Coventry V Poole 1/6/15

[Alan_Jones 1,005]

Depends on your view of dangerous, one riders dangerous is another man's not dangerous, Harris thought it wasn't dangerous and Joonas had a different view.

 

But what SCB is saying is that if it's the meeting officials saying it then they are indeed playing with rider safety.

[stevebrum 6,835]

If a meeting starts they should do there best to get at least 10 heats in, we need to ensure the public get there money's worth IMHO.

Rider safety of course is important but equally so is the paying public.

[foreverblue 6,125]

But what SCB is saying is that if it's the meeting officials saying it then they are indeed playing with rider safety.

What are mean't to do, dammed if they carry on and dammed if they stop it, especially when two riders on the same team have a different view, the riders cannot and should not be put in a position where they have the final say, that decision has to be made by a independent official, maybe all meetings should have an ex rider to assess it when needed.

[Alan_Jones 1,005]

What are mean't to do, dammed if they carry on and dammed if they stop it, especially when two riders on the same team have a different view, the riders cannot and should not be put in a position where they have the final say, that decision has to be made by a independent official, maybe all meetings should have an ex rider to assess it when needed.

 

They stop it when they've decided it's dangerous, not wait until they can declare a result.

[JamieE 123]

If a meeting starts they should do there best to get at least 10 heats in, we need to ensure the public get there money's worth IMHO.

Rider safety of course is important but equally so is the paying public.

 

As one of the mugs who paid £18 to attend the meeting, I can assure you I didn't feel I got value for money just for "getting at least 10 heats in". What you had there was the worst scenario for all parties pretty much, fans getting ripped off and questionable rider safety after a certain point of the meeting.

 

Speaking as a fan, I would only feel I had got my money's worth if the meeting had been called off and re-staged another night in better conditions, or if the attitude was to "get at least 10 heats in", then to be compensated accordingly for not getting full value for money.

Edited June 12, 2015 by JamieE

[stevehone 3,437]

maybe all meetings should have an ex rider to assess it when needed.

 

would that be an ex rider that liked riding in the wet, or an ex rider that didn't?

[Alan_Jones 1,005]

 

But the problem is, who decides when it is dangerous? When at least 8 out of 14 riders wish to continue and the track steward wishes to continue, surely you must continue?

 

That's a different debate. What SCB & I are saying is that once the referee or meeting steward has decided at around heat 7/8/9 that the meeting will be called off after heat 10 then they're putting a result ahead of rider safety.

[foreverblue 6,125]

 

That's a different debate. What SCB & I are saying is that once the referee or meeting steward has decided at around heat 7/8/9 that the meeting will be called off after heat 10 then they're putting a result ahead of rider safety.

That depends on the conditions, they may say it can be called off after heat 10 because they expect the track to worsen so by the the time we get to after heat 10 it would be deemed dangerous or if the conditions improved they could continue after heat 10. if the majority of riders do not think it is too dangerous to ride why should the minority over rule them.

[orion 7,639]

 

As one of the mugs who paid £18 to attend the meeting, I can assure you I didn't feel I got value for money just for "getting at least 10 heats in". What you had there was the worst scenario for all parties pretty much, fans getting ripped off and questionable rider safety after a certain point of the meeting.

 

Speaking as a fan, I would only feel I had got my money's worth if the meeting had been called off and re-staged another night in better conditions, or if the attitude was to "get at least 10 heats in", then to be compensated accordingly for not getting full value for money.

I trust you never went to the Lakeside match the other week then when the same happened then or maybe you forgot to post ? it's amazing that fans only feel ripped off or worry about the riders getting hurt when they get beat .

[foreverblue 6,125]

Isn't that what happened at this meeting?

 

I can only think of the Belle v Vue Poole meeting when the manager of the team in the lead knew it was dangerous (he said something like 'when riders lke Iversen fall off it must be dangerous') and still told his riders to go out in a subsequent race.

But when Iversen came down it was heat 10, so Middlo didn't tell them to go out in a subsequent race.

[The Voice Of Reason 2,124]

I trust you never went to the Lakeside match the other week then when the same happened then or maybe you forgot to post ? it's amazing that fans only feel ripped off or worry about the riders getting hurt when they get beat .

What an utterly, ill-informed, patronising post.

 

Most of us on here are TRUE Speedway Supporters. Unlike many other 'various sports' supporters, we hold our particular sport close to our heart. In most cases, I'd suggest that we have been Speedway fans since a VERY early age,

 

Irresepctive of the teams, or riders, that we support, the last thing that we EVER want to see is riders getting hurt. Simple reason is, as Speedway Supporters, and despite our dislikes, the LAST thing that we want see is rider injury.

 

Basically, to suggest otherwise Orion, you truly are a complete and utter CLOWN.

Edited June 13, 2015 by The Voice Of Reason

[SCB 15]

What an utterly, ill-informed, patronising post.

 

Most of us on here are TRUE Speedway Supporters. Unlike many other 'various sports' supporters, we hold our particular sport close to our heart. In most cases, I'd suggest that we have been Speedway fans since a VERY early age,

 

Irresepctive of the teams, or riders, that we support, the last thing that we EVER want to see is riders getting hurt. Simple reason is, as Speedway Supporters, and despite our dislikes, the LAST thing that we want see is rider injury.

 

Basically, to suggest otherwise Orion, you truly are a complete and utter CLOWN.

Orions point is spot on. When I complained about the Lakeside heat 10 a few people told me I was wrong, nobody agreed with me. 4 weeks later it's the the worst thing ever.

[mdmc82 2,878]

Orions point is spot on. When I complained about the Lakeside heat 10 a few people told me I was wrong, nobody agreed with me. 4 weeks later it's the the worst thing ever.

I don't think any meeting should be declared after 10 heats.

However the weather was no way near as bad against lakeside. It was light drizzle for most of it and still good race times with light rain coming nearer the latter heats. We have seen many teams race in those conditions

 

Against Poole it was gale force winds and heavy rain from the start. The worst conditions I have seen speedway raced it. The race times were 6 seconds slower and no visability.

Edited June 13, 2015 by mdmc82

[foreverblue 6,125]

I don't think any meeting should be declared after 10 heats.

However the weather was no way near as bad against lakeside. It was light drizzle for most of it and still good race times with light rain coming nearer the latter heats. We have seen many teams race in those conditions

 

Against Poole it was gale force winds and heavy rain from the start. The worst conditions I have seen speedway raced it. The race times were 6 seconds slower and no visability.

That is rubbish it was not gale force winds or heavy rain from the start it was windy and light rain it even stopped briefly on one or two occassions it only became really heavy at the end. The races were not noticeably slow at the start. Edited June 13, 2015 by foreverblue

[Woz01 3,589]

If I remember correctly the wind was recorded at 45mph in Coventry that night. It must've been windy as Tatum was nearly knocked over by it. The first heat was 2-3 seconds slower than usual and the race times steadily got slower. When you get race times slower than what Dwyer and Knuckey get at NL level then you know you have a problem.

Edited June 13, 2015 by woz01