Rule change for tape exclusion

[Endeavour]

I would prefer to see the rider who breaks the tapes to go off 15m. No option to bring in a reserve.

 

[bigcatdiary]

16 minutes ago, Endeavour said:

I would prefer to see the rider who breaks the tapes to go off 15m. No option to bring in a reserve.

 

Their is a better way, just exclude any rider who moves prior to the start when the green light is on, no replacement.

This would eradicate all the nonsense at the tapes in a few meetings.

Very few riders get excluded for a second offence in a meeting having been officially warned once, so they clearly know they get no leeway for trying to cheat.

 

[Endeavour]

23 minutes ago, bigcatdiary said:

Their is a better way, just exclude any rider who moves prior to the start when the green light is on, no replacement.

This would eradicate all the nonsense at the tapes in a few meetings.

Very few riders get excluded for a second offence in a meeting having been officially warned once, so they clearly know they get no leeway for trying to cheat.

 

Can see your point of view but referees would need to be more consistent at starts. Some let riders away with murder . I prefer refs that are sticklers for the rules.

[IronScorpion]

1 hour ago, bigcatdiary said:

Their is a better way, just exclude any rider who moves prior to the start when the green light is on, no replacement.

This would eradicate all the nonsense at the tapes in a few meetings.

Very few riders get excluded for a second offence in a meeting having been officially warned once, so they clearly know they get no leeway for trying to cheat.

 

I mentioned the straight forward exclusion some years ago as it would also stop teams bringing in a reserve for an under performing rider. I am not too sure as a tape exclusion, as of now, counts as a ride where as a 2 minute exclusion even if at the tapes but gardening/delaying the start, counts. A "frustrated ride" is mentioned but is a fickle rule to understand as are others.

Regarding your last paragraph, whether this has occurred at other meetings, we had a rider excluded for 2 offences but was announced that a new rule this year means that they are wiped clean so if a rider has a 3rd offence it becomes his 1st again.

Straight forward exclusion, as you say, eradicates all the nonsense at the starts & the rider & team suffer having only the 1 rider at the tapes. Nice and easy rule to enforce, simple & effective plus no waiting around for another rider meaning the meeting is not dragged out.

[Endeavour]

6 minutes ago, IronScorpion said:

I mentioned the straight forward exclusion some years ago as it would also stop teams bringing in a reserve for an under performing rider. I am not too sure as a tape exclusion, as of now, counts as a ride where as a 2 minute exclusion even if at the tapes but gardening/delaying the start, counts. A "frustrated ride" is mentioned but is a fickle rule to understand as are others.

Regarding your last paragraph, whether this has occurred at other meetings, we had a rider excluded for 2 offences but was announced that a new rule this year means that they are wiped clean so if a rider has a 3rd offence it becomes his 1st again.

Straight forward exclusion, as you say, eradicates all the nonsense at the starts & the rider & team suffer having only the 1 rider at the tapes. Nice and easy rule to enforce, simple & effective plus no waiting around for another rider meaning the meeting is not dragged out.

At Glasgow v Edinburgh league play off Wells was excluded. He is up and down like a fiddlers elbow at Ashfield. Reserve Novak came in and won the race. You could argue it benefitted home team. In scheme of things didn’t really matter as we were well and truly trounced and Glasgow were worthy winners. No doubt all teams at some point have had strong reserves in same scenario. 

[RS50]

How about this?  Keep the same options, but let the opposing team manager make the decision.

[mikebv]

Poland have zero tolerance and dont seem to have many starting issues and races start promptly.. 

Start Marshall walks away, and if a rider moves back, then the ref tells him and he returns to move the rider forward..

The Final at Peterborough had some riders six inches from the tapes..

No need for so many extra Mickey Mouse rules to be added if they just implemented some rules that they have properly..

Although there would need a comms system from ref to start marshall like Poland have...

Two plastic cups and a piece of string may work..?

[Triple.H.]

50 minutes ago, RS50 said:

How about this?  Keep the same options, but let the opposing team manager make the decision.

I like that, brings team management more into the game much like the TS rule back in the day

[Technik]

The start marshal's need to be stronger & in a lot of cases less biased. Riders must be no more than 4 inchs away from the tapes.

The tapes should be the same hight as the centre of the front wheel so that if a rider moves he will touch the tape instead of going under them before they move.

A two minute clock needs to be in place & used correctly. If the rider is not ready at zero then out he go's & the Refs must not turn it off when it gets to 10 seconds to give riders more time to garden.

[Humphrey Appleby]

14 hours ago, IronScorpion said:

I mentioned the straight forward exclusion some years ago as it would also stop teams bringing in a reserve for an under performing rider. I am not too sure as a tape exclusion, as of now, counts as a ride where as a 2 minute exclusion even if at the tapes but gardening/delaying the start, counts. A "frustrated ride" is mentioned but is a fickle rule to understand as are others.

A tapes exclusion counts as a ride for average purposes, but not for the purpose of calculating minimum rides unless the rider is not replaced. 

[IainB]

It seems perfectly simple to me, a rider should have 2 minutes to be at the start ready to race, if they touch the tapes they are excluded, what's difficult about that? Any of the other starting shenanigans are always up to interpretation, so why have them. So what if a rider gets a flyer or anticipates the start, this used to add a bit of unpredictability into proceedings, I still remember Jason Gage beating Hans Nielsen at Peterborough because he got a flyer... and Andy Meredith out trapping Hans at Coventry with Nielsen making a right pickle of trying to get round him.

From the Speedway I've seen in this country, this season, the starts haven't really been an issue, I don't know if anything has changed but it doesn't seem as bad as in previous years. Watching some Swedish Speedway on the other hand and some of their starts have been terrible and you can almost guarantee the first race of every TV match will be called back... such an anti-climax.

 

[jenga]

i remember Neil Collins @workington going off 30 mtrs when he broke the tapes, went off 15 mtrs and then jumped the start and was put back another 15 mtrs .

instead of possing about with the silly rules of speedway .even when this rule was introduced the refs did not know how to use it .

why dont the kings n queens of speedway get their act together and run speedway in the summer months and give the promoters chance to make a bit of profit from the WINTER play offs  in the summer .crazy sport , even crazier mup pets in charge of a good sport for self gain .

 

[Humphrey Appleby]

4 hours ago, iainb said:

It seems perfectly simple to me, a rider should have 2 minutes to be at the start ready to race, if they touch the tapes they are excluded, what's difficult about that?

I think the argument was that being excluded for tape touching doesn't benefit the team, unlike (say) laying down a bike during a race when on a heat disadvantage. The reserve replacement will usually not be better, and they could have been put in the race anyway if the team had really wanted to gain a tactical advantage. 

Frankly though, using potentially unreliable tapes to detect a false start is pretty old fashioned anyway. Just get rid of the tapes and use a laser beam to detect it. 

[old bob at herne bay]

Let 'em roll creep push and stretch  the tapes as much as they dare after the start marshall walks away. Ref lets the tapes up when the rolling rider is moving backwards and is left at the gate.

However if the tapes are broken ....that rider is EXCLUDED.

[cityrebel]

5 hours ago, jenga said:

i remember Neil Collins @workington going off 30 mtrs when he broke the tapes, went off 15 mtrs and then jumped the start and was put back another 15 mtrs .

instead of possing about with the silly rules of speedway .even when this rule was introduced the refs did not know how to use it .

why dont the kings n queens of speedway get their act together and run speedway in the summer months and give the promoters chance to make a bit of profit from the WINTER play offs  in the summer .crazy sport , even crazier mup pets in charge of a good sport for self gain .

 

Chris Harris did the same thing at Lakeside. He seemed as far back as the Dartford tunnel!

[False dawn]

2 hours ago, Humphrey Appleby said:

..............Just get rid of the tapes and use a laser beam to detect it. 

Two laser beams. One at the back of the bikes to prevent backing off.

[Endeavour]

27 minutes ago, old bob at herne bay said:

Let 'em roll creep push and stretch  the tapes as much as they dare after the start marshall walks away. Ref lets the tapes up when the rolling rider is moving backwards and is left at the gate.

However if the tapes are broken ....that rider is EXCLUDED.

And should be put back 15m. If a team has a strong reserve that team is not penalised. Look at the Panthers and the strong reserve they maintained throughout the season.

[old bob at herne bay]

1 minute ago, False dawn said:

Two laser beams. One at the back of the bikes to prevent backing off.

So when old bob was younger bob back in the day, Wimbledon tried a system where a scaffold pole was placed behind the bikes at the start once the green light came on to prevent riders moving back.

[Sidney the robin]

1 hour ago, old bob at herne bay said:

So when old bob was younger bob back in the day, Wimbledon tried a system where a scaffold pole was placed behind the bikes at the start once the green light came on to prevent riders moving back.

Not placed at you Bob not one bit, but god with the trouble the sport has in this Country why would anyone be that bothered about a trivial ruling.? Stupid rules and over complicating speedway has totally ruined our model in the Uk it is totally flawed.

[*JJ]

17 hours ago, old bob at herne bay said:

So when old bob was younger bob back in the day, Wimbledon tried a system where a scaffold pole was placed behind the bikes at the start once the green light came on to prevent riders moving back.

And I remember once at Birmingham, a thick rope was used for the same reason. The riders fought and struggled to get their bikes back over the rope in order to do their gardening and jumping ... All of these shifts will only work if the riders are forced to co-operate with them, by being disqualified if necessary.