Aces51 2,778 Posted September 16, 2017 There have been many instances over the years where results have later been amended because of some illegality during the meeting. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lisa-colette 6,018 Posted September 16, 2017 Dont know the man thanks. I came on to this thread and lo and behold he has gone on and on fishing to get a bite. Please ask yourself what his post brings??? Going on about everyone is behind Poole Speedway now. The man is a troll who posts to get reactions..............sad really Have a look at the nature of the posts something that some Poole fans cant do....not sure if its a lack of education down that way. He posts to antagonise and troll......look at his posts on this thread. I give opinions...totally different..................you know opinions like the one i gave that Poole would win at Somerset only to be told i know nothing and speak bullsh1t.... Im sure if Swindon are found in the wrong they will get punished............just hilarious how Poole fans get their knickers in a twist when their club is far and away the biggest culprits. How quickly they forget the goggles issue , Dakota North, Hans Andersen......strange little world down that way So leave us to our strange little world and get lost, get back to guarding your bridge! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lioness 1,449 Posted September 16, 2017 'Matters of fact' as defined in the Speedway Regulations cannot be appealed, heat results are defined as such. Is that a relatively new rule Neil? (Last 5 years or so). I only ask as it was done a few years back when Redcar appealed a heat result in a meeting against Glasgow and the rede larded result after the appeal was farcical as they updated the Redcar rider in second, not the Glasgow rider in third and gave a point to a rider who DNF Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
orion 7,612 Posted September 16, 2017 There have been many instances over the years where results have later been amended because of some illegality during the meeting. Any when they have changed the result of one heat ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lucifer sam 3,953 Posted September 16, 2017 (edited) Any when they have changed the result of one heat ? Reading v Oxford, when Oxford used an illegal supplementary reserve in Heat 1. Left the stadium thinking Oxford had won 46-44 (and also wondering if the rules regarding supplementary reserves had changed for a second time that season); the following day, the SCB considered the matter and changed the score to 45-45. I didn't blame Mr Sugar for his objection - rather our team manager for being incompetent. The same should happen with Thursday's meeting - in fact, it should have been amended on Friday. All the best Rob Edited September 16, 2017 by lucifer sam Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
racers and royals 8,717 Posted September 16, 2017 Reading v Oxford, when Oxford used an illegal supplementary reserve in Heat 1. Left the stadium thinking Oxford had won 46-44 (and also wondering if the rules regarding supplementary reserves had changed for a second time that season); the following day, the SCB considered the matter and changed the score to 45-45. I didn't blame Mr Sugar for his objection - rather our team manager for being incompetent. All the best Rob Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
orion 7,612 Posted September 16, 2017 Reading v Oxford, when Oxford used an illegal supplementary reserve in Heat 1. Left the stadium thinking Oxford had won 46-44 (and also wondering if the rules regarding supplementary reserves had changed for a second time that season); the following day, the SCB considered the matter and changed the score to 45-45. I didn't blame Mr Sugar for his objection - rather our team manager for being incompetent. The same should happen with Thursday's meeting - in fact, it should have been amended on Friday. All the best Rob depends what the rules were then and what they are now ..by all accounts lemon had to make it known to ref by the next heat something he never did . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Steve Shovlar 10,439 Posted September 16, 2017 depends what the rules were then and what they are now ..by all accounts lemon had to make it known to ref by the next heat something he never did . So you think Swindon should get an unfair advantage for breaking the rules? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Steve0 5,517 Posted September 16, 2017 (edited) So you think Swindon should get an unfair advantage for breaking the rules? Didn't see you complaining about gogglegate last year when Poole rode against BV #doublestandards #sh!tshoveller Edited September 16, 2017 by Steve0 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
A ORLOV 8,628 Posted September 16, 2017 So you think Swindon should get an unfair advantage for breaking the rules? And Poole have not in the past have they ? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
racers and royals 8,717 Posted September 16, 2017 I think it`s passed the time when an amended score would have been released- so we can safely say(unfortunately ) that the result stands. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NeilWatson 1,988 Posted September 16, 2017 Is that a relatively new rule Neil? (Last 5 years or so). I only ask as it was done a few years back when Redcar appealed a heat result in a meeting against Glasgow and the rede larded result after the appeal was farcical as they updated the Redcar rider in second, not the Glasgow rider in third and gave a point to a rider who DNF IIRC the rule was introduced precisely to stop appeals after the event, probably at the same time the new process for declaring line-ups with clear timelines for queries was introduced. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ouch 1,191 Posted September 16, 2017 I bet Kennett wishes his silencer shenanigans was more recent as nowadays he'd be ok. I'm not a fan of the new rules but if that's the case then we'll have to live with it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
orion 7,612 Posted September 16, 2017 So you think Swindon should get an unfair advantage for breaking the rules? Being a sports fan I understand it's ref job on the day day to apply the rules and some times he will get it wrong and some one will gain from that ..the history of sport is full of these .When Newman never had his goggles on in the play off final was one of these times when it happened but I don't remember you making any comment about it ..so the question is does it only matter if it does not concern your team . 4 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beowulf 1,513 Posted September 16, 2017 All this dodgy stuff coming out of Swindon. BWD turning up to ride at Poole but Swindon booked a guest who was better. BWD must be well peed off losing wages so Swindon could gain an advantage in the playoffs. Now not satisfied with that, they continue by only giving the out of form dodgy Pole two rides. Again benefitting as the ref missed it. You couldn't make it up. No wonder people are saying if Swindon win either the league or cup it will be a hollow success which will leave a bad taste in the mouths of every fair minded fan. Never seen so many on social media praying for a Poole victory in the second leg of the playoffs to bring respect and karma back to the sport. Comedy gold. You really should consider writing a series for the BBC. 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites