Jump to content
British Speedway Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Islander15

Bv Vs Lakeside Play-off Semi Leg 2

Recommended Posts

But doesn’t it just sum the club up when the person who has most to gain from a win is not interested in attending away meetings?

Lead from the front etc etc

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not the whole story because the Colts have a very talented young team and that certainly shouldn't be overshadowed by any home track advantage they might have. After all, they did pretty well away, too.

 

But I'd maintain that the Colts lads have motors that are set up for NSS and the others simply do not have means to produce the sort of power and speed necessary

 

There is a lot of truth in that.its long been known that BV is a very difficult track to find the right set up for, especially for inexperienced riders. My impression,from when BVcame to Lakeside8 and having spoken to the BV managers, us that they are a very, very, professional and well managed club, and th averag fan had no idea how important club management is to success.

 

Lakeside are a better managed club than most and Kelvin is excellent with the young riders but BV have taken it to a new level.It is exactly what the sport needs to bring riders on and, as a Lakeside supporter I bow to no one in my admiration for BV who deserve to go all the way. They are the team to beat and it's now for others to rise to that standard. It was still a pretty decent effort from Lakeside though to cobble a team together from nowhere and get this far but there's no denying BV's acievement

Edited by Daytripper
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone says about Lakeside joining the NL late but I am pretty sure they knew what they were intending to do long before most so I don’t think they were that short in planning, they came up with a decent side in a division where good young riders are far and few between, plenty of old hands and riders who are still learning but not maybe as a natural talent as others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the guy who was managing the team tonight has the licence to do the job so why not let the fans know he is the assistant team manager,,.Tatum is a busy man ,but Cook seems to have little interest at this level,,deflating for the riders ...

 

Tatum might be a busy man but missing the teams most important meeting of the season is p1ss poor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it should be compulsory for at least all top flight teams to have a junior team even if it's only a small MDL type to run as second halves.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone who has been around long enough to remember them, I think the old second half junior meetings had there place, an extra six heats of action, it also helped ease the flow of traffic at the end as not everyone watched them but it was still important track time for the riders.

Now I’m not a fan of NL racing on its own but I will always stay and watch it when it’s part of something of a higher standard, I know that sounds snobbish and it is but I prefer to watch primarily a higher level of racing, no disrespect to any rider but you can’t beat watching the likes of AJ tear it up from the back.

 

And these junior teams can make riders of the future, I recall Ipswich at one time having several kids come through at the same time, notably Leigh Lanham, Lol Hare, Savalas Clouting and Ben Howe, I think they were the four?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The one-sided scoreline from the Belle Vue v Lakeside play-off semi-final has emphasised abuses of the rules which urgently need to be investigated. Lakeside, like plenty of other clubs, have blatantly abused the ridiculous rule which allows riders to opt out of matches they don't want to ride in for the flimsiest of reasons by sending a six man team for this match, and Belle Vue have also unashamedly continued to use rider-replacement for a rider who has been absent for virtually the whole of the season through a relatively minor "injury." which seems to be taking an inordinately long time to heal, and their already powerful team has become even stronger because of it!

 

Perhaps I am being unfair to Lee Payne in saying this. I don't know for certain whether he is genuinely injured or whether he has retired - but no one from his club is saying, and it's worth pointing out that the rules stipulate that if he has retired, then his club are only entitled to use rider-replacement for 28 days, but if he is "injured" then they can use it indefinitely. Therefore, it suits Belle Vue for him to be "injured."

 

If I have got this wrong, then I apologise to Lee and to Belle Vue, but there is far too much of this kind of rule bending going on - particularly in the National League and I think it is high time that it was investigated and stopped.

Edited by BBuck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted on 25/8/17 that RR had only averaged 7.03 in place of a 8.48 rider, though Lee's average was due to increase at the next set of averages.

 

We are not benefiting from RR.

 

We could have signed another rider up to 8.48 but decided to let the lads have the rides before Lee returned but unfortunately he didn't, then it got so late on it wasn't worth making another signing.

 

No rule breaking here mate, only bones.

Edited by ouch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't suggesting that Belle Vue had broken the rules. Just saying that they are being abused (and I acknowledge that plenty of other clubs have and are still, doing the same thing.) What I'm saying is that the rules should be clearly set out and rigidly enforced - and this is far from being the case at the moment.

 

Perhaps someone from Belle Vue could say definitely whether Lee Payne is injured or whether he has given it neck (maybe just for the season.) I appreciate that it is unfair to single him out from the others, but I'm just picking up this instance as an example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that this is a reasonable question. Certainly not seen Lee Paine at the NSS for a long time nor heard how he is. I'm not sure that his absence or presence would have made any difference to our season. We have a young improving side some of whom will go far. Bewley, Bickley and Smith being prime examples.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Couldn't agree more. Belle Vue have put together a cracking young National League team and deserve to win the championship. It just concerns me that teams and/or riders can just play the system as and when they like. Everyone agrees in principle but there is usually a big outcry from supporters on the occasions that the rules are enforced and it adversely affects their own team.

 

Eastbourne supporters for example are up in arms over the two match ban imposed on Jake Knight for opting out of the NLRC - but the rule book says that riders cannot opt out of this meeting so why should anyone be shirty when the rule is enforced? I notice that some are saying that Knight should have been informed that action would be taken against him if he didn't show - but he like every rider, has been supplied with a rule book so the onus has to be on him to read it!

 

I'm not knocking at Eastbourne or any other club - I just want speedway to be run properly and in line with the rules.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Couldn't agree more. Belle Vue have put together a cracking young National League team and deserve to win the championship. It just concerns me that teams and/or riders can just play the system as and when they like. Everyone agrees in principle but there is usually a big outcry from supporters on the occasions that the rules are enforced and it adversely affects their own team.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Eastbourne supporters for example are up in arms over the two match ban imposed on Jake Knight for opting out of the NLRC - but the rule book says that riders cannot opt out of this meeting so why should anyone be shirty when the rule is enforced? I notice that some are saying that Knight should have been informed that action would be taken against him if he didn't show - but he like every rider, has been supplied with a rule book so the onus has to be on him to read it!

 

 

 

 

 

 

If you look at it a different way Belle vue have never used a guest for Payne they have used their own riders for cover young riders who's extra rides will have helped with their development in a development league and 3 riders per meeting have had smaller averages than Payne so have been at a slight disadvantage.

Now if they were forced to drop Payne there are not many free riders available on a 8+ average so there is a good chance that they would have had to replace him with a 3 point novice.All the teams started off with the same team starting average so having to replace a heat leader with a 3 point novice would have given all the other teams an unfair advantage with him being out early on in the season.Now which of the 2 is the fairer option.

Edited by B.V 72

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not certain whether or not we at Lakeside broke the rules when we brought in Paul Hurry, but we absolutely trampled all over the spirit of what the NL is supposed to be about. I'm not having a go at Paul, who seems a decent enough gentleman, I just feel it wasn't right bringing in someone of that age into what is essentially a league to develop young talent. My highlight of the season was seeing Jason Edwards make his debut.

 

Regarding the play off, Belle Vue do indeed have some terrific kids in their side and I'm very pleased for them that they've done so well. The R/R they used may or may not have been a wangle, but so too was ours with the sudden unavailability of our weakest rider. In the end, the best team deservedly won.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Couldn't agree more. Belle Vue have put together a cracking young National League team and deserve to win the championship. It just concerns me that teams and/or riders can just play the system as and when they like. Everyone agrees in principle but there is usually a big outcry from supporters on the occasions that the rules are enforced and it adversely affects their own team.

 

Eastbourne supporters for example are up in arms over the two match ban imposed on Jake Knight for opting out of the NLRC - but the rule book says that riders cannot opt out of this meeting so why should anyone be shirty when the rule is enforced? I notice that some are saying that Knight should have been informed that action would be taken against him if he didn't show - but he like every rider, has been supplied with a rule book so the onus has to be on him to read it!

 

I'm not knocking at Eastbourne or any other club - I just want speedway to be run properly and in line with the rules.

The choice of words is misleading. Jake did not 'opt out' but withdrew because of lack of equipment having blown it the previous evening at B Vue. Whether he contacted them to tell them this in the intervening hours or simply did not turn up we will never know. If he did not tell them then he deserved the ban for not communicating the problem, If he did then there was no way he could get the mechanical situation resolved, being away from home and travelling from Manchester to Leicester.

 

Some of us were upset that the club were not given a guest facility as it was an individual event and should not have impacted the rest of the team. As it happened it seemed to motive them even more judging by the result.

Edited by Hunters

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×