PHILIPRISING 7,298 Posted October 8, 2012 I always thought is a race was stopped in a Grand Prix, somebody must be excluded . .You cannot call it unsatifactory start as the crash occured coming out of the second bend which is probably 60 metres from the start line. THE incident started on the first bend ... the official verdict (I get that in my radio at the GPs from the referee via the SGP secretary who sits next to him): unsatisfactory start, all four back. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Arson fire 4,785 Posted October 8, 2012 The speed in which Ackroyd made his decision meant he couldn't have looked at many replays...he bottled it, took the easy option after sh!ttin his kegs, end of, holder took nicki off, when he could have avoided it.... but Holder won and probably still would have, or did monster make the decision??.. Happy days 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mixy230 120 Posted October 8, 2012 Philip Glad your opinions are clear! Its good that you do have clear opinions! Shame they are so 1 sided. (What was the verbal assualt on Holder? Did Nikki clash with Jack Holder? Or did Jack clash with Nikki?) The Ref will blame Nikki (Even Nikki is not daft enough to assualt Chris when surrounded by 10+ Holder hangers on!) Ok maybe he is! lol... But you even try and take the spotlight off of the Holder clan over this incident!!!!!!!!! I am counting the ones (1. People I know who watched it 2. Presenters initial reaction 3. Posters on the internet 4. My opinion) Probably not much different to the ones you count!?!? Not being the worse thing we have seen does not make it acceptable?! I am not realy bothered about the outcome, just the way the outcome was achieved, which all must agree was woolly to say the least! Philip please do not ignore the obvious failings of the system (rules / refs) and the poor behaviour of the Holder clan (Trying to divert the blame onto Nikki ?!) There was what 10 to 20 of them by the Pit gate?!? Should he should have climbed over the fence to avoid them? or walk through them ignoring them all! They were there for a reason, what reason? to add pressure? to provoke? (THEY SHOULD NOT ALL HAVE BEEN THERE!) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Barney Rabbit 728 Posted October 8, 2012 THE incident started on the first bend ... the official verdict (I get that in my radio at the GPs from the referee via the SGP secretary who sits next to him): unsatisfactory start, all four back. As you say, it started on the first bend, not at the start. Agreed, the ref has the discretion to call an unsatisfactory start and he did so despite, as you have just posted, the incident started well away from the start area and was a first bend incident unrelated to the start. How is that not bottling making an exclusion decision? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PHILIPRISING 7,298 Posted October 8, 2012 As you say, it started on the first bend, not at the start. Agreed, the ref has the discretion to call an unsatisfactory start and he did so despite, as you have just posted, the incident started well away from the start area and was a first bend incident unrelated to the start. How is that not bottling making an exclusion decision? BECAUSE first bend incidents are related to the start in that particular context. You see this all the time, riders clashing on the first bend and a rerun being ordered. Simply do not accept that Ackroyd did anything out of the ordinary. Pedersen tried to clamp down on Holder, as he was entitled to do. Holder tried to keep going, even with his front wheel over the white line, as he was entitled to do. Result... a racing incident that the referee decided was not the sole fault of either rider. He did watch TV replays but immediately felt that they confirmed what he had seen with his own eyes. We are going round in circles here now. People have made up their own minds, quite rightly, and we will just have to agree to disagree. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mixy230 120 Posted October 8, 2012 I can live with that! lol Shakes hands and moves on! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Barney Rabbit 728 Posted October 8, 2012 (edited) BECAUSE first bend incidents are related to the start in that particular context. You see this all the time, riders clashing on the first bend and a rerun being ordered. Simply do not accept that Ackroyd did anything out of the ordinary. Pedersen tried to clamp down on Holder, as he was entitled to do. Holder tried to keep going, even with his front wheel over the white line, as he was entitled to do. Result... a racing incident that the referee decided was not the sole fault of either rider. He did watch TV replays but immediately felt that they confirmed what he had seen with his own eyes. We are going round in circles here now. People have made up their own minds, quite rightly, and we will just have to agree to disagree. As you post, we, over here, see it all the time, but isn't that the point of the thread? I watch quite a lot of Polish speedway (having Polish parents and relatives I'm over there a time ir two a year, always in the speedway season) and far more first bend clashes result in exclusions than in British speedway, a point made by Mr Grodski who's never slow in excluding a rider in a first bend incident if it isn't as a result of something starting at the start - as this particular clash wasn't. I think our refs are far too quick to duck out of an unpopular decision if they can just get away with 'unsatisfactory start, all four back'. This was a classic example. I'd say the originator of this thread is saying just that. Edited October 8, 2012 by Barney Rabbit Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Phil The Ace 2,860 Posted October 8, 2012 Well there you go folkes. Just heard it from horses mouth. He was lucky to get all 4 back Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
george.m 3,063 Posted October 8, 2012 (edited) I wanted Chris to win the championship. When the incident happened my immediate reaction was that Chris had to be excluded. I don't know all the rules and don't profess to. Having just watched it again now on Sky, Nicki definitely cut across Chris and leaves him no room. Am I right in thinking the rider in front is allowed to choose his race line, provided he's not turning left on an opponent? Chris, I assume, has to keep the throttle on to control the bike. He could of course have come off in the hope he gets NP excluded, but doesn't. Chris then hits Nicki. If NP did cut across CH 'illegally', then that's the first incident and the one that should be judged. If illegal NP should have been excluded. If not, then CH should have been excluded for bringing NP down. Edited October 8, 2012 by george.m Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dontforgetthefueltapsbruv 10,707 Posted October 8, 2012 The speed in which Ackroyd made his decision meant he couldn't have looked at many replays...he bottled it, took the easy option after sh!ttin his kegs, end of, holder took nicki off, when he could have avoided it.... but Holder won and probably still would have, or did monster make the decision??.. Happy days Or he was so sure of his decision he didnt need to look at it over and over again! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Arson fire 4,785 Posted October 8, 2012 Or he was so sure of his decision he didnt need to look at it over and over again! the bloke himself has just said he got lucky...is he wrong aswell?? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Phil The Ace 2,860 Posted October 8, 2012 (edited) What nicki did to holder in 1st corner happens at least 3-6 times a meeting. It's called getting clamped not being forced onto centre green. Everyone else manages to shut up and give up the 1st bend Edited October 8, 2012 by Phil The Ace Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iris123 21,044 Posted October 8, 2012 the bloke himself has just said he got lucky...is he wrong aswell?? You know he is.If Nicki said it should be all 4 back then that would be used as almost if not 100% evidence,but if Holder said he got lucky,forget it Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dontforgetthefueltapsbruv 10,707 Posted October 8, 2012 the bloke himself has just said he got lucky...is he wrong aswell?? Perhaps he realises refs can make mistakes and he was lucky he made the right one this time! :-) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Arson fire 4,785 Posted October 8, 2012 Perhaps he realises refs can make mistakes and he was lucky he made the right one this time! :-) even his bloody Labrador was going berserk in the box at him!! ....but time to get off his back, he's taken some white stick!! 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
