Jump to content
British Speedway Forum

Belle Vue v Ipswich Play off semi 2nd leg 3 Oct


Recommended Posts

Perfect weather in Manchester dry all yesterday and nice sunny autum day today 17/18 so track will be perfect for our new rider it will feel like poland to him and he has brought is polish / gp engines the battles with doyle will be worth the addmission money alone :party:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, NSS1 said:

don't forget to pick your toys & dummy up from your pram :rofl:

Well done for the balanced and intelligent level of debate you have managed here :t:

People will be able to draw their own conclusions as to which posters are childlike cretins and which try to discuss sensibly even when disagreeing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aces have done nothing wrong same as wolves/poole have done in the past we all know they were underhand tatics but within the rules !! except Aces case is genuine with a rider injured and out for the season !! fans will have to suck it up like like other fans did in the past funny how things turn around :rolleyes:

Edited by NSS1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, dontforgetthefueltapsbruv said:

Well done for the balanced and intelligent level of debate you have managed here :t:

People will be able to draw their own conclusions as to which posters are childlike cretins and which try to discuss sensibly even when disagreeing

oh dear another one with a lump in his throat :rofl:

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, dontforgetthefueltapsbruv said:

Well done for the balanced and intelligent level of debate you have managed here :t:

People will be able to draw their own conclusions as to which posters are childlike cretins and which try to discuss sensibly even when disagreeing

think you had better go back and read some other commments here pot/kettle/black :t:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you use averages, and given all the manipulation and variable ways they get delivered it is definitely not an exact science, (nor in my opinion fit for purpose, but that's for another time)...

You then cannot complain when they get used to bring in riders for those injured.. 

You either have to use them or not and given the whole season sees guests being used on a horses for courses/ringer basis, then at least we have one rider now who will complete (hopefully), 3 meetings.. 

Just a shame he couldnt have done all four...

Let's hope we see some great racing tonight from him..

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, NSS1 said:

Aces have done nothing wrong same as wolves/poole have done in the past we all know they were underhand tatics but within the rules !! except Aces case is genuine with a rider injured and out for the season !! fans will have to suck it up like like other fans did in the past funny how things turn around :rolleyes:

Maybe so but you haven't even scratched the surface with the level of flack Poole used to get.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, NSS1 said:

Aces have done nothing wrong same as wolves/poole have done in the past we all know they were underhand tatics but within the rules !! except Aces case is genuine with a rider injured and out for the season !! fans will have to suck it up like like other fans did in the past funny how things turn around :rolleyes:

As a non-Poole fan and non-Wolves fan, I would point both Hancock (2013) and Woffinden (2016) were signed before the transfer deadline and used in regular league matches.  Wolverhampton had both Lindgren and Thorssell injured in 2017, won the away leg at Swindon, but then lost the final because they were missing their two biggest home track experts. Wolves followed the rules and didn't look for a loophole in the rulebook, get turned down for it, and then threaten legal action until they got their own way!  Belle Vue Speedway is a credit to British speedway, with a superb track and stadium, but they will lost a lot of friends with their actions.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, lucifer sam said:

As a non-Poole fan and non-Wolves fan, I would point both Hancock (2013) and Woffinden (2016) were signed before the transfer deadline and used in regular league matches.  Wolverhampton had both Lindgren and Thorssell injured in 2017, won the away leg at Swindon, but then lost the final because they were missing their two biggest home track experts. Wolves followed the rules and didn't look for a loophole in the rulebook, get turned down for it, and then threaten legal action until they got their own way!  Belle Vue Speedway is a credit to British speedway, with a superb track and stadium, but they will lost a lot of friends with their actions.  

Was the rule written the same way then? I don't have a copy of 2017 rule book but know the rule was rewrittten this year to include the 25% to 75% window with 2 transfers except for long term injury.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, lucifer sam said:

As a non-Poole fan and non-Wolves fan, I would point both Hancock (2013) and Woffinden (2016) were signed before the transfer deadline and used in regular league matches.  Wolverhampton had both Lindgren and Thorssell injured in 2017, won the away leg at Swindon, but then lost the final because they were missing their two biggest home track experts. Wolves followed the rules and didn't look for a loophole in the rulebook, get turned down for it, and then threaten legal action until they got their own way!  Belle Vue Speedway is a credit to British speedway, with a superb track and stadium, but they will lost a lot of friends with their actions.  

They didn’t break the rule as there was no rule there at the time. Signing ringers for the play offs was subsequently stopped but they made a cock up with the rules which saw replacing long term injured riders also stopped. A oversight that hit Wolves hard in 2017. This has since been addressed and is the reason Belle Vue signed Lambert for their last four fixtures, all within the rules. 
 

Edited by ouch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rob B said:

Was the rule written the same way then? I don't have a copy of 2017 rule book but know the rule was rewrittten this year to include the 25% to 75% window with 2 transfers except for long term injury.

That's not the rule that causes the issue.

The rule is 010.3.1, which, for some reason, no Belle Vue supporter seems to want to take any notice of despite it being quoted on this forum when Rob was first refused permission.

The rule reads: "No team changes will be allowed after 28th August with the effective date being 31st August. Except riders returning to the team after injury who must re-take their position, dictated by their MA, with their replacement being released."

Personally, I'd rather be watching Rob Lambert racing tonight, and in terms of who wins I'm completely neutral. But if you want to look at rules, you need to include that one too, which gives no mention of long-term injuries.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have seen in the past Poole bringing in Hancock and Wolves bringing in Woffinden, now we bring in Lambert, forgetting how the rules were written seasons ago these moves did not break any rules but the one thing i dont really agree with is riders who dont commit fully to British speedway using us as a couple of extra paydays when the overseas commitments have ended, You can have nothing but admiration for Doyles continued commitment to the sport here.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure what to make of this. If the rules don't allow for changes to be made at this point then there shouldn't really be any "in the best interests" exceptions. On the other hand it's good to see Lambert back (even if only for a few meetings) and it's preferable for a club to have a signing rather than guests. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Grachan said:

That's not the rule that causes the issue.

The rule is 010.3.1, which, for some reason, no Belle Vue supporter seems to want to take any notice of despite it being quoted on this forum when Rob was first refused permission.

The rule reads: "No team changes will be allowed after 28th August with the effective date being 31st August. Except riders returning to the team after injury who must re-take their position, dictated by their MA, with their replacement being released."

Personally, I'd rather be watching Rob Lambert racing tonight, and in terms of who wins I'm completely neutral. But if you want to look at rules, you need to include that one too, which gives no mention of long-term injuries.

So, for completeness, could you show the long-term injury rule please. The rule you have shown only covers riders returning from injury and am interested to find which rule it would have been for BV to appeal against. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BV to win the league @ 4/7 with bet365 is a gift for anyone who wants to put money on it.

I'll be hammering this line as it's the biggest certainty since backing Ukraine to win the Eurovision Song Contest.

Edited by TTT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Grachan said:

That's not the rule that causes the issue.

The rule is 010.3.1, which, for some reason, no Belle Vue supporter seems to want to take any notice of despite it being quoted on this forum when Rob was first refused permission.

The rule reads: "No team changes will be allowed after 28th August with the effective date being 31st August. Except riders returning to the team after injury who must re-take their position, dictated by their MA, with their replacement being released."

Personally, I'd rather be watching Rob Lambert racing tonight, and in terms of who wins I'm completely neutral. But if you want to look at rules, you need to include that one too, which gives no mention of long-term injuries.

But you cannot ignore the newer rule either, in fact the newer rule should take precedence over the old one, which shouldn’t have been left in. 
If you apply both rules then you have two cut off dates for changes. Ipswich hit the deadline 07/08/2022 but if they wanted to make a change they could say they will use the old rule and have until the 28/08/2022. Sheffield hit theirs 31/08/2022 so they would prefer to use the new rule to get some extra days should they need it. There is no reason for the old rule to be there, as I’ve mentioned before it impacted teams with long term injury issues when all it need to do was address ringers. The fact the new rule did this and evened out the playing field for when teams could change up to (75%) was perfect. Unfortunately they forgot to remove the old rule. Just to be clear to the usual suspects, no rules have been hastily rewritten, no brown envelopes have changed hands (a refreshing change after all these years) and nothing has been done with the dreaded best interests of speedway that the in crowd often use. It’s purely a desire to see the rules adhered to and the usual BSPL antics pushed to one side. 

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