Danish Grand Prix - Vojens - 16th Sep

[chunky]

2 hours ago, Lioness said:

I hadnt appreciated that the riders knew of the rule so Im setting on the reversing lights and admitting he has no complaint when it was given to him before the start of the series in black and white.
I do think though now it has arisen, the rule has to be looked at for the sake for the sake of the sport.  For a first offence and in practice only it should perhaps be a very heavy fine and relegated to last place in the qualifying.  After that, well it would have to be what happened to Zmarslik 

I get what you're saying, but the problem is the fact that sport is "ruled" by money these days. It's easy to say that it was a minor offence, or a technicality, but that is not the way that governing bodies look at things now; it's all financial, and about control.

Teams and organisations are now producing contracts that are affecting their lives away from the sport (including social media), where they can go and what they can do/say, and rights to images and names. Competitors are getting much harder punishments for breaking these rules.

[Fromafar]

On 9/19/2023 at 5:46 PM, Lioness said:

I hadnt appreciated that the riders knew of the rule so Im setting on the reversing lights and admitting he has no complaint when it was given to him before the start of the series in black and white.
I do think though now it has arisen, the rule has to be looked at for the sake for the sake of the sport.  For a first offence and in practice only it should perhaps be a very heavy fine and relegated to last place in the qualifying.  After that, well it would have to be what happened to Zmarslik 

It’s all a bit fishy. IMO.Rules are Rules covers everything though.Pretty severe penalty considering the crime.

[Tim Templeton]

My thoughts on the Zmarzlik situation.  I think everyone reasonable would agree that the rules should apply to all equally.  All concerned should be responsible for their responsibilities and actions, whether they be failings or not.  And this must include those responsible for ensuring the rules are being adhered to, namely Zmarzlik, Morris, Olsson, Ackroyd, & Hanne Thomsen.  This did not happen, but only Zmarzlik has been penalized.  The FIM jury fell short of their responsibilities as well, and apologised, but have not been held accountable for their failure to ensure the regulations were being complied with.    

In today's Speedway Star it says "Under section 12.3 of the SGP regulations, riders CAN be fined and disqualified.....................".  The critical point is that the regulation is quoted as "CAN", which infers discretion, as it does not say "MUST".  Morris states that the only sanction listed for the offence in the rulebook is disqualification, plus fine.  Both of those interpretations are diametrically opposed, and cannot both be correct.  Everyone has accepted that the rules have been broken, so the only debate is whether the punishment of disqualification was non negotiable by any of the persons involved,  or not. "CAN" and "MUST" mean different things.  Which was it?

Just to muddy the waters further, the regulations further state "The sanction must be proportionate to the offence, and to circumstances................."  That again is at loggerheads with Morris's saying  there was no option but to disqualify & fine, meaning that being able to be "proportionate" in any way was not an option.  

 

[AFCB Wildcat]

18 hours ago, Tim Templeton said:

My thoughts on the Zmarzlik situation.  I think everyone reasonable would agree that the rules should apply to all equally.  All concerned should be responsible for their responsibilities and actions, whether they be failings or not.  And this must include those responsible for ensuring the rules are being adhered to, namely Zmarzlik, Morris, Olsson, Ackroyd, & Hanne Thomsen.  This did not happen, but only Zmarzlik has been penalized.  The FIM jury fell short of their responsibilities as well, and apologised, but have not been held accountable for their failure to ensure the regulations were being complied with.    

In today's Speedway Star it says "Under section 12.3 of the SGP regulations, riders CAN be fined and disqualified.....................".  The critical point is that the regulation is quoted as "CAN", which infers discretion, as it does not say "MUST".  Morris states that the only sanction listed for the offence in the rulebook is disqualification, plus fine.  Both of those interpretations are diametrically opposed, and cannot both be correct.  Everyone has accepted that the rules have been broken, so the only debate is whether the punishment of disqualification was non negotiable by any of the persons involved,  or not. "CAN" and "MUST" mean different things.  Which was it?

Just to muddy the waters further, the regulations further state "The sanction must be proportionate to the offence, and to circumstances................."  That again is at loggerheads with Morris's saying  there was no option but to disqualify & fine, meaning that being able to be "proportionate" in any way was not an option.  

 

It's a tricky one for sure. I've read and reread the regulation, trying to make sense of it and the only thing I can come up with is this.

The header starts "SHALL be penalised with a fine or sanction as provided in the FIM disciplinary code. The final sentence that says that the jury MAY sanction any persons breaking the rules as follows.

There is a direct contradiction between SHALL and MAY, so is the MAY referring to the offences listed below that give a variable punishment?  I.e. different fines depending on severity and state 'UP TO' disqualification. In that case it could be saying that the jury MAY sanction anything between the given parameters for a given offence. 

For the offence commited here though, there were no parameters given. It clearly states 600 euro fine plus disqualification from the meeting.

The Star didn't really elaborate on their interpretation of the rules when they used the word 'CAN'. Phil Morris was adamant though that it was black and white and that they had no choice.

I think the whole section needs rewriting for clarity. As with a lot of things, I'm sure it made sense to the person who wrote it at the time but it's a bit ambiguous!

[enotian]

On 9/19/2023 at 8:28 PM, chunky said:

I get what you're saying, but the problem is the fact that sport is "ruled" by money these days. It's easy to say that it was a minor offence, or a technicality, but that is not the way that governing bodies look at things now; it's all financial, and about control.

Teams and organisations are now producing contracts that are affecting their lives away from the sport (including social media), where they can go and what they can do/say, and rights to images and names. Competitors are getting much harder punishments for breaking these rules.

you're quite right but what else would that incentivise?

i'm sure the Torun GP promoters and the broadcasters would all prefer a last round decider for the title. that's how entertainment works now, nobody is bothered about a dead rubber.

all feels a bit WWF to me but i'll look forward to the final round

[chunky]

2 hours ago, enotian said:

'm sure the Torun GP promoters and the broadcasters would all prefer a last round decider for the title. that's how entertainment works now, nobody is bothered about a dead rubber.

That's what I keep saying on here. Nobody watches sport for the "sporting aspect"; ie entertainment. The only thing they're interested in is sudden-death finals and results.

Is there really something wrong with me watching speedway because I enjoy the racing?

[DazS]

Well they haven't brought a law out yet. so it must be allowed but health and safety may be looking into it.

[OveFundinFan]

19 hours ago, chunky said:

That's what I keep saying on here. Nobody watches sport for the "sporting aspect"; ie entertainment. The only thing they're interested in is sudden-death finals and results.

Is there really something wrong with me watching speedway because I enjoy the racing?

A bold statement Chunky. I would like to think your wrong but I have no proof.

[chunky]

1 hour ago, OveFundinFan said:

A bold statement Chunky. I would like to think your wrong but I have no proof.

Why do you think they have introduced playoffs into most sports? It's to "keep the interest", and to give "everybody a chance". It never used to be that way, and I was perfectly okay with that.

As a professional sportsman myself, I was quite happy to see the best player/team win, even if it did mean the title was actually wrapped up before the end. You can see by the comments on here, how people dreaded the thought of Zmarzlik winning the title before the last GP. Why? He's the best, and he deserves it. What is so wrong with that? Can't people just enjoy the racing?

[RobbieB]

I agree Chunky, the sudden death finals alongside the GP semis mean that a rider can become World Champion without winning a race, by making the GP finals consistently throughout the season even if they have scored 6 or 8 points during the 20 heats racing.

Obviously, no-one knows how many points Bartosz may have scored in Vojens. But if rider points were solely accumulated over 20 heats, then current system via the semis and final, the GP point scores are significantly different. Using this method, the GP scores going into Torun are Lindgren 86; Lambert 85; Zmarzlik 84; Bewley 84; Holder 81; Vaculik 77; Fricke 71; Doyle 70; Madsen 68; Dudek 60; Woffinden 59; Michelsen 58; Janowski 49; Nilsson 38 and Thomsen 36.

As, you can see from the GP scores several riders would be in with a chance of becoming World Champion - rather than Zmarzlik and Lindgren under the current GP scoring system. More importantly the best rider over the GP series (with race wins) would become World Champion.

[norbold]

On 9/23/2023 at 3:35 PM, chunky said:

That's what I keep saying on here. Nobody watches sport for the "sporting aspect"; ie entertainment. The only thing they're interested in is sudden-death finals and results.

Is there really something wrong with me watching speedway because I enjoy the racing?

Another things that has occurred to me is that back in the "old days", we used to go along and watch "meaningless" matches, London v. the Rest, New Cross v. the Kiwis, etc. I even remember seeing Southampton v. Provincial League Select at New Cross when New Cross had an away fixture on race night. There were also a number of individual trophy meetings. And, of course, there were the second half scratch races. And yet we enjoyed them all just as much as the league and cup matches.

[chunky]

2 hours ago, norbold said:

Another things that has occurred to me is that back in the "old days", we used to go along and watch "meaningless" matches, London v. the Rest, New Cross v. the Kiwis, etc. I even remember seeing Southampton v. Provincial League Select at New Cross when New Cross had an away fixture on race night. There were also a number of individual trophy meetings. And, of course, there were the second half scratch races. And yet we enjoyed them all just as much as the league and cup matches.

Great point! I remember all the "Open" fixtures on the calendar, which often used to end up as challenges. One of my main memories from 1969 was an end-of-season challenge at Plough Lane when the Dons took on a "London" team. I was there. I had no intention of missing it. It was speedway, so I went. And I enjoyed it 

You say about the individual trophy meetings. It was that variety that maintained our interest. A couple of league matches, then an individual meeting. Couple more league matches, then a KOC clash. Another league match, followed by a 4-Team Tournament. Great stuff!

[chunky]

On 9/25/2023 at 10:39 AM, RobbieB said:

I agree Chunky, the sudden death finals alongside the GP semis mean that a rider can become World Champion without winning a race, by making the GP finals consistently throughout the season even if they have scored 6 or 8 points during the 20 heats racing.

Obviously, no-one knows how many points Bartosz may have scored in Vojens. But if rider points were solely accumulated over 20 heats, then current system via the semis and final, the GP point scores are significantly different. Using this method, the GP scores going into Torun are Lindgren 86; Lambert 85; Zmarzlik 84; Bewley 84; Holder 81; Vaculik 77; Fricke 71; Doyle 70; Madsen 68; Dudek 60; Woffinden 59; Michelsen 58; Janowski 49; Nilsson 38 and Thomsen 36.

As, you can see from the GP scores several riders would be in with a chance of becoming World Champion - rather than Zmarzlik and Lindgren under the current GP scoring system. More importantly the best rider over the GP series (with race wins) would become World Champion.

Thing to remember is that under the old World Final system, it was possible for a rider to become World Champion without winning a race also! Okay, it never happened, but it was possible...

[AFCB Wildcat]

On 9/25/2023 at 3:39 PM, RobbieB said:

I agree Chunky, the sudden death finals alongside the GP semis mean that a rider can become World Champion without winning a race, by making the GP finals consistently throughout the season even if they have scored 6 or 8 points during the 20 heats racing.

Obviously, no-one knows how many points Bartosz may have scored in Vojens. But if rider points were solely accumulated over 20 heats, then current system via the semis and final, the GP point scores are significantly different. Using this method, the GP scores going into Torun are Lindgren 86; Lambert 85; Zmarzlik 84; Bewley 84; Holder 81; Vaculik 77; Fricke 71; Doyle 70; Madsen 68; Dudek 60; Woffinden 59; Michelsen 58; Janowski 49; Nilsson 38 and Thomsen 36.

As, you can see from the GP scores several riders would be in with a chance of becoming World Champion - rather than Zmarzlik and Lindgren under the current GP scoring system. More importantly the best rider over the GP series (with race wins) would become World Champion.

I've been reluctant to comment on this because it's been done to death, but if your calculations based on points scored over 20 heats are correct, Lambert would be a major contender for World Champion going in to the last round.

Do you honestly think that Robert is the best  rider in the series this year when he's been nowhere near in the finals?

Bartosz knows how to pull it out of the bag when the chips are down. That to me is the mark of a champion.

[DazS]

33 minutes ago, AFCB Wildcat said:

I've been reluctant to comment on this because it's been done to death, but if your calculations based on points scored over 20 heats are correct, Lambert would be a major contender for World Champion going in to the last round.

Do you honestly think that Robert is the best  rider in the series this year when he's been nowhere near in the finals?

Bartosz knows how to pull it out of the bag when the chips are down. That to me is the mark of a champion.

well there we have it 2023 world champion decided by you. who will win next year,?

[AFCB Wildcat]

8 minutes ago, DazS said:

well there we have it 2023 world champion decided by you. who will win next year,?

Good grief! 

What is that even supposed to mean?? 

[DazS]

42 minutes ago, AFCB Wildcat said:

Good grief! 

What is that even supposed to mean?? 

do you read what you write.?

[AFCB Wildcat]

45 minutes ago, DazS said:

do you read what you write.?

Are you for real?

My initial point was that accumulating points in qualifying heats when you may have the favoured gates at the right time or be racing against reserves because of exclusions etc. doesn't make you the best rider in the world.

The best riders come to the fore at the business end of the meeting in my opinion.

The forum is about opinions though, so feel free to have a different one to mine by all means, and express it in an adult manner, but your responses have added nothing to debate and are just confrontational and pathetically childish.

 

 

[DazS]

5 minutes ago, AFCB Wildcat said:

The best riders come to the fore at the business end of the meeting in my opinion.

 

just remind me how they get to the business end of the meeting.!!

[AFCB Wildcat]

1 hour ago, DazS said:

just remind me how they get to the business end of the meeting.!!

If you're trying to sound clever, you're failing miserably. Quite the contrary in fact.

I didn't predict the 2023 champion, or any other year for that matter. 

I was saying that Bartosz and other riders worthy of becoming world champion can win the races that matter.  Feel free to offer an alternative view point if you can, although I accept that sensible debate might be a bit challenging for you .