Heats Re-Run

[Teromaafan 586]

My understanding is that a new rule was introduced this season (Regulation 15.8.1) regarding heats being re-run after a rider has been disqualified. This seems to a sensible rule aimed at protecting a team on a 'certain' 5-1 when an opponent causes the race to be stopped, with the rider in third place at the time put on a 15m handicap in the re-run.

In heat 1 of the Swindon v Leicester match last night, my recollection was that Bellego was well adrift of the Lions pair when Morris kissed the dirt. As so often happens, that 5-1 was wiped out when Bellego flew from the tapes in the re-run. If Bellego wasn't handicapped in this instance, what is the criteria for the handicap to be implemented (Kelv and Nige never brought the matter up)? The rule states that it is at the referee's discretion, but there has to be a basic yardstick for them to consider making the call. So what is it? Has anyone attended a meeting where the re-run handicap was applied?

As it happened, the outcome of heat 1 did not go on to affect the over all result, but it would have given me something to moan about had the score been closer!

[Steve Shovlar 10,439]

I brought it up last night and it was a clear case for the ref to use the rule. Bellego was way back when Morris fell and I said at the time he should have gone from 15 metres. Swindon certain got the rub of the green in that heat.

[dontforgetthefueltapsbruv 10,693]

If the reg didnt merit being used in this case its not worth having!!

It has been adapted already as the race now has to be at a more advanced stage before being invoked (although the reg doesnt appear updated)

It was used when Ipswich were at Newcastle where Heeps slide off in a first bend incident and didnt clear the track. Etheridge was put off 15m in that case despite the race being not much more than 15m complete!!

 

[leander 495]

This rule is, in my opinion, quite ambiguous. Granted when the race is stopped the two riders are usually in 3rd and 4th place

15.8.1 If the Referee stops a heat, following an incident or accident, where the rider causing
the stoppage and his team partner were in third and fourth place and a re-run is called
with one of those riders excluded, the Referee has the sole discretion to order that the
remaining team partner will start on a 15 metre handicap in gate position c or d (the
opposing team does not change positions).

However, the wording of the rule (after speaking to a couple of referees) doesn't actually say 3rd and 4th place at the time of the stoppage. It could imply that the two riders were in 3rd and 4th when the rider causing the stoppage fell off, and if the rider falling (for example) was leading when he fell they weren't in 3rd and 4th.. Not having seen the Morris incident I don't know where he was position-wise when he fell. I've been told the rule is designed to stop riders deliberately causing a race to be stopped in order to give his partner a 2nd chance in the rerun. Did Morris deliberately lay it down or did he obviously stay down making no effort to get off the track after falling? 

Another rule which is good in principal, but allows for too much ambiguity.

 

[drew2 248]

1 hour ago, Steve Shovlar said:

I brought it up last night and it was a clear case for the ref to use the rule. Bellego was way back when Morris fell and I said at the time he should have gone from 15 metres. Swindon certain got the rub of the green in that heat.

Surely that should be rub of the dust Steve??? 

[foreverblue 6,079]

1 hour ago, Steve Shovlar said:

I brought it up last night and it was a clear case for the ref to use the rule. Bellego was way back when Morris fell and I said at the time he should have gone from 15 metres. Swindon certain got the rub of the green in that heat.

Didn't do them any Nick Morris being withdrawn either, he didn't seem too keen before he fell for the second time.

[Rob B 1,245]

I thought the rule was only used if its an obvious case of a rider falling and staying down on purpose to get a rerun. That wasn't the case with Morris.

[dontforgetthefueltapsbruv 10,693]

The rule makes no reference whatsoever to staying down on purpose to get a rerun

In this case Morris was 3rd and fell challenging and in no way faked his staying down (it was a nasty one)

However his fall meant he wouldnt get a point even if he got straight up and meanwhile Bellego was 50m behind the leader after nesrly 2 laps

Even with a 15m handicap he wouldve closer to the rider in 2nd let alone the leader

Leicester deserved that advantage and the rule could and should have been used

Edited July 25, 2018 by dontforgetthefueltapsbruv

[Steve0 5,517]

8 minutes ago, dontforgetthefueltapsbruv said:

The rule makes no reference whatsoever to staying down on purpose to get a rerun

In this case Morris was 3rd and fell challenging and in no way faked his staying down (it was a nasty one)

However his fall meant he wouldnt get a point even if he got straight up and meanwhile Bellego was 50m behind the leader after nesrly 2 laps

Even with a 15m handicap he wouldve closer to the rider in 2nd let alone the leader

Leicester deserved that advantage and the rule could and should have been used

The rule was used “referee’s sole discretion”.  Time to move on...

[Grachan 7,314]

8 hours ago, Rob B said:

I thought the rule was only used if its an obvious case of a rider falling and staying down on purpose to get a rerun. That wasn't the case with Morris.

Exactly what I was going to say. The fall was not deliberate. He stayed down because he was injured, not because he wanted to get the race stopped.

The whole point of the rule is to stop the old laying down of the bike tactic, or staying down on the track if your partner is at the back in order to get the race stopped. It's not hard to comprehend that this is what the rule was brought in for.

Neither were the case. It was a legitimate stoppage. I do sometimes wonder where speedway fans keep their brains.

[Steve Shovlar 10,439]

Disagree Grachan. If the roles had been reversed you might be far from happy.

Clearly the rule should have been used as Swindon gained a full advantage. Whether or not Morris fell deliberately or not, Bellego was out of the race being so far back so why should he gain advantage by coming off the gate again? The opportunity shouldn’t have been granted to him.

Not sure Stead got on the phone to the ref to remind him but if not it was a missed opportunity.

[Daniel Smith 5,645]

Were 2 laps completed? If so, why was the heat re-run at all?

[John Scrutton 180]

agree   the race should have been declared as a 5 1 to Leicester

[Call me wolfie 677]

1 hour ago, Steve Shovlar said:

Disagree Grachan. If the roles had been reversed you might be far from happy.

Clearly the rule should have been used as Swindon gained a full advantage. Whether or not Morris fell deliberately or not, Bellego was out of the race being so far back so why should he gain advantage by coming off the gate again? The opportunity shouldn’t have been granted to him.

Not sure Stead got on the phone to the ref to remind him but if not it was a missed opportunity.

When have you ever known a referee to change his decision

[foreverblue 6,079]

1 hour ago, Call me wolfie said:

When have you ever known a referee to change his decision

Cardiff GP Saturday.