Jump to content
British Speedway Forum

Sheffield vs. Belle Vue Grand Final 2nd Leg 13/10/22


TTT

Recommended Posts

On 10/15/2022 at 10:22 PM, mikebv said:

Sheffield Heat Leaders..

18 off 14 rides in leg one..

25 off 14 rides in leg two..

43 off 28 rides in total..

And that includes a gifted 5 points in Heat Fifteen of leg two which was a dead rubber..

A collective average of 6.14 for the three Sheffield HL's..

And some still suggest it was 100% the refs fault that the Tigers lost...:rolleyes::D

People see what they want to see, and will apportion blame where it suits. Some will seek to blame the referee, some will choose riders, some will choose the rule makers. I think the one point I would make was that for me Christina was very consistent in her application of the "rules" Personally I disagree with most of the decisions made these days, where the slightest contact results in a rider taking a dive and getting the decision, but that is very much how the sport is decided these days. Anyone thinking Holder should not have been excluded when Wright went down in the first leg must also agree that Brady shouldn't have been excluded in heat 1 of the second leg, both occasions where a rider made a forceful move with minimal "rubbing" on the way through, the rider on the outside could easily have straightened up and conceded the move, but instead chose to take the contact and chance a get off and reinstatement. For me this is how speedway is going. I'm not keen on it, but it seems to be the norm. The reality of both legs was if you went up the inside of someone and there was the slightest of contact, you were deemed the guilty party. At least she was consistent in that regard

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, wtf said:

People see what they want to see, and will apportion blame where it suits. Some will seek to blame the referee, some will choose riders, some will choose the rule makers. I think the one point I would make was that for me Christina was very consistent in her application of the "rules" Personally I disagree with most of the decisions made these days, where the slightest contact results in a rider taking a dive and getting the decision, but that is very much how the sport is decided these days. Anyone thinking Holder should not have been excluded when Wright went down in the first leg must also agree that Brady shouldn't have been excluded in heat 1 of the second leg, both occasions where a rider made a forceful move with minimal "rubbing" on the way through, the rider on the outside could easily have straightened up and conceded the move, but instead chose to take the contact and chance a get off and reinstatement. For me this is how speedway is going. I'm not keen on it, but it seems to be the norm. The reality of both legs was if you went up the inside of someone and there was the slightest of contact, you were deemed the guilty party. At least she was consistent in that regard

I don't agree it was all the referee's fault, Sheffield didn't ride well enough especially on their own track but the Holder /Wright incident in the first leg was completely different to the Kurtz exclusion in the second leg. Overall the decisions went against Sheffield but it wasn't the reason they lost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, foreverblue said:

I don't agree it was all the referee's fault, Sheffield didn't ride well enough especially on their own track but the Holder /Wright incident in the first leg was completely different to the Kurtz exclusion in the second leg. Overall the decisions went against Sheffield but it wasn't the reason they lost.

I'm intrigued. What was your "take" on both incidents? For me, both Holder in first leg and Kurtz in second leg went for a gap that ultimately didn't develop. Both had to be excluded. Correct decisions.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ace no.5 said:

I'm intrigued. What was your "take" on both incidents? For me, both Holder in first leg and Kurtz in second leg went for a gap that ultimately didn't develop. Both had to be excluded. Correct decisions.

I would say that my take on the first leg incident is that there was a gap plenty big enough for Holder to go through but the gap was closed slightly by Kerr which meant Holder moved slightly wider which resulted in him brushing Wright. I thought it was a harsh decision. The Kurtz heat one incident in the second leg was different in my view as Kurtz seemed to lose a bit of control and seemed to ride straight into Kerr. I think in a final both incidents should have been all 4 back. I think too many times referees feel they have to exclude someone just because they have passed the first bend. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Ace no.5 said:

I'm intrigued. What was your "take" on both incidents? For me, both Holder in first leg and Kurtz in second leg went for a gap that ultimately didn't develop. Both had to be excluded. Correct decisions.

Those two incidents were totally different the Holder exclusion was because he 'brushed' against Wright as he was passing him in more or less a straight line. Kurtz tried to do his 'blocking' move by swinging his rear wheel out. Unfortunately he was too late with it and wiped out Kerr's front wheel, causing him to fall.

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