lisa-colette 6,051 Posted October 9, 2012 (edited) Did Chris say he was lucky it was all four back because he deserved to go? Or could he have meant that referees often exclude a rider in that type of incident? He said on the interview on sky last night that he has been excluded for less and was lucky to be all 4 back... Edited October 9, 2012 by lisa-colette Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BigFatDave 258 Posted October 9, 2012 Que? i was looking for clarity. Try the OED between Clamp down and Clash. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
robinsgirl 59 Posted October 10, 2012 Que? i was looking for clarity. Well you're in the wrong forum then! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gavan 5,062 Posted October 10, 2012 dont think ackroyd bottled it he just made the wrong decision this time as refs do in football 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Blazeaway 1,501 Posted October 10, 2012 dont think ackroyd bottled it he just made the wrong decision this time as refs do in football But he didn't actually make a decision. Just took the easy way out. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheReturn 1,724 Posted October 10, 2012 (edited) dont think ackroyd bottled it he just made the wrong decision this time as refs do in football But he didn't actually make a decision. Just took the easy way out. I have to agree with Blazeaway Gavan. I don't think he really made a decision, but took the easy option. Being a referee is hard, and over the years I have tried to avoid being critical of ref's, so I don't mind them making mistakes, every referee will make mistakes in every sport, On this occasion I think he chose not to make a decision for whatever reason. Either CH or NP were at fault, which one is the decision to make. Edited October 10, 2012 by TheReturn 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
spinkox 37 Posted October 11, 2012 I dont suppose there would be 24 pages of comment on the refs decision if this had been the first GP of the season - yet it would have had the same effect on the World Championship result. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iris123 21,074 Posted October 11, 2012 I dont suppose there would be 24 pages of comment on the refs decision if this had been the first GP of the season - yet it would have had the same effect on the World Championship result. Sorry,but one of the most ridiculous posts i have seen lately.Shows no understanding of sports psycholgy or a GP season if you think a heat at the start of the season has as much impact and pressure as one of the last heats involving two riders going for the title!!!!!Asa cold statistic maybe,but as part of a world championship that statement is crazy to say the very least Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PHILIPRISING 7,298 Posted October 11, 2012 I have to agree with Blazeaway Gavan. I don't think he really made a decision, but took the easy option. Being a referee is hard, and over the years I have tried to avoid being critical of ref's, so I don't mind them making mistakes, every referee will make mistakes in every sport, On this occasion I think he chose not to make a decision for whatever reason. Either CH or NP were at fault, which one is the decision to make. OR, as Craig says, it was 50/50 end he put both back. That was an option and he took it. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chesilmaster 2 Posted October 11, 2012 Not sure what was the correct decision, BUT... Being in the crowd at Torun, If Holder was excluded, there would of been a riot. The police had arrested 2 or 3 from the crowd, just prior to the incident. It was an atmosphere ready to go bang..... Bloody good atmosphere tho. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Barney Rabbit 730 Posted October 11, 2012 (edited) OR, as Craig says, it was 50/50 end he put both back. That was an option and he took it. As some are saying, the easy option, or no decision at all. It wasn't 50/50. Either Pedersen illegally forced Holder over giving Holder no option but to do as he did - Pedersen to blame - or Holder was legitimately clamped but opted to go over the curb and lost control thus t-boning Pedersen - Holder to blame. Depends on where one sees the incident as starting. But the one place it never started was the start gate. That was clean. It was never an unsatisfactory start but that's the line Ackroyd took. Sorry, 'no decision - all 4 back' was a bottle-job. Edited October 11, 2012 by Barney Rabbit Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PHILIPRISING 7,298 Posted October 11, 2012 GOING round and round again. You saw it with one pair of eyes and the referee with another. Nothing is going to change that. Or the fact that incidents on the first corner can constitute an unsatisfactory start. It's not just about what happens on the starting line. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
spinkox 37 Posted October 11, 2012 Sorry,but one of the most ridiculous posts i have seen lately.Shows no understanding of sports psycholgy or a GP season if you think a heat at the start of the season has as much impact and pressure as one of the last heats involving two riders going for the title!!!!!Asa cold statistic maybe,but as part of a world championship that statement is crazy to say the very least I meant it as a cold statistic - which is factually and mathmatically correct. As part of the championship would not be crazy to say the least. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gemini 4,894 Posted October 11, 2012 Gawd! Is this still going on? I've seen it time after time that an incident on the first bend is called an 'unsatisfactory start'. Sounds a bit daft but that's the way it has always been described. I'm no fan of Holder but the referee made the best decision in having a re-run of the race with all four riders. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cj69 333 Posted October 11, 2012 Shud have had McGreggor as the ref he aint scared of a bit of controversy Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
