Mildenhall 2012

[Jayne 312]

If anything, Jayne, that makes the situation even more bizarre. NL regulations are clear: a rider must either be a British passport holder or have patriality.

 

If Heeps was a British passport holder, why was he initially refused permission to ride and why did Mildenhall have to take the matter to the ACU ?

 

UK Border agency rules state that you have to be 17 to have patriality so he doesn't have that either, at least by the legal definition.

 

If the BSPA accept that only a British parent is necessary, just how much 'paper work' and 'red tape' is needed to show that that is the case ? Wouldn't a birth certificate be enough ?

 

If the BSPA do have a different definition of patriality, I have no doubt this is the first time anyone has heard of it. Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't Nick Morris refused permission to ride in the NL in 2011 because he was under 17, despite the fact that one of his parents is British ?

 

You yourself said on the pages of this forum that you have to be 17 to have patriality, and every other opinion I sought on the subject agreed. It was a case, initially, that 'by all accounts' he wasn't eligible. When he was, no-one knew how and no explanation was given at all.. If it was as simple as you make out, why weren't they told ?

 

It might be the case that it is a coincidence that Heeps clearance came through at precisely the same point that James Brundle was illegally refused permission to double up, that the definition of patriality has never been the precise legal one and that the BSPA have acted with complete integrity in this matter.

 

As anyone who knows me will tell you I am rarely cynical and am correspondingly stupidly naive, but I don't believe any of that for a single second.

 

I think that some common sense has to prevail regarding patriality in the legal sense and in respect of eligibility for riding in the NL with regards to those riders under 17. After all it is the league that makes the rules regarding elibility not the government otherwise all EU riders would be permitted to race if you applied the letter of the law. As I said I am not privy to all in the ins and outs of the situation but I believe that the delay was due to the Heeps family having to firstly apply for the correct documents and then produce them to the BSPA. I believe Cameron was eligible for a British passport but did not actually have one and the delay in him being cleared to ride occurred whilst he was applying for it. I have only tried to answer the question but if you want the finer details then you need to contact either the BSPA office or the Mildenhall promotion.

 

As for Nick Morris I am not aware of him being refused permission to race in the NL in 2011, as you say his father is English and Nick holds a current British passport which was produced when he rode for Buxton in 2010.

 

Were there not any official protests from others about the lads inclusion? Indeed, where are the protests from other promotions in the PL that Heeps is included at Ipswich on a 3.00 average? I'm assuming then that he isn't eligible for that either?

 

Where are the protests?? You can bet your bottom dollar that if this situation arose in the Elite league, if his average or eligibility are wrong it would be challenged.

 

 

There were plenty of questions from other clubs, myself included but it was dealt with and authorised by the BSPA after a lot of work and correspondence between the relevant parties.

[ZODIAK 304]

But i still don't understand it as things have now moved on to the PL. The other PL promoters must be aware if Cameron Heeps is perfectly eligible to ride in the PL on lets be honest, a ridiculous bargain average of 3.00. If he wasn't, any PL promoter worth his salt would protest and challenge his inclusion.

 

As far as i'm aware, none have been forthcoming. The only conclusion i can take from that is that he must be perfectly eligible and the others are happy with his inclusion.

[Halifaxtiger 5,318]

I think that some common sense has to prevail regarding patriality in the legal sense and in respect of eligibility for riding in the NL with regards to those riders under 17. After all it is the league that makes the rules regarding elibility not the government otherwise all EU riders would be permitted to race if you applied the letter of the law. As I said I am not privy to all in the ins and outs of the situation but I believe that the delay was due to the Heeps family having to firstly apply for the correct documents and then produce them to the BSPA. I believe Cameron was eligible for a British passport but did not actually have one and the delay in him being cleared to ride occurred whilst he was applying for it. I have only tried to answer the question but if you want the finer details then you need to contact either the BSPA office or the Mildenhall promotion.

 

The thing is you clearly believed that the legal definition of patriality applied (as we all did) because you said so in an earlier post.

 

I don't understand how the goalposts were shifted half way through and why, if patriality is subject to a BSPA definition, he couldn't simply have produced his mother's birth certificate because that would have been enough. I also don't understand how, if he was clearly eligible for a British passport, permission to ride at the outset was refused outright - to the extent that Mildenhall took the matter to the ACU.

 

Word I got (including a contribution from Jack) was that he was eligible to ride, end of. Questions were indeed asked but that was it - no explanation, no details, no clarification, nothing.

 

I very much appreciate your contribution, Jayne (as always), but we both know that there is absolutely no chance of either Mildenhall or the BSPA (particularly the latter) responding if this was indeed bent, and I believe I have made a fair case for that. After all, the BSPA don't exactly have a reputation for integrity, do they ?

 

But i still don't understand it as things have now moved on to the PL. The other PL promoters must be aware if Cameron Heeps is perfectly eligible to ride in the PL on lets be honest, a ridiculous bargain average of 3.00. If he wasn't, any PL promoter worth his salt would protest and challenge his inclusion.

 

As far as i'm aware, none have been forthcoming. The only conclusion i can take from that is that he must be perfectly eligible and the others are happy with his inclusion.

 

The problem with this, as Phil K pointed out to me so correctly once, is that they are all up to their eyeballs in it. Its odds on that this favour (the actual fault was not with Mildenhall, but, as I understand it, with a PL club), if exposed, goes back in a long chain of favours and backhander dealings with virtually every club involved. You only have to look at what happened to Avtar Sandhu to see what happens if you break ranks and its why the BSPA are absolutely dead against any form of independent scrutiny.

 

I was genuinely shocked when informed by a former riders mechanic of a similar rule breaking exercise that took place in 2008 when a current promoter called in a favour to have him illegally reinstated in a team.

 

The thing is the silence regarding his eligibility is positively thunderous. You would have thought that just one promotion might have said something publicly, wouldn't you ?

 

The other thing you have to remember is that Mildenhall were deprived of their number one - James Brundle - after they had been initially told that he was OK to double up and, in fact, he could do precisely that based upon his average at the time (it has to be remembered Heeps replaced Laurence, not Brundle).

 

I would say that any club illegally forced to lose its top man half way through the season would go berserk, yet Mildenhall's silence was equally thunderous.

 

Why ?

Edited January 1, 2012 by Halifaxtiger

[norwichkev 66]

 

Where are the protests?? You can bet your bottom dollar that if this situation arose in the Elite league, if his average or eligibility are wrong it would be challenged.

This goes slightly off thread but have to disagree with you there, looking through the EL threads there seems to be far worse issues on a regular basis there.

 

Part of the problem in my view is that the moment rules are in place then promoters are finding ways around them ( same promoters who presumably are pushing for implementation in the first place ) - bringing riders in for 1 meeting to manipulate averages etc.

 

Agree with Halifax there is a nasty smell, but realistically the current set up looks unlikely to change - short term best we all get on with it, I suspect it will only be the likes of Sky that can force any major changes.

 

Kev

[Parsloes 1928 nearly 495]

A couple of things. One, Heeps is an Aussie..: and for a long time Speedway's lower divisions have allowed riders from the 'Commonwealth' to compete as if British nationals. In that sense I dispute entirely the notion that Cameron was 'foreign'

 

And secondly, there have been a very large number of riders who have competed in the CL/NL under such terms. Andrew Bargh and young Alex Cunningham are two Kiwis as examples. Byron Bekker a South African who I'm not sure had the patriality that others had..? There was even an Aussie from a Latvian background called Karlis Ezagalis (excuse the likely spelling error!).

So why this concentration on rules being broken over Heeps..? I can't personally see that any were...

 

Also I'm sure young English riders benefit from riding against and/or with young Aussie talent like Heeps..

[Halifaxtiger 5,318]

A couple of things. One, Heeps is an Aussie..: and for a long time Speedway's lower divisions have allowed riders from the 'Commonwealth' to compete as if British nationals. In that sense I dispute entirely the notion that Cameron was 'foreign'

 

And secondly, there have been a very large number of riders who have competed in the CL/NL under such terms. Andrew Bargh and young Alex Cunningham are two Kiwis as examples. Byron Bekker a South African who I'm not sure had the patriality that others had..? There was even an Aussie from a Latvian background called Karlis Ezagalis (excuse the likely spelling error!).

So why this concentration on rules being broken over Heeps..? I can't personally see that any were...

 

Also I'm sure young English riders benefit from riding against and/or with young Aussie talent like Heeps..

 

Thing is Derek is that the regulations on eligibility for riders in the NL were changed in 2011, excluding many Australians. Essentially, you had to have a British passport or patriality, and only three of the previous seasons riders did - Kurtz, Herne & Branford. Mickey Dyer, for example, who had ridden in 2010, was no longer able to.

 

I think Bekker is a British passport holder, so he's OK.

 

The question is, then, whether Heeps had patriality or was a British passport holder at the point that he was cleared to ride.

 

Kev's honest, fair and pragmatic comment above sums the situation up rather succinctly.

 

As to your final point, I agree completely. Taking everything into account, I regard it as a false economy to exclude such riders (within reason, say 1 per team) from the NL.

[Swift Saint 186]

This really is an interesting thread and Halifax Tiger is to be commended to try and get to the bottom of the "Heeps Affair" and I think that Jayne's response achieves that.

 

I think that this is a basic problem affecting the sport with riders who are qualified to ride in our League in terms of patriality but who have gained considerable experience elsewhere in the world effectively distorting the system we put in place through points limits and averages to ensure a level playing field.

 

All such riders previous experience should be assessed in advance of their declaration and an appropriate assessed average given to them. This would prevent those well skilled from taking seven rides every week from the reserve berth to the total disadvantage to the teams that meet them whilst they are at reserve. What is the point of going to such trouble to achieve a level playing field and then allowing such distortion to take place.

 

I have made these comments before many times earning last season the ire of Chris Louis but any remarks I may have made last year were not specifically at Cameron Heeps but the warped system. It was just as bad when Todd Kurtz (very effectively used to beat Mildenhall in 2009 one Sunday), Tai Woffinden, Jay Herne et all were all deployed in this way.

 

I believe that steps may be taken to improve this situation and I certainly hope that this is the case.

 

Surely we all believe in fair play then the rules should support this. They must in fact do so because we would all use the distortion as it currently stands given the opportunity.

 

 

Malcolm Vasey

[villiers210 61]

This really is an interesting thread and Halifax Tiger is to be commended to try and get to the bottom of the "Heeps Affair" and I think that Jayne's response achieves that.

 

I think that this is a basic problem affecting the sport with riders who are qualified to ride in our League in terms of patriality but who have gained considerable experience elsewhere in the world effectively distorting the system we put in place through points limits and averages to ensure a level playing field.

 

All such riders previous experience should be assessed in advance of their declaration and an appropriate assessed average given to them. This would prevent those well skilled from taking seven rides every week from the reserve berth to the total disadvantage to the teams that meet them whilst they are at reserve. What is the point of going to such trouble to achieve a level playing field and then allowing such distortion to take place.

 

I have made these comments before many times earning last season the ire of Chris Louis but any remarks I may have made last year were not specifically at Cameron Heeps but the warped system. It was just as bad when Todd Kurtz (very effectively used to beat Mildenhall in 2009 one Sunday), Tai Woffinden, Jay Herne et all were all deployed in this way.

 

I believe that steps may be taken to improve this situation and I certainly hope that this is the case.

 

Surely we all believe in fair play then the rules should support this. They must in fact do so because we would all use the distortion as it currently stands given the opportunity.

 

 

Malcolm Vasey

 

Malcolm - for once I agree with your sentiments, and I for one am glad that there was the like of yourself who has made you views known, irrespective of who it upsets. What bothers me as well, is that you can bet your life that when people start using terms like "common sense has to prevail when applying the rules" it usually means that someone is about to bend them to their limits for the benefit of somebody.

 

I have no axe to grind whatsoever with Mildenhall - tell me which club wouldn't have done the same if they were allowed to? But I do have an axe to grind with the people who apply the rules then turn a blind eye because its in someones best interest to do so. Was the NL the better for having Cameron Heeps riding in it last year? Undoubtedly it was, and I was particularly impressed with the youngster, but that is not the issue. The issue is the rules being applied equally and fairly to all who take part.

[Parsloes 1928 nearly 495]

I have made these comments before many times earning last season the ire of Chris Louis but any remarks I may have made last year were not specifically at Cameron Heeps but the warped system. It was just as bad when Todd Kurtz (very effectively used to beat Mildenhall in 2009 one Sunday), Tai Woffinden, Jay Herne et all were all deployed in this way.

Malcolm Vasey

 

Surely not Tai. Both his parents are British....

[fentigers79 6]

Zzzzzz...sorry I dropped off there.... What were we talking about? Oh yeah Mildenhall 2012

Come on you lot let's change the subject it's really boring now, new year new subject please..

 

 

My team prediction : 1. Heeps ( sorry had to mention his name please don't take this as a cue to start again)

2. A. Baseby

3. Blackbird

4. Nilsson

5. Jacobs

6. Halsey

7. A 3 pointer ??

 

Anyone else have a opinion on the 2012 team?

Edited January 1, 2012 by fentigers79

[scribbler 213]

Surely not Tai. Both his parents are British....

 

 

And so is Tai - born in Scunthorpe...

[frostylion 35]

Have Mildenhall tapped Nilsson up now??? Tried to unseat Ben Reade earlier,blackbird from K.L last year,who will they go for next!

[Swift Saint 186]

I knoiw Tai Woffinden is English but he was also never a three point rider with great experience when he arrived.

 

But if you want distorted results Parsloes something you always advocated when Wimbledon were once given a major advantage over the rest of us who am I to argue.

 

Malcolm Vasey

Edited January 1, 2012 by Proud Potter

[shaza71 0]

I knoiw Tai Woffinden is English but he was also never a three point rider with great experience when he arrived.

 

But if you want distorted results Parsloes something you always advocated when Wimbledon were once given a major advantage over the rest of us who am I to argue.

 

Malcolm Vasey

but tai was kept at reserve by peter morrish when the rules said he should of been in the main part of the team, but hey rules are only rules

[Parsloes 1928 nearly 495]

I knoiw Tai Woffinden is English but he was also never a three point rider with great experience when he arrived.

 

But if you want distorted results Parsloes something you always advocated when Wimbledon were once given a major advantage over the rest of us who am I to argue.

 

Malcolm Vasey

 

Ah, I've missed you having a go at me, Malc!!

Happy New Year!!!