Jump to content
British Speedway Forum


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

320 Excellent

About womble53

  • Rank
    Dave T

Previous Fields

  • Gender
  • Age Range
    over 40

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Wellington, Somerset

Recent Profile Visitors

336 profile views
  1. Somerset 2018

    Believe me when I say that at Somerset, all those things have and do happen every season.
  2. Somerset 2018

    It doesn't matter which club a rider is an asset of, when it comes to the crunch, he'll ride where he wants to.
  3. Somerset 2018

    Maybe I should have used the term, 'Team Asset' PR, or even written it as follows 'it doesn't matter who holds his registration, a rider will ride where he wants to' but you clearly know the point I was making
  4. Somerset 2018

    Not strictly true, Matt Ford can only put him in the Pirates side, if Charles wants to ride for the team. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter who holds his contract, a rider will ride where he wants to & if that's not his parent club, there's not much they can do. Sure, a promoter could stop another club talking to one of his contracted riders, but that would only have the effect of antagonising the rider, who would probably just stick two fingers up to the parent club.
  5. Somerset V Wolverhampton 22.9.17

    If only it had have been just 14, we'd have been in the final now ! It's pretty easy to criticise when you don't know the facts. If I was feeling a little less generous, I might even say that your comment's a bit of a cheap shot really. Had you bothered to come to the meeting, you might not hold that view. Firstly Garry asked a few of riders to guest in place of Josh, but they refused, so it wasn't for the lack of trying. So as a result he decided to go with RR at one and a guest for Paddy, and Edward answered the call very late in the day, and was prepared to come, unlike some others who were asked. Secondly he has had some great performances at the Oaktree in the past, and at one time was extremely hard to beat around the track. Granted his more recent outing at the OTA have been nothing to write home about, but as Stuart Robson once observed when putting in a great guest performance for the Rebels, 'It's much easy to ride for a team than it is to ride against it as a visitor', which is a sentiment that EK appears to have proved tonight.
  6. Wolves 2017

    May be you should be asking the question of who wanted the 22nd of September in the first place, certainly not Somerset. CVS can make all the statements he wishes to the contrary, but it was Wolverhampton who originally insisted on the date, and even went as far as releasing it publically without even consulting the Rebels management. So maybe it should CVS who is the one taking the responsibility for sport becoming 'embarrassing when these things happen', as you're so quick to say 'Incognito' (Interesting name by the way, under the circumstances), rather than doing what he has done, and tried to deflect the blame towards the leagues 'New Boys'. Is it any wonder the top tier in this country has trouble attracting enough teams to make a fully meaningful and competitive league. If it really wanted to, then it should put forward the real interest of British Speedway, and not the holy than thou, self interested, 'I'm alright Jack' attitude we have from some people. If CVS had the best interest of British Speedway at heart, and would 'Back it all the way', again as you say 'Incognito', then this could and would have been sorted to everyone's satisfaction months ago. Sorry but he's only got himself to blame for this one.
  7. Also Wolverhampton went public with the dates for both legs before even informing Somerset.. Forgive me if I have it wrong, but aren't both parties supposed to agree a date before releasing the information to the public & informing Speedway GB?
  8. That statement is a little bit ingenuous to say the least, the truth of the matter is that the Wolverhampton Promotion actually wanted to come to Somerset on the 22nd September when Somerset wanted the meeting on the 15th September but as Freddie Lindgren was in a German meeting on that date they could only have an NL guest (Therefore one guest) So who’s fault is this! Given the visits of Somerset to Wolves in the course of the season it was clear that whatever happened at Somerset, Wolverhampton would still have won on aggregate, which is what the cup is about. You only have to look at the four matches competed this season. It seems it was ok for Somerset to be told to go to Swindon with 4 guests, and an RR, but when the card is shown to another club in this league they throw there toys out, maybe they have had it all there own way far too long !! If Kings Lynn and Wolverhampton had raced their tie back in the Summer and got guests for there respective number ones then Somerset would not be running this fixture so late anyway & it would have actually been raced in on one of the 5 blank weeks we had between June and August!!
  9. I'll take that from you R&R, as I respect your opinion, and know you speak from a position of vast speedway knowledge. In my defence, I have to say that is the way I have always interpreted that rule, and in the past when I have asked for clarification, that's how it was explained to me. You are correct in assuming that I didn't see the Riss incident, as I wasn't there, and haven't read the reports from those that were. Put that alongside the fact that I truly have never seen a rider excluded for knocking of his team mate, having seen many such incidents, where the fallen team mate was excluded, and that is where my posting came from. Unlike some on here, I have no problems with being put right, as we all have holes in our knowledge to fill, and yes I will seek the chance to speak to a referee for their take. Thank you for your reply.
  10. Whilst not specifically written in the rules, it's generally accepted that a rider isn't excluded for causing his team mate to fall. Where two team mates come together and one falls, it is always the fallen rider who is excluded. Whilst there is no mention of this particular situation in any of the rules, those relating to exclusions state that 'The referee shall disqualify the rider, who in his/her opinion is the primary cause of the stoppage, has indulged in foul, unfair, dangerous or reckless conduct that’s jeopardised the fair chance of an opponent.' ​​The pertinent part of that rule are the final seven words (underlined above), so as the riders in this situation are team mates, the so called guilty rider, can't be excluded, and he has not jeopardised the fair chance of an opponent, therefore the primary cause of the stoppage is the fallen rider, and not the team mate who may have caused him to fall. I have never yet seen a rider excluded for knocking off his team mate, but I've seen plenty of 'fallen team mates' excluded, in fact every time.
  11. Lasse Bjerre. Refusal To Ride.

    SK, If your going to quote the website article, please quote it correctly, as it doesn't quite read as you may like it to. Something of a subtle difference, I fancy if, quoted correctly. It actually reads as follows: With the Leicester duo of Lasse Bjerre and Kyle Newman coming in as guest replacements for Heeps and Kerr respectively, the Somerset management were rocked when Bjerre informed them in the lead-up to the start of the match that he could no longer able to ride for them, leaving the Rebels short-handed to the extent that they would be forced to go into at least 3 heats with just 1 rider.
  12. Ooops! Think you might have to reconsider that assessment.
  13. In my view, last week was not the best track we have seen this season, but it could in no way be described as atrocious, far, far, from it, as can be seen by IDH's photos. For the record, at the 'Rider of the Night' award after last weeks meeting, Richard Lawson described that so called atrocious track as 'MINT' !
  14. Crashed out in his first race at Edinburgh tonight, and withdrew from the meeting