magnus Posted August 16 Report Share Posted August 16 2 minutes ago, SharpenRake said: Steve Worrall is ill otherwise he would have been Bomber's partner. Anders Rowe was signed to replace Steve Worrall; Anders average is lower than Steve's. So Glasgow haven't been strengthened by Anders being signed. Glasgow were not pulling a fast one or taking advantage of ambiguous rules. They replaced a rider rather than going down the route of guests - most fans hate guests. Having replaced the rider why shouldn't he then take his place in a pairs competition representing the side he has signed for? Well done to Anders and Bomber, 3rd place was more than I expected. Also hope that Charles and Scott are both OK after their 'coming together'. I didn't imply Glasgow have pulled a fast one or taking advantage of ambiguous rules. I'm just stating that any team regardless of replacing a rider through injury or illness, should be represented by a rider who has been established team member prior to a prestigious event. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ragdoll64 Posted August 16 Report Share Posted August 16 25 minutes ago, SteelShoe said: We were right behind the incident and the ref got it right for us. I watched on BSN with all the replays. Was a massively tough decision for the ref but the rules say someone has to go and as far as I’m concerned the correct call was made under the circumstances. Wright was committed on the outside and had nowhere to go. And if anyone says the throttle works both ways….they don’t understand speedway. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SharpenRake Posted August 16 Report Share Posted August 16 6 minutes ago, magnus said: I didn't imply Glasgow have pulled a fast one or taking advantage of ambiguous rules. I'm just stating that any team regardless of replacing a rider through injury or illness, should be represented by a rider who has been established team member prior to a prestigious event. In essence you are saying Jack Smith should have been Chris Harris's partner? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnus Posted August 16 Report Share Posted August 16 2 minutes ago, SharpenRake said: In essence you are saying Jack Smith should have been Chris Harris's partner? So be it if that's the rules. Its unfortunate that Leon Flint or any rider who's average descends in order is unavailable (Leon's unavailability is exceptional circumstances by the way) therefore, if Jack Smith is the next rider in line, then yes.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fozzie4388 Posted August 16 Report Share Posted August 16 As a neutral I thought the ref got it spot on and after speaking to a member of the Oxford track staff his opinion and most of the other staff at the track were in agreement that Nicholls was the one at fault if anyone which is fair enough to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SharpenRake Posted August 16 Report Share Posted August 16 21 minutes ago, magnus said: So be it if that's the rules. Its unfortunate that Leon Flint or any rider who's average descends in order is unavailable (Leon's unavailability is exceptional circumstances by the way) therefore, if Jack Smith is the next rider in line, then yes.. But that's not the rules! The rules allow Anders Rowe to appear. You disagree with the rules and I'm emphasising the potential outcome based on your, in my opinion, illogical suggestion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnus Posted August 17 Report Share Posted August 17 7 minutes ago, SharpenRake said: But that's not the rules! The rules allow Anders Rowe to appear. You disagree with the rules and I'm emphasising the potential outcome based on your, in my opinion, illogical suggestion. I have not disputed that's the rules, therefore Anders is allowed to ride. I have indicated in my opinion the rules should be looked at for future events and amended if the powers that be so see it. Just like I have neither stated Glasgow have strengthened the team by signing Ander's or pulled a fast one 🤷♂️ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gambo95 Posted August 17 Report Share Posted August 17 7 hours ago, Fozzie4388 said: As a neutral I thought the ref got it spot on and after speaking to a member of the Oxford track staff his opinion and most of the other staff at the track were in agreement that Nicholls was the one at fault if anyone which is fair enough to me. Didn't Adam and Rory (two riders) imply that Charles run into Scott's back wheel so he is the cause of the stoppage? The previous night Adam Ellis took evasive action to not hit Max Fricke and Adam was excluded. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Shovlar Posted August 17 Report Share Posted August 17 1 minute ago, Gambo95 said: Didn't Adam and Rory (two riders) imply that Charles run into Scott's back wheel so he is the cause of the stoppage? The previous night Adam Ellis took evasive action to not hit Max Fricke and Adam was excluded. And that was a terrible call as Fricke locked up causing Ellis to lay it down. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chairboy Posted August 17 Report Share Posted August 17 2 riders come together. They both go down. Both at fault, neither at fault? I keep imagining a parallel universe where the referee can exclude both fallers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gazc Posted August 17 Report Share Posted August 17 6 hours ago, magnus said: I have not disputed that's the rules, therefore Anders is allowed to ride. I have indicated in my opinion the rules should be looked at for future events and amended if the powers that be so see it. Just like I have neither stated Glasgow have strengthened the team by signing Ander's or pulled a fast one 🤷♂️ So you are suggesting the rules be changed to enable the product on show be made a lesser spectacle by weakening the field. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noelinho Posted August 17 Report Share Posted August 17 7 hours ago, magnus said: I have not disputed that's the rules, therefore Anders is allowed to ride. I have indicated in my opinion the rules should be looked at for future events and amended if the powers that be so see it. Just like I have neither stated Glasgow have strengthened the team by signing Ander's or pulled a fast one 🤷♂️ The event becomes a lot less prestigious if the rules suddenly mean you have to put someone who is essentially a reserve in. May as well just tell them to not bother turning up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foreverblue Posted August 17 Report Share Posted August 17 1 hour ago, Gambo95 said: Didn't Adam and Rory (two riders) imply that Charles run into Scott's back wheel so he is the cause of the stoppage? The previous night Adam Ellis took evasive action to not hit Max Fricke and Adam was excluded. He could not avoid running into Scotts back wheel,he had nowhere to go. Tough decision but a correct one in my view. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IainB Posted August 17 Report Share Posted August 17 The ref had 2 rules to work with, foul, unfair or dangerous riding or primary cause of the stoppage. It wasn't the former so had to be the latter and both rules rely on the opinion of the ref. There is nothing else in the rules to help the ref, no mention of who is in front, who is in control of their bike, who locks up where and when on the track etc. The way I saw it was Nicholls passed Wright fair and square, Wright could have gone wider, there was still room but it looked like he elected to try and cut back, there was a slight twitch just before he ran into the back of Nicholls. For me, like with any motor insurance claim if you run into the back of somebody you are at fault. Maybe there could be some clearer definition in the rules to help the ref make a decision but personally I like it the way it is, as Dave Lanning used to say "the fans will be talking about this one for a long time to come", well at least until 5pm this evening... and look at the pickle Football has got itself into with VAR, they've taken the decision away from one bloke on the pitch to another bloke in a TV production studio. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IainB Posted August 17 Report Share Posted August 17 (edited) 3 minutes ago, foreverblue said: He could not avoid running into Scotts back wheel,he had nowhere to go. Tough decision but a correct one in my view. Was still plenty of room on the outside, looks like he decided to try an cut back to me Edited August 17 by iainb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alang Posted August 17 Report Share Posted August 17 Given the number of guests in the league these days you'd be as well putting the top 18 available riders names in a hat and drawing out 2 for each team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foreverblue Posted August 17 Report Share Posted August 17 8 minutes ago, iainb said: Was still plenty of room on the outside, looks like he decided to try an cut back to me You can see Scott left him no room and way Scott passed him he would have thought Scott would end up quite near the fence so the obvious thing to do was cut back but Scott left him no room to do that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IainB Posted August 17 Report Share Posted August 17 1 minute ago, foreverblue said: You can see Scott left him no room and way Scott passed him he would have thought Scott would end up quite near the fence so the obvious thing to do was cut back but Scott left him no room to do that. But Nicholls doesn't have to leave him room to do a cut back does he? Especially if there is still room on the outside, which there was and Wright would have known that having ridden there all season and seen the extremities of the track being used. And you know what thought did... and then he only thought he did. If he'd stuffed Wright into the fence, which he didn't then that would have been unfair riding, but there was still plenty of room on the outside as can be seen in the picture. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoff100 Posted August 17 Report Share Posted August 17 Watching on facebook looks to me like charles turns into scotts back wheel,if your infront u didtate where u want to go! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnus Posted August 17 Report Share Posted August 17 1 hour ago, Gazc said: So you are suggesting the rules be changed to enable the product on show be made a lesser spectacle by weakening the field. I merely said that in my opinion the rules should be looked at, so that the rider with the next highest rider is considered over a rider who has just been signed. If the unfortunate circumstances prevail that a second string or reserve is the only option available then yes. Do you think when one of your opposition heat leaders is unavailable for a league meeting, for circumstances outside the rule book that you should be allowed to replace him with a rider of a similar average? instead of having to use an unattached rider from the league below? that to weakens the field and becomes a lesser spectacle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.