Coventry V Poole 1/6/15

[BWitcher 12,453]

I've not read all the current 43 pages on this thread so please forgive me if this has already been covered but does a football match result stand if its called off after 60 minutes (2/3rds) of its allocated time ? No it doesn't and formula 1 Grand Prix racing only awards 1/2 points if a race is curtailed before it run its course ! The 10 heat rule definitely requires looking at .

 

This meeting was only run because sky were there and should never have happened .

 

It turned into a total farce and shame on the sport (if you can call it a sport) for allowing it to descend to new levels of incompetence !

 

 

Cricket results can stand with much less than 2/3rds of a match completed.

 

Baseball results can stand with 2/3rds of a match completed.

[Jacques 3,114]

I can't believe I'm going to do this because I'm far from a fan of his but I have to defend Havelock. What Havelock did showed true integrity, something that is sadly lacking. It was his opinion that the track was unsafe to race on, an opinion held and apparently agreed on by even some in the Poole ranks, before the rerun of heat 10. He was promised a visual track inspection would take place and this was not forthcoming. His refusal to allow his riders to take to what he considered and unsafe track which had not been inspected and what followed when Holder lost control probably saved riders from injury. He was the only one there prepared to actually take a stand.

 

I also feel for Horton - not a fan of his really either. There is little doubt that had this not been a Sky meeting it would have been postponed early morning the same at the Wolves and Belle Vue meetings. I've been to plenty of meetings at Brandon in the last 10 years and I can tell you that whether or not it's on Sky it's the biggest pay day of the season when Poole are in town.

 

Forget blame and petty rivalries for a moment - British Speedway was the loser on Monday and frankly it can't afford that to be the case many more times!!

 

It's a shame you don't post more often these days Chris, always the voice of reason

[Grachan 7,362]

I recall matches being rained off and a date for the re-staging being announced as we left the stadium. That possibly can't happen these days.

True. Normally after heat 6.

[SPEEDY69 1,260]

I can't believe I'm going to do this because I'm far from a fan of his but I have to defend Havelock. What Havelock did showed true integrity, something that is sadly lacking. It was his opinion that the track was unsafe to race on, an opinion held and apparently agreed on by even some in the Poole ranks, before the rerun of heat 10. He was promised a visual track inspection would take place and this was not forthcoming. His refusal to allow his riders to take to what he considered and unsafe track which had not been inspected and what followed when Holder lost control probably saved riders from injury. He was the only one there prepared to actually take a stand.

 

I also feel for Horton - not a fan of his really either. There is little doubt that had this not been a Sky meeting it would have been postponed early morning the same at the Wolves and Belle Vue meetings. I've been to plenty of meetings at Brandon in the last 10 years and I can tell you that whether or not it's on Sky it's the biggest pay day of the season when Poole are in town.

 

Forget blame and petty rivalries for a moment - British Speedway was the loser on Monday and frankly it can't afford that to be the case many more times!!

 

The rather obvious response to this is though, would Havelock had shown this integrity had the meeting scores been reversed?? I agree about the promised track inspection - the meeting steward is wholly to blame there. Holder losing control is a red herring, was just a grippy patch that Andersen hit earlier, it's the heat 10 cut off that needs removing and the scenes didn't show the sport as particulalry well run.

[ouch 1,191]

Arya, it's not rubbish or even my opinion it's fact as caught on film.

Dispicable.

The "he does it govnor so I thought I would" augment doesnt wash with me I'm afraid.

[mickthemuppet 976]

 

 

Cricket results can stand with much less than 2/3rds of a match completed.

 

Baseball results can stand with 2/3rds of a match completed.

Sometimes boxing matches are completed with only !0% of the time used

[orion 7,615]

The problem is Speedway live matches should not be on television. Televising Speedway has done no favours in this country. The sooner it is taken off the TV the better. I would think the gates have gone down by two thirds since the Elite League has been on Sky.

Another speedway myth ...the crowds had been dropping even before sky come on ....do you really think bar the matches that are shown live that speedway crowds are going to shoot up the moment it's not shown on tv ....

[BWitcher 12,453]

Another speedway myth ...the crowds had been dropping even before sky come on ....do you really think bar the matches that are shown live that speedway crowds are going to shoot up the moment it's not shown on tv ....

 

tbf its partially right, but only because of the incompetence of the sport and its promotion.

 

The constant showing of speedway in front of empty stadiums does not help the sport at all.

 

The previous 2 sky meets in front of bigger, noisy crowds do the sport wonders.

 

Sadly the promoters, 15 years in, still haven't grasped this very, very basic concept.

 

As such the problem isn't tv.. its the promoters who quite simply no longer promote, just rely on their existing fan base which is ever shrinking.

[mickthemuppet 976]

Another speedway myth ...the crowds had been dropping even before sky come on ....do you really think bar the matches that are shown live that speedway crowds are going to shoot up the moment it's not shown on tv ....

That's rather an oxymoron isn't it

[orion 7,615]

The rather obvious response to this is though, would Havelock had shown this integrity had the meeting scores been reversed?? I agree about the promised track inspection - the meeting steward is wholly to blame there. Holder losing control is a red herring, was just a grippy patch that Andersen hit earlier, it's the heat 10 cut off that needs removing and the scenes didn't show the sport as particulalry well run.

Spot on ..as others have said at other times Havelock has been more than happy quickly race to heat 10 when suited him an aslo Horton ...so far I have never seen any intergrity from someone winning the meeting when heat 10 comes about .

[stevebrum 6,821]

The problem is Speedway live matches should not be on television. Televising Speedway has done no favours in this country. The sooner it is taken off the TV the better. I would think the gates have gone down by two thirds since the Elite League has been on Sky.

Yea great idea, not.

Take away the TV audience who won't suddenly all start turning up to live Speedway - they will be lost to the sport. So infact you are advocating we lose yet more of a viewing audience.

[21st century heathen 220]

 

It's a shame you don't post more often these days Chris, always the voice of reason

 

Thanks.

 

 

The rather obvious response to this is though, would Havelock had shown this integrity had the meeting scores been reversed?? I agree about the promised track inspection - the meeting steward is wholly to blame there. Holder losing control is a red herring, was just a grippy patch that Andersen hit earlier, it's the heat 10 cut off that needs removing and the scenes didn't show the sport as particulalry well run.

 

That cannot, of course, be answered simply yes or no as it's pure conjecture. What we do now know is that Holder is of the opinion that the meetings should never have started, that Watt (when taking a 0-5 with Starke) passed comment that he couldn't see well and almost fell despite being out front on his own and under no pressure, that both sides wanted a track inspection before heat 9. At this time, with two heats to go (as it turned out), there was no way of knowing which team would be leading if/when the meeting was called to an end. My point being that considerable concerns had already been raised. It seems to me that the 'tipping point' for Havelock was when the promised track inspection was subsequently refused. We all know Havelock is a strong character and will state his opinion with no concern for whether it's popular or not. I would suggest that he almost certainly had no concern whatsoever at this point for the meeting score and his actions were driven solely by anger at the refusal of a track inspection that had been promised just moments earlier.

 

With regard to Holder's temporary lose of control on the first corner - What caused it is utterly irrelevant to the point I made, though a soft grippy patch on an otherwise rock hard slippery surface would have been down to the specifics of the track at that time and in the weather at the time. My point was merely that having the courage to state, figuratively or literally, that he (Havelock) believed the track to be unsafe and he would therefore not risk the safety of his riders showed integrity (or call it strength of character to take a stand in other words) and regardless of why Holder lost control for a moment almost certainly did save riders from injury.

 

With regard to the heat 10 rule - As SCB has stated it's not the rule itself that's an issue but rather the juxtaposition of its intended and actual application. Self-interest is rife and this rule, combined with weak officiating has led us to what we saw on Monday evening.

 

It's my opinion that the meeting referee should rule the meeting with an iron fist. He/she should have sole control of the meeting. If mistakes are made then he/she can, of course, be held accountable afterwards. To have a race director or meeting steward taking part control from the referee is utterly ridiculous. I would go so far as to extend this further and state that meetings being called off by committee with referees holding meetings with riders and team managers is also a mistake. Riders and team managers will always be accused of self-interest in either continuing or abandoning a meeting. The referee is impartial and should be trained and/or experienced enough to recognise the signs when a track becomes unfit for racing. No consideration should be given to what heat the meeting is up to nor what the score is. It should be simply the referee's decision that the track is safe to continue or it isn't.

Spot on ..as others have said at other times Havelock has been more than happy quickly race to heat 10 when suited him an aslo Horton ...so far I have never seen any intergrity from someone winning the meeting when heat 10 comes about .

 

And in different circumstance I may have another opinion about the actions of any one person. You point is also why I state the opinion of those whose interest is in concluding early or continuing a meeting should not be considered at all by the referee.

[BWitcher 12,453]

 

Thanks.

 

 

That cannot, of course, be answered simply yes or no as it's pure conjecture. What we do now know is that Holder is of the opinion that the meetings should never have started, that Watt (when taking a 0-5 with Starke) passed comment that he couldn't see well and almost fell despite being out front on his own and under no pressure, that both sides wanted a track inspection before heat 9. At this time, with two heats to go (as it turned out), there was no way of knowing which team would be leading if/when the meeting was called to an end. My point being that considerable concerns had already been raised. It seems to me that the 'tipping point' for Havelock was when the promised track inspection was subsequently refused. We all know Havelock is a strong character and will state his opinion with no concern for whether it's popular or not. I would suggest that he almost certainly had no concern whatsoever at this point for the meeting score and his actions were driven solely by anger at the refusal of a track inspection that had been promised just moments earlier.

 

With regard to Holder's temporary lose of control on the first corner - What caused it is utterly irrelevant to the point I made, though a soft grippy patch on an otherwise rock hard slippery surface would have been down to the specifics of the track at that time and in the weather at the time. My point was merely that having the courage to state, figuratively or literally, that he (Havelock) believed the track to be unsafe and he would therefore not risk the safety of his riders showed integrity (or call it strength of character to take a stand in other words) and regardless of why Holder lost control for a moment almost certainly did save riders from injury.

 

With regard to the heat 10 rule - As SCB has stated it's not the rule itself that's an issue but rather the juxtaposition of its intended and actual application. Self-interest is rife and this rule, combined with weak officiating has led us to what we saw on Monday evening.

 

It's my opinion that the meeting referee should rule the meeting with an iron fist. He/she should have sole control of the meeting. If mistakes are made then he/she can, of course, be held accountable afterwards. To have a race director or meeting steward taking part control from the referee is utterly ridiculous. I would go so far as to extend this further and state that meetings being called off by committee with referees holding meetings with riders and team managers is also a mistake. Riders and team managers will always be accused of self-interest in either continuing or abandoning a meeting. The referee is impartial and should be trained and/or experienced enough to recognise the signs when a track becomes unfit for racing. No consideration should be given to what heat the meeting is up to nor what the score is. It should be simply the referee's decision that the track is safe to continue or it isn't.

 

And in different circumstance I may have another opinion about the actions of any one person. You point is also why I state the opinion of those whose interest is in concluding early or continuing a meeting should not be considered at all by the referee.

 

Best post on the thread, I agree 100% with everything you say.

[SPEEDY69 1,260]

 

It's my opinion that the meeting referee should rule the meeting with an iron fist. He/she should have sole control of the meeting. If mistakes are made then he/she can, of course, be held accountable afterwards. To have a race director or meeting steward taking part control from the referee is utterly ridiculous. I would go so far as to extend this further and state that meetings being called off by committee with referees holding meetings with riders and team managers is also a mistake. Riders and team managers will always be accused of self-interest in either continuing or abandoning a meeting. The referee is impartial and should be trained and/or experienced enough to recognise the signs when a track becomes unfit for racing. No consideration should be given to what heat the meeting is up to nor what the score is. It should be simply the referee's decision that the track is safe to continue or it isn't.

 

This is exactly what I said in an earlier post - the steward is pointless and I agree that the growing power of riders/officials to influence the ref is not doing the sport any good.

[Fromafar 10,363]

This is exactly what I said in an earlier post - the steward is pointless and I agree that the growing power of riders/officials to influence the ref is not doing the sport any good.

I agree,the Ref's are not strong enough these days,riders and Team Managers harass them too much.The point being that it is seldom the riders and Team Managers agree just like Monday purely because of self interest and score at the time.Speedway is a dangerous sport but that card is used too often now.Watt would moan if the track was perfect ,he didn't even have any opposition and he was telling how hard it was.Tiddlywinks springs to mind!!!!. No fan in their right mind will turn up on a wet night if they had any sense .just to watch a squabble between Managers,riders and officials.