Should The "heat 10" Rule Be Scrapped?

[Agrotron 955]

Yes its a load of bollocks just look at the farce last night, Speedway is a joke of a sport now even more so than it used to be.

[Skidder1 7,637]

As posted on the Lakeside v Poole thread:

 

The Speedway Control Bureau rule states:

 

15.11 After Heat 10 in an official Team fixture, only the Team that is losing may request a track

inspection, or seek abandonment of the Meeting.

 

So it was the Belle Vue call last season and should have been Swindon's decision 2 weeks ago. It should also have been up to Poole last night!!

 

Maybe they all need to recheck the rules - referees, riders, managers, promoters and Sky!!!

[stevebrum 6,824]

As posted on the Lakeside v Poole thread:

 

The Speedway Control Bureau rule states:

 

15.11 After Heat 10 in an official Team fixture, only the Team that is losing may request a track

inspection, or seek abandonment of the Meeting.

 

So it was the Belle Vue call last season and should have been Swindon's decision 2 weeks ago. It should also have been up to Poole last night!!

 

Maybe they all need to recheck the rules - referees, riders, managers, promoters and Sky!!!

 

 

Middlo clearly doesn't know the rules then.

[Star Lady 5,400]

 

 

Trouble is, far too many of speedway's decision-makers appear to have long forgotten what it's like being a fan deciding whether to spend hard-earned money in a dodgy-weather situation, either in the hours leading up to a meeting or while reflecting immediately after attending a truncated one.

 

And it is now far too easy to not go to a meeting and instead get your "fix" on TV. True you might not get to see "your" team every week but after a couple of weeks the habit is broken. Result one more fan lost to the terraces. I've done it (for many different reasons) and to be honest haven't missed live speedway in the slightest. I look forward to my away trips but that's because they are now part of a mini break and not so weather dependent. If there were no Sky or Bet365 would I still go - if I'm honest I really don't know.

 

As posted on the Lakeside v Poole thread:

 

The Speedway Control Bureau rule states:

 

15.11 After Heat 10 in an official Team fixture, only the Team that is losing may request a track

inspection, or seek abandonment of the Meeting.

 

So it was the Belle Vue call last season and should have been Swindon's decision 2 weeks ago. It should also have been up to Poole last night!!

 

Maybe they all need to recheck the rules - referees, riders, managers, promoters and Sky!!!

 

It would appear that it's really only a problem if TV is involved!

Clearly last year pressure was put on Belle Vue and last night pressure was put on both teams. I've said for years that when rider safety is an issue the decision should be made by secret rider ballot. Not difficult for a rider to put a cross on a piece of paper against yes or no, and to keep Sky happy they could have a count like in the General Election. That way the people that really matter, the ones putting their lives on the line, make the decision. No one knows who voted yes or no, unless it's unanimous or they choose to tell us and it avoids all the name calling, pressure and interference from Sky etc.

[dontforgetthefueltapsbruv 10,706]

As posted on the Lakeside v Poole thread:

 

The Speedway Control Bureau rule states:

 

15.11 After Heat 10 in an official Team fixture, only the Team that is losing may request a track

inspection, or seek abandonment of the Meeting.

 

So it was the Belle Vue call last season and should have been Swindon's decision 2 weeks ago. It should also have been up to Poole last night!!

 

Maybe they all need to recheck the rules - referees, riders, managers, promoters and Sky!!!

isnt there a supplementry to this rule covering televised meetings and the role of the meeting coordinator???

[arnieg 3,648]

This illustrates the typical cycle of a speedway rule

 

1. There is an injustice.

 

Let me take you back to 1989. The visitors were 43-29 up with four heats to go before the match was abandoned due to lack of ambulance cover. The hosts concede (due to injuries they would only have had one rider in heat 13's rerun). However according to the rule book the match can't be awarded. Much sympathy for the visitors and widespread agreement among fans that it should have been awarded.

 

2. Fans call for a new rule allowing result to be declared after a certain number of heats after this and other examples.

 

3. New rule introduced (in this case not for another decade) - result can be declared after 12 heats (now 10)

 

4. Everyone says how sensible.

 

5. New rule produces arguments about whether the last 3/5 heats should be run in poor conditions and matches being called off once a result has been achieved even where there is no curfew (particularly second part of double headers)

 

6. Calls for scrapping of rule

 

7. Rule scrapped

 

8. More examples like point 1 and abandoned fixtures being rearranged on cold Thursdays with two guest stuffed teams lead to demands for its reintroduction.

 

9. repeat ad nauseum

 

Alternatively at point 7 the rule is rewritten to incorporate all sorts of caveats, and that explains why the rule book gets longer and longer.

[DC2 11,150]

It's clear that some Heat 10 "results" have been influenced by the requirements of one or other team rather than the safety of the riders or value for money for the paying public so at the very least a Heat 10 result should carry one less point than a full result. That way we might see genuine abandonments & re-staging.

[Mike.Butler 601]

another nail in the coffin...instead of 20+ heats for one's money it's now apparently acceptable for 10 heats to be deemed a nights entertainment. £1.50 a heat!... talk about taking the p**s...I can see no future with the current model and total lack of governance...my heart bleeds for our sport

[scoobydoo 2,254]

For your admission money you get approx one minute of entertainment per heat so a completed meeting gives you 15 minutes of actual entertainment and people wonder why crowds are falling then you get sky presenters who promote the fact that it's a result after 10 heats with no thought for the paying public it's one of the reasons I don't attend meetings anymore it's just not worth the money

[oldace 1,678]

This illustrates the typical cycle of a speedway rule

 

1. There is an injustice.

 

Let me take you back to 1989. The visitors were 43-29 up with four heats to go before the match was abandoned due to lack of ambulance cover. The hosts concede (due to injuries they would only have had one rider in heat 13's rerun). However according to the rule book the match can't be awarded. Much sympathy for the visitors and widespread agreement among fans that it should have been awarded.

 

2. Fans call for a new rule allowing result to be declared after a certain number of heats after this and other examples.

 

3. New rule introduced (in this case not for another decade) - result can be declared after 12 heats (now 10)

 

4. Everyone says how sensible.

 

5. New rule produces arguments about whether the last 3/5 heats should be run in poor conditions and matches being called off once a result has been achieved even where there is no curfew (particularly second part of double headers)

 

6. Calls for scrapping of rule

 

7. Rule scrapped

 

8. More examples like point 1 and abandoned fixtures being rearranged on cold Thursdays with two guest stuffed teams lead to demands for its reintroduction.

 

9. repeat ad nauseum

 

Alternatively at point 7 the rule is rewritten to incorporate all sorts of caveats, and that explains why the rule book gets longer and longer.

 

 

I don't think anyone doubts the wisdom of the heat 10 rule if used properly. It is when matches are dragged on purely for that purpose. If it pours down after heat 10 and a match has to be abandoned then fair enough but nowadays even if it is heat 5 or 6 when the track becomes bad a match is limped through to heat 10 purely for that reason. Often the track can be in better shape at heat 10 than it was for heat 6 but it is still off. A track can not be fit to ride until we reach heat ten the immediately unfit with no further adverse weather conditions.

 

That is unless you count the "moisture coming out of the track" nonsense that Tony Steele was spouting at Belle Vue last year

[mickthemuppet 976]

For your admission money you get approx one minute of entertainment per heat so a completed meeting gives you 15 minutes of actual entertainment and people wonder why crowds are falling then you get sky presenters who promote the fact that it's a result after 10 heats with no thought for the paying see it's one of the reasons I don't attend meetings anymore it's just not worth the money

The old rubbish statement of 15 minutes of entertainment again. So go horse racing for the afternoon and see 8 minutes. in 3 hours. NO lets go watch a tennis match which is 12 minutes play in an hour. Or we could go to the dogs for a whole evening and see 12 races last 45 seconds each, which makes 8 minutes in three hours. Then again we could go to the Golf Open and follow Rory McIlroy round and hit the ball in play for perhaps 14 minutes in 4 hours. .

Surely it is time to put this stupid statement to bed now!!!

[SCB 0]

This illustrates the typical cycle of a speedway rule

 

1. There is an injustice.

 

Let me take you back to 1989. The visitors were 43-29 up with four heats to go before the match was abandoned due to lack of ambulance cover. The hosts concede (due to injuries they would only have had one rider in heat 13's rerun). However according to the rule book the match can't be awarded. Much sympathy for the visitors and widespread agreement among fans that it should have been awarded.

 

2. Fans call for a new rule allowing result to be declared after a certain number of heats after this and other examples.

 

3. New rule introduced (in this case not for another decade) - result can be declared after 12 heats (now 10)

 

4. Everyone says how sensible.

 

5. New rule produces arguments about whether the last 3/5 heats should be run in poor conditions and matches being called off once a result has been achieved even where there is no curfew (particularly second part of double headers)

 

6. Calls for scrapping of rule

 

7. Rule scrapped

 

8. More examples like point 1 and abandoned fixtures being rearranged on cold Thursdays with two guest stuffed teams lead to demands for its reintroduction.

 

9. repeat ad nauseum

 

Alternatively at point 7 the rule is rewritten to incorporate all sorts of caveats, and that explains why the rule book gets longer and longer.

The rule is fine.It's the abuse of the rule thats not.

[Grachan 7,362]

another nail in the coffin...instead of 20+ heats for one's money it's now apparently acceptable for 10 heats to be deemed a nights entertainment. £1.50 a heat!... talk about taking the p**s...I can see no future with the current model and total lack of governance...my heart bleeds for our sport

Actually, in the good old days, it was 6 heats and we then had matches being forced through to 6 and then abandoned in order to avoid giving a refund.

[Woz01 3,589]

As posted on the Lakeside v Poole thread:

 

The Speedway Control Bureau rule states:

 

15.11 After Heat 10 in an official Team fixture, only the Team that is losing may request a track

inspection, or seek abandonment of the Meeting.

 

So it was the Belle Vue call last season and should have been Swindon's decision 2 weeks ago. It should also have been up to Poole last night!!

 

Maybe they all need to recheck the rules - referees, riders, managers, promoters and Sky!!!

But wasn't Belle Vue barred from making that kind of decision after the burst pipe fiasco?

[bigcatdiary 3,165]

Middlo clearly doesn't know the rules then.

None of them know the rules well enough including some referees.