TotallyHonestJohn 3,078 Posted June 14, 2021 45 minutes ago, Halifaxtiger said: Not sure that's true THJ. There's a great deal of difference between the likes of Barry Bishop, Jittendra Duffil and Adrian Smith and certain other promoters that could be mentioned. Need to read it again HT and I totally agree there is a great deal of difference between the guys you mention and others as I did say "like for like" changes on the management committee... does the mafia ever give up their control... the good guys; the guys who do the right thing dont get a look in unfortunately then they get disallusioned and leave the sport or take a back seat and their enthusiasm ideas and drive are lost to the sport... Regards THJ 4 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ringitsneck 348 Posted June 14, 2021 Rathbone V Godfrey being a prime example. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Janice Jackson 71 Posted June 15, 2021 Please visit our website for a statement from Redcar Agilia Bears co-promoter Jitendra Duffill https://buff.ly/3gBqjtJ 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yearbyred 1,106 Posted June 15, 2021 Can fully understand Jitendras decision, if it’s affecting his mental health and personal life he has to do what’s best for him. He has been a fantastic “face” of Redcar Speedway over the last few years and the improvements to the club, both on and off the track, are a testament to all his hard work. Good luck and thank you. 6 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bear_Bottom 516 Posted June 24, 2021 Excellent response from Ben to the 'statement' in SS... Ben Duffill 37 m · Via the Speedway Star, a ‘spokesman’ for SCB has issued a response to my query as to why the recent Redcar V Birmingham KO Cup match was different to the Redcar V Glasgow (01.06.17) and Coventry V Rye House (11.09.15) matches. Both of those matches were abandoned and declared before heat 10, whereas the KO Cup match was not. I have asked several times via email, why those matches were declared, contrary to the SCB’s own rule book (SCB reg 011.1.23). I was NOT given a reason - I was told that a meeting can only be declared before heat 10 if the result is already ‘mathematically certain’, with no other explanation. I wouldn’t usually take to social media to do this, but feel I have no other option as I didn’t get the decency of a reply to my question by email - instead I had to read it in the Speedway Star this morning. Reading the ‘spokesman’s’ response, he states that the 2 matches I have used as an example, were ‘beyond doubt mathematically’! It’s written for us all to read, but is completely untrue. If you see the photos attached to this post, you will see that NEITHER of those results were mathematically beyond doubt. The opposition could have won by heat 15 in both examples (if they are using heat 10 for that analysis, then the KO Cup match result was beyond doubt too). In fact, the score difference was exactly the same (8 points) at the time of the abandonment in the Redcar V Glasgow match in 2017. Both matches were abandoned after Heat 9 - other than the fact that one was a KO Cup match, there is no difference whatsoever. The rule book does not state that a KO Cup match is treated differently to a league match either! (see attached reg 011.1.23). In this article, the SCB also state that the KO Cup match at Birmingham was not abandoned due to the condition of the track - the fact that the match was delayed for over an hour due to the remedial track work means that it WAS directly responsible. The match would never have reached curfew otherwise - the SCB have not acknowledged this in their statement. It’s a shame this explanation wasn’t given to me personally by our governing body when I requested it, but then again, it’s a very weak and untrue explanation. The evidence is attached for all to see. These decisions ARE inconsistent, and our treatment in this situation is disrespectful and unfair. Precedents were set I’m afraid and this explanation is not fooling me, or Redcar Speedway - we deserve better. 7 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cyclone 943 Posted June 24, 2021 (edited) 14 hours ago, Bear_Bottom said: Excellent response from Ben to the 'statement' in SS... Ben Duffill 37 m · Via the Speedway Star, a ‘spokesman’ for SCB has issued a response to my query as to why the recent Redcar V Birmingham KO Cup match was different to the Redcar V Glasgow (01.06.17) and Coventry V Rye House (11.09.15) matches. Both of those matches were abandoned and declared before heat 10, whereas the KO Cup match was not. I have asked several times via email, why those matches were declared, contrary to the SCB’s own rule book (SCB reg 011.1.23). I was NOT given a reason - I was told that a meeting can only be declared before heat 10 if the result is already ‘mathematically certain’, with no other explanation. I wouldn’t usually take to social media to do this, but feel I have no other option as I didn’t get the decency of a reply to my question by email - instead I had to read it in the Speedway Star this morning. Reading the ‘spokesman’s’ response, he states that the 2 matches I have used as an example, were ‘beyond doubt mathematically’! It’s written for us all to read, but is completely untrue. If you see the photos attached to this post, you will see that NEITHER of those results were mathematically beyond doubt. The opposition could have won by heat 15 in both examples (if they are using heat 10 for that analysis, then the KO Cup match result was beyond doubt too). In fact, the score difference was exactly the same (8 points) at the time of the abandonment in the Redcar V Glasgow match in 2017. Both matches were abandoned after Heat 9 - other than the fact that one was a KO Cup match, there is no difference whatsoever. The rule book does not state that a KO Cup match is treated differently to a league match either! (see attached reg 011.1.23). In this article, the SCB also state that the KO Cup match at Birmingham was not abandoned due to the condition of the track - the fact that the match was delayed for over an hour due to the remedial track work means that it WAS directly responsible. The match would never have reached curfew otherwise - the SCB have not acknowledged this in their statement. It’s a shame this explanation wasn’t given to me personally by our governing body when I requested it, but then again, it’s a very weak and untrue explanation. The evidence is attached for all to see. These decisions ARE inconsistent, and our treatment in this situation is disrespectful and unfair. Precedents were set I’m afraid and this explanation is not fooling me, or Redcar Speedway - we deserve better. Hope Ben Duffil passes his response on to Speedway Star for publication in order to set the record straight and expose this Speedway Control Bureau chicanery. Edited June 24, 2021 by cyclone 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
screm 8,057 Posted July 1, 2021 Congratulations to Redcar on being awarded the British Under-21 Final. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ringitsneck 348 Posted July 2, 2021 On 6/24/2021 at 11:45 PM, cyclone said: Hope Ben Duffil passes his response on to Speedway Star for publication in order to set the record straight and expose this Speedway Control Bureau chicanery. The Star will not print anything controversial that criticises the BSPL or the SCB , they won’t bite the hand that feeds them. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mikebaker 199 Posted July 10, 2021 If we want to be challenging for the play offs. Serjeant needs to be replaced. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bellers101 347 Posted July 10, 2021 1 hour ago, mikebaker said: If we want to be challenging for the play offs. Serjeant needs to be replaced. Agree. The 'promising 28 year old' should never have been signed! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bellers101 347 Posted July 10, 2021 On 7/2/2021 at 11:51 AM, Ringitsneck said: The Star will not print anything controversial that criticises the BSPL or the SCB , they won’t bite the hand that feeds them. Bring back the old Speedway Mail! 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
szkocjasid 3,026 Posted July 10, 2021 (edited) 3 hours ago, mikebaker said: If we want to be challenging for the play offs. Serjeant needs to be replaced. Who out there is stronger though? No point dropping a rider if you can't strengthen up! Edited July 10, 2021 by szkocjasid 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
szkocjasid 3,026 Posted July 10, 2021 1 hour ago, Bellers101 said: Agree. The 'promising 28 year old' should never have been signed! Who would you have signed instead? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yearbyred 1,106 Posted July 11, 2021 Another blow to the Bears, Jordan Jenkins our for a while with a broken wrist. Only able to replace with a 2* rising star and he’s been riding better than that. Missing 3 of your starting 7 is not ideal. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MartinBSN 617 Posted July 11, 2021 3 minutes ago, Yearbyred said: Another blow to the Bears, Jordan Jenkins our for a while with a broken wrist. Only able to replace with a 2* rising star and he’s been riding better than that. Missing 3 of your starting 7 is not ideal. There is a bunch of rising stars riding better than 2* though so it's not the worst thing, although Jenkins will be missed! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites