Jump to content
British Speedway Forum

Premiership Pairs


Recommended Posts

The thread running earlier this year about British Speedway being a joke seems quite apt. How come one sport can end up with such an incompetent bunch ruling over what use to be an enjoyable past time but has become a farce. Well done all on the top table, you have earned dick heads of the year for what must be the umpteenth time. No wonder Speedway is on it knees.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, tocha said:

In other words it took a long time to arrive at the wrong decision. Still, it is a new event and I'm sure they'll get it right should it happen again.

I think they have learned from this season's Jubillee Cup fiasco...

So William's first one should be a doddle..

Edited by mikebv
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did the referee not have a copy of the rule book or did the referee fail to read the rule book? The team managers also appear not to know the rule book as well as they should and even if you can't remember all the rules knowing where things are in the rule book and having the ability to actually read the relevant sections should be a minimum qualification for the job.

Heads should roll or at the very least some urgent re-training is required.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Chris116 said:

Did the referee not have a copy of the rule book or did the referee fail to read the rule book? The team managers also appear not to know the rule book as well as they should and even if you can't remember all the rules knowing where things are in the rule book and having the ability to actually read the relevant sections should be a minimum qualification for the job.

Heads should roll or at the very least some urgent re-training is required.

You can check out the Rule book yourself on the SCB Website, to see that the Referee complied with them to the letter!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Gambo said:

You can check out the Rule book yourself on the SCB Website, to see that the Referee complied with them to the letter!

So it's the team managers who really should've kept schtum, rules can't be changed on a whim but an amendment done for next season if everyone agrees?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Chris116 said:

Did the referee not have a copy of the rule book or did the referee fail to read the rule book? The team managers also appear not to know the rule book as well as they should and even if you can't remember all the rules knowing where things are in the rule book and having the ability to actually read the relevant sections should be a minimum qualification for the job.

Heads should roll or at the very least some urgent re-training is required.

All they needed was a programme, the rules were printed in there weren't they? People were quoting them on here. 

Edited by iainb
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Gambo said:

You can check out the Rule book yourself on the SCB Website, to see that the Referee complied with them to the letter!

If the referee complied with the rules to the letter why did the BSPL issue the statement the following day altering the result? 

Did the referee get it wrong or has the BSPL moved the goal posts in the 24 hours after the meeting?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Chris116 said:

If the referee complied with the rules to the letter why did the BSPL issue the statement the following day altering the result? 

Did the referee get it wrong or has the BSPL moved the goal posts in the 24 hours after the meeting?

As I said, the Referee followed the rules, as they stood at the time, to the letter!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Gambo said:

As I said, the Referee followed the rules, as they stood at the time, to the letter!

So you are saying that the rules were changed after the event! Having looked at the rules on the SCB site as well as those quoted on this thread I can't find any changes so how can you claim the referee followed the rules correctly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Chris116 said:

So you are saying that the rules were changed after the event! Having looked at the rules on the SCB site as well as those quoted on this thread I can't find any changes so how can you claim the referee followed the rules correctly?

To return the question to you, where/what is the rule that the referee did not follow. And if there was a part that he did not follow, why did the Team managers not point that out to him?

 

Edited by Gambo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Gambo said:

To return the question to you, where/what is the rule that the referee did not follow. And if there was a part that he did not follow, why did the Team managers not point that out to him?

 

Read what the BSPL statement says.

The SCB would like to apologise to the Wolverhampton Team at the Premiership Pairs Round 5 at Belle Vue on Thursday 27th October where an error was made in the calcification of the results for the semi finals, where on the countback system Wolverhampton should have qualified for the race off.

 

Three teams tied on 20 points however the SCB Regulations quite clearly states as per SCB Regulation 016.1.3 -

 

"If more than a two way tie the team with the highest scoring heat results will qualify"

 

Under this regulation between the three tied teams Wolverhampton, Peterborough and Sheffield, this meant Sheffield finshed in 5th position having not scored any 6 - 3 results in their favour, where as both Wolverhampton and Peterborough had one race each with a 6-3 advantage.

 

Wolverhampton and Peterborough also had one race each of a 5-4 advantage.

 

Thereafter Wolverhampton had one race with a score of 4-5 where as Peterborough other three races were all scores of 3-6, meaning that Wolverhampton should have qualified with a higher scoring heat results.

 

So the 5th round positions will be adjusted to the following -

 

1st Belle Vue

2nd Ipswich

3rd Wolverhampton

4th Peterborough

5th Sheffield

They say the rules were not followed and from my reading of the rules, I have to agree with the BSPL on this occasion.

Edited by Chris116
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And what would they have done had Harris not crashed out of the semi, which would have seen the Panthers in the final?  Adjust the scores with Wolves going ahead of the Witches? Order the whole meeting restaged? Restage the semi & final?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Col said:

And what would they have done had Harris not crashed out of the semi, which would have seen the Panthers in the final? 

They'd have said he was guesting for Wolverhampton.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Chris116 said:

Read what the BSPL statement says.

The SCB would like to apologise to the Wolverhampton Team at the Premiership Pairs Round 5 at Belle Vue on Thursday 27th October where an error was made in the calcification of the results for the semi finals, where on the countback system Wolverhampton should have qualified for the race off.

 

Three teams tied on 20 points however the SCB Regulations quite clearly states as per SCB Regulation 016.1.3 -

 

"If more than a two way tie the team with the highest scoring heat results will qualify"

 

Under this regulation between the three tied teams Wolverhampton, Peterborough and Sheffield, this meant Sheffield finshed in 5th position having not scored any 6 - 3 results in their favour, where as both Wolverhampton and Peterborough had one race each with a 6-3 advantage.

 

Wolverhampton and Peterborough also had one race each of a 5-4 advantage.

 

Thereafter Wolverhampton had one race with a score of 4-5 where as Peterborough other three races were all scores of 3-6, meaning that Wolverhampton should have qualified with a higher scoring heat results.

 

To be fair to the ref...

They probably thought that working all that out would have taken till Friday lunchtime...

"Anyone got a box and 3 pieces of paper?"...

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mikebv said:

To be fair to the ref...

They probably thought that working all that out would have taken till Friday lunchtime...

"Anyone got a box and 3 pieces of paper?"...

Someone did say, let's get a random number generator, adjust for the teams and riders in alphabetical order and take into account league position (not counting the play-offs of course).
Then the ref said, "where's the cardboard box?" :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy