Cl 4 Team Tournament Final

[Trevor 270]

The meeting was spoilt by finishing 2 heats early with the result still in the balance. This was because of so many re-runs, on a tricky track, with the time after the 10pm curfew. There were many spills, well done Stoke for having an airfence, it must have saved serious injury tonight.

 

However, IF the meeting had started at the time stated on teletext, and the time stated on the front of the programme, then the meeting would have been able to reach it's natural conclusion. Half the crowd turned up for a 7pm start with the other for a 7.30 start, the meeting had been poorly advertised, nothing for example in this weeks Speedway Star. Who set the time at 7pm, who changed it to 7.30???

[Guest Steve Dixon]

who changed it to 7.30???

 

The weather, it was raining at 7 and the ref was having a meeting with the team managers.

 

[happy potter 14]

The meeting was spoilt by finishing 2 heats early with the result still in the balance. This was because of so many re-runs, on a tricky track, with the time after the 10pm curfew. There were many spills, well done Stoke for having an airfence, it must have saved serious injury tonight.

 

However, IF the meeting had started at the time stated on teletext, and the time stated on the front of the programme, then the meeting would have been able to reach it's natural conclusion. Half the crowd turned up for a 7pm start with the other for a 7.30 start, the meeting had been poorly advertised, nothing for example in this weeks Speedway Star. Who set the time at 7pm, who changed it to 7.30???

 

 

poor advertising? stoke? never

 

its the same week in week out.

 

imo this meeting should have started at half 6, he struggles to get 15 heats done some weeks let alone 24! and it never starts at half 7.

[KEITH M 850]

A major event finishing 2 heats early with Weymouth only 1 point ahead, it's just like the F.A.Cup final finishing 10 minutes early with one team winning 1-0, and speedway wants to be taken serious

[buxton-babe 0]

it was throwing it down at half 6 it wouldnt of been able to start then. Devil Darren it was at a FAIR track with an airfence, that says it all imo.

Edited October 19, 2008 by buxton-babe

[Trevor 270]

If there was an annoucement at 7pm, that the start was being delayed for half an hour, because of the weather, I could have understood it. But with the track lights off etc it gave the impression to me that it a 7.30 start was what they were now working towards.

[iannewsman 16]

The meeting was always set for 7.30pm. I put the track lights on at 7.00 which is our normal time for a 7.30pm start. Stoke speedway was unaware that 7.00pm had even been put out there as a start time. That is why there was no announcement of a delay, because there wasn't a delay. This is a shared event and the responsibility for advertising it does not fall on Stoke.

 

As others have said it was raining from about 6.20 until about 7.10 so a 7.00 start would have been very doubtful. Stoke have a curfew of 10.00pm, so to go on racing until around 10.15 (it would have taken until about then to complete the meeting) could have put Stoke Speedway in a very difficult position with the local authority.

 

The problem was that the rain just before the start caused the track to be very greasy for the first few heats (particularly bend 3) resulting in a lot of falls. Thanks to the Stoke air fence none of those falls were serious.

 

Just for the record, at last weeks Neil Collins testimonial, we completed 20 heats of racing (including one 8 lap race) between 7.30 and 9.25 and it rained throughout the meeting.

Edited October 20, 2008 by iannewsman

[Parsloes 1928 nearly 495]

As others have said it was raining from about 6.20 until about 7.10 so a 7.00 start would have been very doubtful. Stoke have a curfew of 10.00pm, so to go on racing until around 10.15 (it would have taken until about then to complete the meeting) could have put Stoke Speedway in a very difficult position with the local authority.

 

Just for the record, at last weeks Neil Collins testimonial, we completed 20 heats of racing (including one 8 lap race) between 7.30 and 9.25 and it rained throughout the meeting.

 

Interesting that you mention the rain, Ian: coz I was at both meetings; and as you say, there was a fair amount of the wet stuff (not by any means for the only time this season at Loomer Rd... )..

 

Travelling up from London you can imagine I'm very concerned not to go up there and find the meeting rained off; so the Met Office's web-site was well and truly consulted..

For BOTH Saturdays, no rain was "predicted" by said Met Office boffins for the Stoke-on-Trent area for either afternoon/evening/night.

Which makes one (again..) wonder: do they actually have ANY idea what they are talking about..!!??

 

Well done to all at Stoke, then, for getting both meetings on..

The only point I'd question is: why was there the sort of length of interval there was between the semis and the Final on Saturday? I know the track staff deserve a break but the curfew must always have been a concern.

 

Previous stagings of the Fours at Loomer Rd. BTW HAVE been 7pm start-times...: that's probably why the prog. was printed that way...

[iannewsman 16]

Interesting that you mention the rain, Ian: coz I was at both meetings; and as you say, there was a fair amount of the wet stuff (not by any means for the only time this season at Loomer Rd... )..

 

Travelling up from London you can imagine I'm very concerned not to go up there and find the meeting rained off; so the Met Office's web-site was well and truly consulted..

For BOTH Saturdays, no rain was "predicted" by said Met Office boffins for the Stoke-on-Trent area for either afternoon/evening/night.

Which makes one (again..) wonder: do they actually have ANY idea what they are talking about..!!??

 

Well done to all at Stoke, then, for getting both meetings on..

The only point I'd question is: why was there the sort of length of interval there was between the semis and the Final on Saturday? I know the track staff deserve a break but the curfew must always have been a concern.

 

Previous stagings of the Fours at Loomer Rd. BTW HAVE been 7pm start-times...: that's probably why the prog. was printed that way...

 

 

You are quite right about the weather. I was getting up to the minute reports from the Met Office and no rain was forecast for either meeting.

 

The reason for long the interval was to give folks time to write out the programme for the final. As you know it takes a while to write out the whole thing. Once I had written mine down I had to confirm it with the referee and timekeeper and then announce it to the crowd to make sure we were all up to date.

 

It all got very hectic in the box as the referee was rightly keeping the heats moving by putting the 2 minute warning on as soon as the last rider crossed the line. I was giving out the results and line-ups with riders already at the tapes.

 

It was a fraught meeting most of the night and I'm amazed we got as far as we did really. From my personal point of view it didn't help when they decided to alternate the races between the two semi-finals. It just added to the overall rush in the box, but I understand why it was done. At one point my programme had flipped over the page and I didn't notice, nearly resulting in me giving out the result for heat 6 semi-final two instead of heat 6 semi-final one. Thank the Lord for Tippex!

 

I should have also reminded folks that the air fence was punctured by a falling rider's footrest during the final and this led to a 10-15 minute delay while it was repaired.

Edited October 20, 2008 by iannewsman

[Devil-Darren 0]

it was throwing it down at half 6 it wouldnt of been able to start then. Devil Darren it was at a FAIR track with an airfence, that says it all imo.

 

what was the crowd like.. i have heard 500'ish.. so no team will get any money from that then.. great shared event.. at plymouth it would have been 3 times that.. and that would just be the plymouth crowd so i would say with travelling fans up around 2000..

 

and i think plymouth has one of the best safety records there is.. so the air fence remark is needless.. and last year we got the whole meeting done in our allotted time and we have a curfew.. in fact we had time spare..

 

ohh well.. well done weymouth

 

darren

 

[iannewsman 16]

what was the crowd like.. i have heard 500'ish.. so no team will get any money from that then.. great shared event.. at plymouth it would have been 3 times that.. and that would just be the plymouth crowd so i would say with travelling fans up around 2000..

 

and i think plymouth has one of the best safety records there is.. so the air fence remark is needless.. and last year we got the whole meeting done in our allotted time and we have a curfew.. in fact we had time spare..

 

ohh well.. well done weymouth

 

darren

 

 

The air fence remark was not aimed at Plymouth in any way. I haven't been to Plymouth so I can't and wouldn't comment on their fence or safety record. Sorry if you thought it was. I was simply making the point of how worthwhile it was during this meeting.

Edited October 20, 2008 by iannewsman

[Parsloes 1928 nearly 495]

Ian:

As a fellow announcer I can fully sympathise.. I think you did (as always) an excellent job!!!!

[Devil-Darren 0]

The air fence remark was not aimed at Plymouth in any way. I haven't been to Plymouth so I can't and wouldn't comment on their fence or safety record. Sorry if you thought it was. I was simply making the point of how worthwhile it was during this meeting.

 

it wasnt you that said it mate.. so no need to apologies..

 

darren

 

[iannewsman 16]

Ian:

As a fellow announcer I can fully sympathise.. I think you did (as always) an excellent job!!!!

 

 

Thanks much appreciated.

[iannewsman 16]

it wasnt you that said it mate.. so no need to apologies..

 

darren

 

 

Thanks for clearing that up. I thought you'd read something I didn't mean.