Jump to content
British Speedway Forum
Sign in to follow this  
waytogo28

The C word ( chaos )

Recommended Posts

49 minutes ago, SCB said:

Right, so the problem with the rules in 2017/2018 is stuff that happened in the 1970s and 1980s?

FFS!

Never implied that in my posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 28/12/2017 at 10:42 PM, PHILIPRISING said:

Many years ago the great Ian Thomas said he could tear up the rulebook and rewrite them on a sheet of paper. It doesn't have to be complicated. The more complicated they are the more people will have different interpretations. 

I very much doubt you could write the rules of most sports on a sheet of paper (unless it was a very large sheet and writing was very small), especially a sport that caters for multiple formats. 'Tear up the rulebook' is just one of those silly mantras that gets bandied about by speedway people, and you of all people should know better than to repeat that.

Whether or not there should be points limits, guests, averages and the like is one debate, but whilst they're deemed to be necessary by the sport, then there's always going to need to be a degree of complexity in the regulations. If there was nothing written down about these things, it would be total chaos and even more open to ad-hoc and biased decision-making. 

'Four riders doing four laps' would frankly get pretty boring pretty quickly if there wasn't any structure to it. That's why the sport quickly evolved from ad-hoc scratch races to team events. 

And in reality, it's really only the team building stuff and certain technical elements that are highly contentious. The rest of the rulebook, whilst it might be better written, isn't controversial. 

Edited by Humphrey Appleby
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Humphrey Appleby said:

And in reality, it's really only the team building stuff and certain technical elements that are highly contentious. The rest of the rulebook, whilst it might be better written, isn't controversial. 

The very fact that people people harp on about complex rules and contradictions but are never able to list any says it all. It's a lie, a myth, a red herring.

What is an issue is the wilful ignorance of the rules by the powers that be and the way any rule can be ignored if someone with enough power doesn't like it. Or the fact that some teams have signed riders on an old average from 2018 while others have signed riders on a converted average from another league thats more recent but nobody in power is explaining why. Maybe if the BSPA twitter had not blocked so many people we could ask them, but then asking them questions is a blockable offence it would seem!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/28/2017 at 8:16 PM, SCB said:

 

Which rules contradict? Should be easy for you (or anyone) to answer because there’s too many of them apparently.

riders with a PL average over 6 can't ride in the CL?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They couldn't..then they could...now they can't again....a I have a sneaky feeling in an week or so time...they will be able to again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Baldyman said:

They couldn't..then they could...now they can't again....a I have a sneaky feeling in an week or so time...they will be able to again.

I have no doubt it will change....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, stevehone said:

riders with a PL average over 6 can't ride in the CL?

What does in contradict? You could argue it's unfair. I'd argue it's stupid that if you ride Championship and Premiership and get a Premiership average over 6 its unfair you can double up/drop down but a rider who only rode Premiership and averaged 6.01 can't but it's not contradictory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, SCB said:

What does in contradict? You could argue it's unfair. I'd argue it's stupid that if you ride Championship and Premiership and get a Premiership average over 6 its unfair you can double up/drop down but a rider who only rode Premiership and averaged 6.01 can't but it's not contradictory.

the contradiction is that some with an average over 6 can ride in the CL, others can't

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, stevehone said:

the contradiction is that some with an average over 6 can ride in the CL, others can't

It's not a contradiction as you are only quoting half of the rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BWitcher said:

It's not a contradiction as you are only quoting half of the rule.

It’s quite amazing that Philip Rising tells us there are “many” rules that contradict one another but neither he nor anyone else can name them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DEPENDS what your definition of contradiction is in this case.  Mind is obviously different to many here but, no matter, we all have own own opinions.

As far as I am concerned rules should encourage progress, to make the sport, in this case speedway, as good and simple as possible, to encourage those involved to aspire to the highest levels. The opposite is currently the case which as far as I'm concerned is a contradiction. 

But it's hardly worth an argument about semantics and if my interpretation doesn't align with yours that's fine. Mine is that the current regulations do more harm than good, starting with the one eight point rider per team fiasco.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, PHILIPRISING said:

DEPENDS what your definition of contradiction is in this case.  Mind is obviously different to many here but, no matter, we all have own own opinions.

As far as I am concerned rules should encourage progress, to make the sport, in this case speedway, as good and simple as possible, to encourage those involved to aspire to the highest levels. The opposite is currently the case which as far as I'm concerned is a contradiction. 

But it's hardly worth an argument about semantics and if my interpretation doesn't align with yours that's fine. Mine is that the current regulations do more harm than good, starting with the one eight point rider per team fiasco.

Totally agree with you about the one over 8, why don't you use the SS to expose those that proposed it and then voted for it, if they think it's is such a good idea they don't need to hide and should welcome the opportunity to explain themselves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel speedway rules change too much. Because I can't recount every change doesn't mean I'm wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Red Flag said:

Totally agree with you about the one over 8, why don't you use the SS to expose those that proposed it and then voted for it, if they think it's is such a good idea they don't need to hide and should welcome the opportunity to explain themselves

DO you honestly think the BSPA would tell us? As I wrote in SS, more secret than North Korea. One thing his for certain... Chris Van Straaten didn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, PHILIPRISING said:

DEPENDS what your definition of contradiction is in this case.  Mind is obviously different to many here but, no matter, we all have own own opinions.

As far as I am concerned rules should encourage progress, to make the sport, in this case speedway, as good and simple as possible, to encourage those involved to aspire to the highest levels. The opposite is currently the case which as far as I'm concerned is a contradiction. 

But it's hardly worth an argument about semantics and if my interpretation doesn't align with yours that's fine. Mine is that the current regulations do more harm than good, starting with the one eight point rider per team fiasco.

This is not a matter of 'opinion'.

What is it with speedway fans who think they can spout things that are factually wrong and hide behind 'opinion'. Nothing bad about being wrong, you simply hold your hand up, learn and move on. What really makes folk look foolish is when they are shown to be wrong and continue to trot out the 'opinion' line.. generally then followed by abuse. 

In this case, you've completely changed your argument. It is your opinion that the current regulations do more harm than good. That is fair enough, it is an opinion. Whether that opinion has any weight behind it would be determined by WHY you think they do more harm than good.. but an opinion nonetheless.

However, your initial statement was something very different when you stated that many rules contradicted each other. It is nothing to do with an argument about semantics, you were asked to name ONE rule (bearing in mind you said there were many) and have failed to do so. Now, even more bizarrely you seem to be claiming you are speaking a different language to the rest of us and have your own definition of what contradiction means?

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy