Was Penhall,s Retirement The Start Of The Decline In Speedway.?

[The White Knight 9,039]

Great Thread this. I don't know either way - but - I really am enjoying the Discussion.

[oldace 1,678]

Great Thread this. I don't know either way - but - I really am enjoying the Discussion.

 

 

Better watch ourselves now Grachan, the forum bully boy is on our case. He took my dinner money last week and gave me a chinese burn!!!!

 

Just a joke Ian !!!!!

Edited February 17, 2014 by Oldace

[The White Knight 9,039]

 

 

Better watch ourselves now Grachan, the forum bully boy is on our case. He took my dinner money last week and gave me a chinese burn!!!!

 

Just a joke Ian !!!!!

 

 

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!

[Parsloes 1928 nearly 495]

Penhall's retirement? Or the national press front page headlines when the British number one shot his wife in the back and then turned the gun on himself? I know which one I think hastened the decline of Speedway the most.

[waiheke1 4,295]

Id say your right parsloes, but tbh more for the fact that it meant England's only realistic world champion of that era was no more, rather than the tragic/macabre/horrific nature of his actions.

[oldace 1,678]

Penhall's retirement? Or the national press front page headlines when the British number one shot his wife in the back and then turned the gun on himself? I know which one I think hastened the decline of Speedway the most.

 

 

Perhaps it was Fred West who caused the decline in the building industry, or Peter Sutcliffe was responsible for the downturn in the haulage game.

 

You have posted this in the past and referred to Carter bringing shame on the sport.

 

Kenny Carter brought shame on himself, not speedway, not his immediate family, just himself. His actions would have had no bearing whatsoever on the sport, in fact ironically being on the front pages probably would have helped.

[Phlipphlopp 3,913]

Penhall's retirement? Or the national press front page headlines when the British number one shot his wife in the back and then turned the gun on himself? I know which one I think hastened the decline of Speedway the most.

 

 

 

Perhaps it was Fred West who caused the decline in the building industry, or Peter Sutcliffe was responsible for the downturn in the haulage game.

 

You have posted this in the past and referred to Carter bringing shame on the sport.

 

Kenny Carter brought shame on himself, not speedway, not his immediate family, just himself. His actions would have had no bearing whatsoever on the sport, in fact ironically being on the front pages probably would have helped.

Indeed. More parsloes sensationalism rubbish. By his analogy , American football would have suffered terminal decline after the OJ Simpson fiasco's.

Edited March 17, 2014 by phlipphlop

[fatface 2,554]

Dave Lanning was certainly correct when he said in his commentary that it was something that would be talked about until time runs out in speedway.

 

I do think the point of contact is relevant, by the way, as many people have long argued that there was no contact between the two but there was.

To prove Dave Lanning 100% correct, I'll chip in too.

 

Agree with Grachan. I too saw the footage you are referring to. It was shown on Central TV and was introduced by Gary Newbon on some sort of midweek sports show. It was on YouTube but seems to have gone now. For me, it was the clearest evidence that Penhall knocked Carter off. Carter didn't run out of room. He didn't hit the fence first, he was hit by Penhall and that's why he fell. Shame it's not still available, but somebody, somewhere must have it?!

 

Anyone doubting there was contact, only needs to listen to Penhall's words when interviewed in the immediate aftermath (56:56 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nuF9BWpEDXo ) "I felt a little bit and it was him". Strange thing to say if there was no contact?

 

Also, can't agree with a previous poster who says the rider with the wheel in front has the right to choose their line entirely. If they are a length in front, then yes, I would agree. But if they are alongside a rider, then you are also saying they have the right to knock someone off. That's not right. That's why Hans Nielsen was rightly excluded for knocking off Sam Ermolenko at the 1993 Final.

 

To me, Penhall rode the rider and not the track. Watch the race again. Penhall actually makes the best start. But he goes looking for Carter right from tapes up, that's why PC and Crump go clear. Bruce Penhall was not a dirty rider. But with the whole backdrop of the rivalry, the event being Penhall's last meeting, points already dropped, the high stakes and the rough treatment handed out by Carter on the straight - make no mistake that was an angry, fired-up and increasingly desperate Penhall that drove into that bend. He simply had to beat Carter then or his title hopes had effectively gone.

Edited March 25, 2014 by falcace

[oldace 1,678]

To prove Dave Lanning 100% correct, I'll chip in too.

 

Agree with Grachan. I too saw the footage you are referring to. It was shown on Central TV and was introduced by Gary Newbon on some sort of midweek sports show. It was on YouTube but seems to have gone now. For me, it was the clearest evidence that Penhall knocked Carter off. Carter didn't run out of room. He didn't hit the fence first, he was hit by Penhall and that's why he fell. Shame it's not still available, but somebody, somewhere must have it?!

 

Anyone doubting there was contact, only needs to listen to Penhall's words when interviewed in the immediate aftermath (56:56 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nuF9BWpEDXo ) "I felt a little bit and it was him". Strange thing to say if there was no contact?

 

I am not aware of anyone ever suggesting there wasn't contact

 

Also, can't agree with a previous poster who says the rider with the wheel in front has the right to choose their line entirely. If they are a length in front, then yes, I would agree. But if they are alongside a rider, then you are also saying they have the right to knock someone off. That's not right. That's why Hans Nielsen was rightly excluded for knocking off Sam Ermolenko at the 1993 Final.

 

Nielsen rode right through Ermolenko and was rightly excluded. The point I was making is that in some situations, particularly entering a bend, it can appear as if the rider on the inside wipede out the other guy when all he actually did was make a normal turn, the sliding back wheel does the rest. In that situation if the rider on the out is so much as half a wheel behind he has to concede the bend or get wiped out, it really is all about getting your wheel in front

 

To me, Penhall rode the rider and not the track. Watch the race again. Penhall actually makes the best start. But he goes looking for Carter right from tapes up, that's why PC and Crump go clear. Bruce Penhall was not a dirty rider. But with the whole backdrop of the rivalry, the event being Penhall's last meeting, points already dropped, the high stakes and the rough treatment handed out by Carter on the straight - make no mistake that was an angry, fired-up and increasingly desperate Penhall that drove into that bend. He simply had to beat Carter then or his title hopes had effectively gone.

 

All true but it was only the fall which was being judged and that, I am afraid, was Kenny's fault

[fatface 2,554]

 

Anyone doubting there was contact, only needs to listen to Penhall's words when interviewed in the immediate aftermath (56:56 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nuF9BWpEDXo ) "I felt a little bit and it was him". Strange thing to say if there was no contact?

 

I am not aware of anyone ever suggesting there wasn't contact

 

Here's someone who says there was no contact...then again, he had a few years to get his story straight then..

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwL80jiK6no

[lucifer sam 3,953]

Minimal contact, and not at the moment when Carter fell.

 

Carter's exclusion is the correct decision.

 

The decisions in the '86 ans '93 finals were also correct - Knudsen should have been excluded (he moved back across too late when Nielsen was already coming through), but Nielsen's speed moved him wide as he passed Ermolenko and he was rightly excluded for that one.

 

All the best

Rob

[stratton 1,491]

Minimal contact, and not at the moment when Carter fell.

 

Carter's exclusion is the correct decision.

 

The decisions in the '86 ans '93 finals were also correct - Knudsen should have been excluded (he moved back across too late when Nielsen was already coming through), but Nielsen's speed moved him wide as he passed Ermolenko and he was rightly excluded for that one.

 

All the best

Rob

You must be in the minority then Rob,i know you were a Hans fan but he was so lucky not to be excluded in the Knudsen incident.Hans had a record of panicking and making the wrong move in finals and this was one of them he later rectified it and went on to become a great champion.

[lucifer sam 3,953]

You must be in the minority then Rob,i know you were a Hans fan but he was so lucky not to be excluded in the Knudsen incident.Hans had a record of panicking and making the wrong move in finals and this was one of them he later rectified it and went on to become a great champion.

 

I see '86 as the turning point. Nielsen had been the victim until this point - he'd often been pushed around when it came to the vital races (including by Knudsen in '85). In that race against Knudsen at Katowice, Nielsen showed his ruthless side. Tommy left a hole, Hans roared through it. No he didn't leave Tommy a lot of room, but had their positions been reversed, I doubt Knudsen would have left him even that much room.

 

I always get the feeling that the mutual respect between Nielsen and Gundersen didn't exist between Nielsen and Knudsen. I can't remember Nielsen or Gundersen ever crashing into each other, whereas it happened all the time with Nielsen and Knudsen. Knudsen was a rather dirty rider, and Nielsen, in turn, would give Knudsen a rough time.

 

I always felt if Tommy had rode more cleanly, he would have ended up as World Champion - he did have a terrific talent for riding a speedway bike. But he was also too injury prone.

 

All the best

Rob

Edited March 27, 2014 by lucifer sam

[oldace 1,678]

You must be in the minority then Rob,i know you were a Hans fan but he was so lucky not to be excluded in the Knudsen incident.Hans had a record of panicking and making the wrong move in finals and this was one of them he later rectified it and went on to become a great champion.

 

 

Yes I agree Sidney, Hans had luck on his side that day. As Rob says Tommy was starting to come back in as Hans was going out but for me I would have judged it 60/40 and put out Nielsen out.

Edited March 27, 2014 by Oldace

[stratton 1,491]

I see '86 as the turning point. Nielsen had been the victim until this point - he'd often been pushed around when it came to the vital races (including by Knudsen in '85). In that race against Knudsen at Katowice, Nielsen showed his ruthless side. Tommy left a hole, Hans roared through it. No he didn't leave Tommy a lot of room, but had their positions been reversed, I doubt Knudsen would have left him even that much room.

 

I always get the feeling that the mutual respect between Nielsen and Gundersen didn't exist between Nielsen and Knudsen. I can't remember Nielsen or Gundersen ever crashing into each other, whereas it happened all the time with Nielsen and Knudsen. Knudsen was a rather dirty rider, and Nielsen, in turn, would give Knudsen a rough time.

 

I always felt if Tommy had rode more cleanly, he would have ended up as World Champion - he did have a terrific talent for riding a speedway bike. But he was also too injury prone.

 

All the best

Rob

 

I never ever saw Knudsen as a dirty rider, he was tough but lets get thing's right so was Hans.Knudsen for me was up there with Jessup ( ect as very unlucky not to be champion.Even when Knudsen came back from that serious back injury he was still a force he was never frightened of Nielsen his head to head record like ERIK in all competitions was pretty good he beat him Hans as i can remember in quite a few heat 1s.I just felt Hans up until 86 had been really frustrated had been a tad unlucky i admit but he was so lucky to stay in with Knudsen excluded.To his credit Hans went on and got his just rewards a great pro and i began to like him more later on in his career( still not as good as Ole though in my humble my opinion.!) Edited March 27, 2014 by sidney