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

All 4 back question

Recommended Posts

Last night a couple of riders from the same team came together on the first bend, one went down and was excluded. Kelvin said the referee was harsh and should be all 4 back. Kelvin was right in that there was enough contact between the two riders to normally suggest all 4 back.

However, my question is this.  When the coming together is two riders from the same team, where there is no knock on effect from the opposition, it would be unfair on the other team if all 4 back was applied because two riders from the same team could not get it right between them.

So in such scenario, should ref's be encouraged to exclude one rider, rather than all 4 back?

Edited by TheReturn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ref was correct. Kelvin was talking rubbish. It's a different scenario if riders are on the same team, surely.

Kelvin was just annoyed because it helped Swindon. How gutted were him and Nigel when Swindon got a 5-0?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rider excluded was the one who fell, not the one who caused him to fall

It wasn’t the referee’s best ever decision

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given that four riders are heading into the corner and a small piece of track should there be contact between two riders simply because there isn't really enough room then it should be all 4 back team mates or otherwise. Should a rider fall alone due to error on the corner and bring another down then an exclusion is fair.  The riders should be treated as 4 individuals rather than decisions made regarding which team it affects. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Midland Red said:

The rider excluded was the one who fell, not the one who caused him to fall

It wasn’t the referee’s best ever decision

That was the strange one for me, I thought it would be 50/50 whether he put all 4 back or excluded Becker for causing the incident so was surprised when Morris was excluded.

Personally I thought given the conditions that all 4 back would have been the right call.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

The rider excluded was the one who fell, not the one who caused him to fall

It wasn’t the referee’s best ever decision

I'm sure I was told a few years ago that referees were briefed that in the case of two riders from the same team colliding, it is the teammate who falls that is excluded, regardless of whose fault it was.

Don't think it's ever been in the rulebook, but something in the back of my mind says that a referee told me they were directed to do it like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, CottonOn said:

I'm sure I was told a few years ago that referees were briefed that in the case of two riders from the same team colliding, it is the teammate who falls that is excluded, regardless of whose fault it was.

Don't think it's ever been in the rulebook, but something in the back of my mind says that a referee told me they were directed to do it like that.

I have a similar recollection.

Was it a PL play-off between Rye House and Sheffield?  2007?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s a bit of a grey area isn’t it ? I don’t think you’ll find a reference in the rule book about putting all 4 back anyway, but please feel to free to quote it if I’m wrong. 

Another one of speedways unwritten ‘rules’.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, CottonOn said:

I'm sure I was told a few years ago that referees were briefed that in the case of two riders from the same team colliding, it is the teammate who falls that is excluded, regardless of whose fault it was.

Don't think it's ever been in the rulebook, but something in the back of my mind says that a referee told me they were directed to do it like that.

That's the only explanation that would justify last night's decisions for me but briefed by who and who has implemented this instruction if it's not in the rule book?

To me the 4 back option is if the stoppage cannot be solely attributed to a single rider but in both similar instances last night I think it could so if discretion was made for the 1st one because of track conditions then consistency should be applied regardless of who's involved in the incident.

In the 1st incident if you had to exclude someone it should have been Doyle but I agreed with the decision made. I thought it a little unsporting then that the Swindon riders were trying to get the two minutes put and get an exclusion when their rider caused the incident in the first place.

  • 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