Jack Holder And The (lack Of A) 9 Month Ban

[Vincent Blachshadow 2,937]

I font see how you can say it might break the letter of the law.

The law states a rider can miss a meeting for any reason. That's pretty clear and surprisingly unambiguous.

I'd say it's also within the spirit of the law, which is that this is a development league and other activities take priority so I'm not sure how you can compare this to the holder situation, where quite clearly the rules were broken.

I agree it's not particularly fair on IoW and could understand them being annoyed.

 

A development league? Jon Armstrong, Paul Hurry. Definitely in need of developing.

 

(Not picking on those two riders, btw, just two random riders I watched yesterday).

Edited August 21, 2017 by Vincent Blackshadow

[Halifaxtiger 5,318]

I font see how you can say it might break the letter of the law.

The law states a rider can miss a meeting for any reason. That's pretty clear and surprisingly unambiguous.

I'd say it's also within the spirit of the law, which is that this is a development league and other activities take priority so I'm not sure how you can compare this to the holder situation, where quite clearly the rules were broken.

I agree it's not particularly fair on IoW and could understand them being annoyed.

 

As far as I am concerned, "can't be bothered to drive all that way midweek"isnt a reason.

The rule was almost certainly put there in recognition of the fact that the NL is largely amateur and contains young riders who may still be in education. I am sure that we can all accept that there will be absences for work or school that would come above speedway commitments.

 

However, "taking a rest" is nothing more than an abuse of the rule that is absolutely no different to "cant be a*sed'which might also be seen to comply with that rule. It beggars belief just what the NL would be if this resson was subject to widespread use.

 

What's even worse is that it affects IOW only. Belle Vue get two track specialist guests while the Warriors miss out on two of the sports most exciting young riders.

 

Dan has said it is because he is travelling to Latvia; thats fair enough. I trust he won't be at Birmingham on Wednesday.

quote name="Vincent Blackshadow" post="3016374" timestamp="1503343316"]

A development league? Jon Armstrong, Paul Hurry. Definitely in need of developing.

 

(Not picking on those two riders, btw, just two random riders I watched yesterday).

 

Its acknowledged that having a senior rider in a team is not just acceptable, its a very good idea for thr experience thst they can pass on.

 

Jon Armstrong is the best example, because I have heard nothing but praise and credit for his presence in the NL.

[SCB 0]

I think there us a recognition that in the NL rider circumstances are different due to the levels of pay and age. As the rule says - work, education, holiday are accepted as reasons for absence.

 

Simply withdrawing a rider for no reason whatsoever, however, is just wrong and I would say breaks both the intention and the spirit of that rule and indeed possibly the letter of it.

 

What's worse is that Isle of Wight suffer the consequences of it here, not Belle Vue when it is the latter who are culpable.

 

What if Isle of Wight had promoted this match on the basis that Bewley and Smith would be there - and in a limited way they did - only to find that they had cheated their customers through no fault of their own but through the selfish actions of another promotion ?

I agree that it s a crap situation, I can understand one rider missing due to current meeting load but BV shouldn't be letting two miss the same meeting.

 

That said, IoW can hardly complain about poor opposition, if Bewley and Smith are both replaced by 2.00 riders then the Bv teams combined average is still greater than that of IoWs, so maybe IoW have been ripping people off all season?

[scaramanga 902]

I agree that it s a crap situation, I can understand one rider missing due to current meeting load but BV shouldn't be letting two miss the same meeting.

 

That said, IoW can hardly complain about poor opposition, if Bewley and Smith are both replaced by 2.00 riders then the Bv teams combined average is still greater than that of IoWs, so maybe IoW have been ripping people off all season?

i see your point

but have you also considored i.o.w built the team as best they could with the money they had

[archie21 49]

First I have no axe to grind with any rider but IMO it is about time that a rule was made that governs riders to two leagues only. The National ( development ) League and if the riders are good enough they can progress to the Championship, The same between Premiership and Championship. I can not see how a rider who races in the Premiership can gain any "development" by riding in the National League.

[Starman2006 2,354]

but also you could argue if its a develpoment league then no riders riding in the top league should be classed as eligable to ride in a development league

and vice versa any riders riding in the development league should not be classed as experienced enough for the top league

I have a good idea. Why don't we make all leagues development leagues, i mean we are heading that way, i mean that will give the powers that be something to think about in November or whenever the AGM is. Not to taxing, they should cope with that..

Edited August 22, 2017 by Starman2006

[cityrebel 2,960]

There was a very decent crowd on the island last night, so it didn't put many people off. Some excellent riding from Danny ayres kept the punters entertained.

[SharpenRake 1,505]

There was a very decent crowd on the island last night, so it didn't put many people off. Some excellent riding from Danny ayres kept the punters entertained.

 

A sensible post plus as others have said it's a development league. Would those complaining prefer the 2 lads collapsed due to exhaustion. And since this is a jack holder thread to use Peterborough fans excuses they weren't missed from a result point of view

[OveFundinFan 4,141]

What British speedway doesnt want to do at this time is stifle the progress of young Brits, think we all should agree that Britain needs more young talent to get Brit back on the world scene with more then 1 rider, or even 2 as of next year (hopefully).

So those suggesting that development riders should be restricted to the 2 lower leagues would in effect be stifling exceptional talent from coming to the fore.

What a developing rider needs is experience, if that developing rider shows a huge amount of talent they need to be exposed to all sorts of riding experiences. IMO this means being able to ride in all 3 leagues, at least for 1 or 2 seasons. Gaining confidence by riding all sorts of tracks, winning races in the lower league(s), but having to fight for points in the upper league(s).

Not all riders will have that talent to be able to attack all 3 leagues, but those that do should no, IMO, be stifled.

At the same time, they need protection from over exposure, that is to "burn out". Too many meeting, too many miles getting to meetings, can all cause burn out, so they (the young rider) needs someone to protect them, hence the reason why I am supporting the decision for Dan and Jack not to be up and down the country so much in too few days.

The reasons why there are so many meetings in too few days is up for serious invetigation, but whilst it is going on then riders, particularly young riders need some sort of "protection".

[Tsunami 10,219]

What British speedway doesnt want to do at this time is stifle the progress of young Brits, think we all should agree that Britain needs more young talent to get Brit back on the world scene with more then 1 rider, or even 2 as of next year (hopefully).

So those suggesting that development riders should be restricted to the 2 lower leagues would in effect be stifling exceptional talent from coming to the fore.

What a developing rider needs is experience, if that developing rider shows a huge amount of talent they need to be exposed to all sorts of riding experiences. IMO this means being able to ride in all 3 leagues, at least for 1 or 2 seasons. Gaining confidence by riding all sorts of tracks, winning races in the lower league(s), but having to fight for points in the upper league(s).

Not all riders will have that talent to be able to attack all 3 leagues, but those that do should no, IMO, be stifled.

At the same time, they need protection from over exposure, that is to "burn out". Too many meeting, too many miles getting to meetings, can all cause burn out, so they (the young rider) needs someone to protect them, hence the reason why I am supporting the decision for Dan and Jack not to be up and down the country so much in too few days.

The reasons why there are so many meetings in too few days is up for serious invetigation, but whilst it is going on then riders, particularly young riders need some sort of "protection".

Young riders would be given protection if they were limited to ride in two leagues only. It would open up a team place to another youngster and stop some of the excess D/Uing as at the moment.

[Boothers 223]

So tomorrow 3 weeks will have gone by and still no-one has been punished for 'selling British Speedway down the river'

[Baldyman 6,243]

And probably never will.

[maneacat 473]

Thought I read somewhere a meeting up before the SCB in early. september but sorry can't remember where!

[Crump99 4,476]

Thought I read somewhere a meeting up before the SCB in early. september but sorry can't remember where!

 

Someone told me middle of Sept (not seen it written anywhere?) so in the next few weeks in any case is what we're saying.

[TheScotsman 2,483]

Then a UK ban starting on 1st November and lasting 4 and a 1/2 months.