TheReturn 1,724 Posted October 10, 2019 (edited) 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 October 10, 2019 by TheReturn Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Grachan 7,314 Posted October 10, 2019 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
Midland Red 2,383 Posted October 10, 2019 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
Sings4Speedway 3,223 Posted October 10, 2019 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
The Cheese 2,020 Posted October 10, 2019 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. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedyOne 126 Posted October 10, 2019 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
arnieg 3,605 Posted October 10, 2019 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
woofers 467 Posted October 10, 2019 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
AFCB Wildcat 1,362 Posted October 10, 2019 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. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites