred Posted July 6, 2021 Report Share Posted July 6, 2021 2 hours ago, *JJ said: Why? Birmingham came back from 10 down to win at Berwick by 12; and came back from 14 down at Redcar to lose by only two. Who is to say that they could not have won by more than two at Perry Barr? By that way of thinking a first leg of a KOC can never be awarded to any team as any score could occur in the second leg. That’s not in the rules. Even if there is only 1 race left you would have to re-run the meeting by that logic. If Heat 10 had been run the meeting could have been awarded by the current rules (assuming they are applied in a logical manner) Heat 10 was delayed by the crash where Jordan Stewart was injured and Birmingham would have had 1 rider therefore a 3-3 was the best the Brummies could realistically get. Bears would still have been 10 points up (at least). Add to that the delay to the meeting caused by Birmingham’s inability to get the track prepared in time and the fact meetings have previously been awarded after 9 races when the result wasn’t mathematically certain and you can see why Redcar are not happy. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dog Posted July 6, 2021 Report Share Posted July 6, 2021 2 hours ago, Ringitsneck said: The point being made is that the first leg, at B’Ham, was a complete shambles due to the promoters lack of planning, no prior track preparation, inadequate equipment and the fiasco of COVID preparation with fans from both sides being sold seats at the same table !?! Now throw in even more poor planning when the Euro fixtures were always a bone of contention and even after England got through it took Birmingham over 48 hours to decide to postpone the fixture . Riss being injured having anything to do with this ? Yes, any team can pull off a victory but the B’Ham promotion have been found seriously wanting and showed no humility or respect with their press releases blaming Redcar at every opportunity. Understand your frustrations but you cannot blame Birmingham for not running against a Euro semi-final involving England. Apart from it being financially and commercially ridiculous, I would bet most of the fans, riders, promotion team, staff etc on both sides would like to see England hopefully reach the final. I would think the decision to cancel the meeting was pretty much instant but with England playing on the Saturday night, the BSPA would not have been able to make the decision until the office opened on Monday and then get the press release out. Not actually Birmingham waiting 48hrs... Given that Birmingham could cover Riss with nearly anybody in the league due to his high average, I don't think the fact he is injured was even thought about in a sinister way either. Having read all of the press releases on the Brummies website, I've not seen one sentence where they are blaming Redcar for anything either. Please enlighten us all if its been missed somewhere tho 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ringitsneck Posted July 6, 2021 Report Share Posted July 6, 2021 So you didn’t read the next days release which blamed the Redcar riders and promotion for the delays ? The one that Redcar objected too and responded too rather strongly ? Seems you have selective recall just like the promotion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dog Posted July 6, 2021 Report Share Posted July 6, 2021 56 minutes ago, Ringitsneck said: So you didn’t read the next days release which blamed the Redcar riders and promotion for the delays ? The one that Redcar objected too and responded too rather strongly ? Seems you have selective recall just like the promotion. What the press release does say is that 'the visitors weren't too happy with the track and that the start was delayed for around an hour while work was carried out'. That says to me that the club tried all they could to make sure both sets of riders were happy enough to get the meeting on rather than laying the blame at Redcar riders and promotion for the delays.... which they obviously did because the meeting went ahead. 55 minutes ago, Ringitsneck said: So you didn’t read the next days release which blamed the Redcar riders and promotion for the delays ? The one that Redcar objected too and responded too rather strongly ? Seems you have selective recall just like the promotion. 55 minutes ago, Ringitsneck said: So you didn’t read the next days release which blamed the Redcar riders and promotion for the delays ? The one that Redcar objected too and responded too rather strongly ? Seems you have selective recall just like the promotion. 8 hours ago, Ringitsneck said: The point being made is that the first leg, at B’Ham, was a complete shambles due to the promoters lack of planning, no prior track preparation, inadequate equipment and the fiasco of COVID preparation with fans from both sides being sold seats at the same table !?! Now throw in even more poor planning when the Euro fixtures were always a bone of contention and even after England got through it took Birmingham over 48 hours to decide to postpone the fixture . Riss being injured having anything to do with this ? Yes, any team can pull off a victory but the B’Ham promotion have been found seriously wanting and showed no humility or respect with their press releases blaming Redcar at every opportunity. Understand your frustrations but you cannot blame Birmingham for not running against a Euro semi-final involving England. Apart from it being financially and commercially ridiculous, I would bet most of the fans, riders, promotion team, staff etc on both sides would like to see England hopefully reach the final. I would think the decision to cancel the meeting was pretty much instant but with England playing on the Saturday night, the BSPA would not have been able to make the decision until the office opened on Monday and then get the press release out. Not actually Birmingham waiting 48hrs... Given that Birmingham could cover Riss with nearly anybody in the league due to his high average, I don't think the fact he is injured was even thought about in a sinister way either. Having read all of the press releases on the Brummies website, I've not seen one sentence where they are blaming Redcar for anything either. Please enlighten us all if its been missed somewhere tho 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slyfox Posted July 6, 2021 Report Share Posted July 6, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, The Dog said: What the press release does say is that 'the visitors weren't too happy with the track and that the start was delayed for around an hour while work was carried out'. That says to me that the club tried all they could to make sure both sets of riders were happy enough to get the meeting on rather than laying the blame at Redcar riders and promotion for the delays.... which they obviously did because the meeting went ahead. Understand your frustrations but you cannot blame Birmingham for not running against a Euro semi-final involving England. Apart from it being financially and commercially ridiculous, I would bet most of the fans, riders, promotion team, staff etc on both sides would like to see England hopefully reach the final. I would think the decision to cancel the meeting was pretty much instant but with England playing on the Saturday night, the BSPA would not have been able to make the decision until the office opened on Monday and then get the press release out. Not actually Birmingham waiting 48hrs... Given that Birmingham could cover Riss with nearly anybody in the league due to his high average, I don't think the fact he is injured was even thought about in a sinister way either. Having read all of the press releases on the Brummies website, I've not seen one sentence where they are blaming Redcar for anything either. Please enlighten us all if its been missed somewhere tho As Erik Riss is not No 1 in the averages, I think the only option they will have is R/R. If that is the only option I beg to differ and say it would be a big influence in the decision, apart from Harris the rest of the team will not cover his rides at the same level. This whole situation from the 1st meeting, to them planning a replacement date meeting that had a high probability of it being called off is a farce. Plus the even bigger farce is the S C B backing them all the way. A well run club like Redcar who have planned all their meetings with a lot of forethought & helped the BSPL by taking 2 Under 21 meetings (that no one else seemed to want) are being treat like rubbish. No wonder one of their promoters who is one of the best guys in this sport is saying he will walk away at the end of the season because of the double standards that are being applied. Edited July 6, 2021 by slyfox 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevePark Posted July 6, 2021 Report Share Posted July 6, 2021 14 minutes ago, slyfox said: As Erik Riss is not No 1 in the averages, I think the only option they will have is R/R. If that is the only option I beg to differ and say it would be a big influence in the decision, apart from Harris the rest of the team will not cover his rides at the same level. This whole situation from the 1st meeting, to them planning a replacement date meeting that had a high probability of it being called off is a farce. Plus the even bigger farce is the S C B backing them all the way. A well run club like Redcar who have planned all their meetings with a lot of forethought & helped the BSPL by taking 2 Under 21 meetings (that no one else seemed to want) are being treat like rubbish. No wonder one of their promoters who is one of the best guys in this sport is saying he will walk away at the end of the season because of the double standards that are being applied. If he's in the Top three in the averages you can use guest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slyfox Posted July 6, 2021 Report Share Posted July 6, 2021 33 minutes ago, StevePark said: If he's in the Top three in the averages you can use guest. Sorry Steve I bow to your better judgment. I thought they had changed the rules to only number one's. So that's another one where Redcar lose out to these farcical rules. Because Jordan Stewart is No 4 in their averages they cannot use a guest for him. Can someone explain the logic in that rule. 1,2,3, 6 & 7 but not 4 & 5??? Just had a look at the make up of the SCB would love to know who keep's voting against Redcar over the years when these decisions are made. Think it may be a case of who you know and not what you know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edmon Posted July 6, 2021 Report Share Posted July 6, 2021 1 minute ago, slyfox said: Just had a look at the make up of the SCB would love to know who keep's voting against Redcar over the years when these decisions are made. Think it may be a case of who you know and not what you know. Led to believe two with a refereeing background are running things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slyfox Posted July 6, 2021 Report Share Posted July 6, 2021 (edited) 12 minutes ago, edmon said: Led to believe two with a refereeing background are running things. Referees in sport should use the rules to run meetings not make them. The big issue with the Redcar management is that when the same thing happened at a home meeting v Glasgow with almost exactly the same score, Glasgow were awarded the meeting. When Redcar could have mathematically come back and won. On that Basis Redcar should have had the Birmingham meeting awarded. So why the double standards? The referee that night was, head honcho, Scottish referee Jim McGregor. Are you telling me referees have lots of influence ???? Edited July 6, 2021 by slyfox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edmon Posted July 6, 2021 Report Share Posted July 6, 2021 2 minutes ago, slyfox said: Referees in sport should use the rules to run meetings not make them. The big issue with the Redcar management is that when the same thing happened at a home meeting to Glasgow with almost exactly the same score Glasgow were awarded the meeting. When Redcar could have mathematically come back and won. On that Basis Redcar should have had it awarded. So why the double standards? The referee that night was, head honcho, Scottish referee Jim McGregor. Are you telling referees have lots of influence ???? No I will say that Jim McGregor argued against the decision that night, saying it should have been rerun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fortythirtyeight Posted July 6, 2021 Report Share Posted July 6, 2021 11 minutes ago, edmon said: No I will say that Jim McGregor argued against the decision that night, saying it should have been rerun. and on THAT night the head of the SCB said it had to be rerun, by the Monday he was told to award it to Glasgow . McGregor made no argument on that night he simply rang the SCB chair for advice whilst never more than two feet away from the Glasgow management who stuck to him like glue. He did say the rule was it SHOULD be rerun . But that’s all in the past now and we are all best of friends, honestly ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slyfox Posted July 6, 2021 Report Share Posted July 6, 2021 1 hour ago, Fortythirtyeight said: and on THAT night the head of the SCB said it had to be rerun, by the Monday he was told to award it to Glasgow . McGregor made no argument on that night he simply rang the SCB chair for advice whilst never more than two feet away from the Glasgow management who stuck to him like glue. He did say the rule was it SHOULD be rerun . But that’s all in the past now and we are all best of friends, honestly ! The problem with making that decision, and braking their own rules, it set a precedent (just to please the Glasgow management) that now comes back to haunt them. Even in the recent statement they told a pack of lies which the Redcar management knew was untrue. That it was awarded because the result was beyond doubt and Glasgow would have won. Not true!!! 1 1 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.