mdmc82 2,878 Posted June 20, 2015 (edited) Not sure why there's so much confusion about the guest last night. Sarjeant wasn't missing through injury for Glasgow last night, he was missing due to EL priorities (he was missing for Coventry through injury as that is where he would have been) If a gentlemen's agreement had been made between the two promoters then yes it is morally wrong but not illegal with regards to the rule books. Edited June 20, 2015 by mdmc82 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Albert 304 Posted June 20, 2015 Dubious in what way we were entitled to a guest facility simple as Sergeant was due to ride for Coventry last night and the guest was named before his injury as you have to 3 day's prior you should be looking at your own team for not performing better rather than blame Glasgow for something that they were entitled to, Hardly a hollow victory we loved it should sit down and read your last sentence it really does smack off bitterness. Nah...no bitterness from me, I didn't expect to win, I stand by my comments. It does however grind a little that the Glasgow promotion illegibly backstabbed Rob regarding a gentlemans agreement over David Howe. If as Rob suggested, he agreed to release David and let you use him against us as long as you didn't also use a guest... In hindsight, Rob should've just held the deal back a week, wouldn't of been fair on David Howe....but then again, life ain't fair. Glasgow as a team, deserved there victory, on the night Scunny didn't have the riders with any consistency to challenge Lawson, Morris and the match defining Covatti. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lucifer sam 3,954 Posted June 20, 2015 Dubious in what way we were entitled to a guest facility simple as Sergeant was due to ride for Coventry last night and the guest was named before his injury as you have to 3 day's prior you should be looking at your own team for not performing better rather than blame Glasgow for something that they were entitled to, Hardly a hollow victory we loved it should sit down and read your last sentence it really does smack off bitterness. Gaz, did you hear what Rob Godfrey said last night? Fair play to Glasgow for winning on the night. But to use a guest when Rob G requested rider replacement, after he allowed you to track David Howe last night, is poor form. As well as written rules, there are unwritten ones. A gentleman's agreement should be just that. Instead the Tigers management have shown themselves to be win-at-all-costs. As you know I'm often sympathetic to Glasgow, but not in this case. All the best Rob 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nagy1 246 Posted June 20, 2015 (edited) A fairly decent win last night for the Tigs! Being the greedy guy I am we should of had all 4 points though! There was an "accident blackspot" where turn 1 meets turn 2! It caught many a rider out and caused a couple of very nasty crashes, thankfully most people walked away from. Just a note to the home fans, we were cheering the boys getting a 1-5 not the rider that had fell off!!!!! I was very impressed with the track & facilities, would also like to thank the promotion for organising the cold weather to make us feel at home. Richard Lawson looked great and I was impressed with Theo, looked really quick. Some of the referee's decisions were baffling. How he excluded Dmitri when he had gated, was leading as he was about to exit turn 2 and a Scorpions rider took him out(unintentionally is beyond me. Finally on to the centre green rant from the promoter. He said he gave Glasgow permission to speak to David Howe not expecting David to agree to to ride for Glasgow. Then when Glasgow arranged a deal he asked us not to use a guest for James Sargeant. The Glasgow representative said "i'll see what the boss says". The boss obviously wanted to field the strongest team possible so we got a guest which was within the rules. There was no "gentlemans agreement" from what I heard. So when does giving permission to speak to a rider let you make decisions on the rest of the opposing team? Really didn't see what his point was. It is great that he wanted to inform the fans of the happenings but it came across as a bitter man whining! Edited June 20, 2015 by nagy1 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thebaron 434 Posted June 20, 2015 (edited) Rob said we were done over by Glasgee using Covatti as a guest for Sargeant and so it proved. Covatti's 10pt return as Tigers came out 47-42 was essentially the difference. That said Scorps did give it a right old go especially Nike Lunna in his opening rides. Two wins and having a blast on the outside line. But he came off big style in Heat11 in an alarming turn2 spill!. Bikes n bits all over the place as Nike went for the gap in the pack into turn2 lap1 that suddenly shut on him! Bike spectacularly shears off over the fence. My concern was for Nick Morris who was hit from behind. But some how both riders walked away!. Nikes a great talent; thats clear but hes gotta weigh up things a bit before making that move. Cannot fault any of the Scorps all chipped in and made it hard for the would be Champions. Jacobsen could not repeat his last EWR form that got him the booking alas. So thats where we lacked a bit in response to Tigers for whom Lawson was imperious on an unbeaten 15pt max. David Howe was clearly feeling his way back into it and it was a odd situation to make his return. But theres no rancour from the Scorps support and he goes to Tigers with thanks and best wishes. Rob made that very clear; his beef was with the guest for Sargeant that reneged the agreement he had with Tigers. There was a daft incident in Heat12 all 4 at tapes Summers bike plays up. He pulls away drops bike centre green and runs back to pits for second bike ON 2 MINS!. Count down on with 30secs left on his way back to tapes appears to make it; but Lawson brings another bike up to the tapes for Summers? Exclusion siren on! Summers exc two mins; bit of delay Summers now off 15metres. Well no on comes Scorps club man Rick Hollingsworth to tell Summers he was never excluded! So all 4 back to tapes ???.Ref clearly excluded Summers but then said the siren was to end the two mins and send Lawson (who brought out the third bike for Summers) from the track. Keep up because I'm lost ! Anyway Wilko and Willy slammed in a 5-1 to cut the defecit to one point 35-36 with three heats to go. Thing now is no racing until 10 July! at Scunny which cannot be ideal if you want to retain interest amongst the floating support. Crowd was up slightly last night for me; and a bit of atmosphere and support getting behind the team. Fact; we cant have Josh and Ryan out and not miss them. But you got to give credit to the rest of them for battling through this injury crisis. Once Josh and Ryan are back we will be a different proposition make no mistake about that!. On to Worky and keep the faith. Edited June 20, 2015 by the outsider 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Paul Johnson 285 Posted June 20, 2015 i didnt think rob said that david wouldnt go to glasgow.... he said "he didnt expect david to ride again this year", then he heard that he wanted to go to glasgow and it was ironic that it was scunny on friday, so he gave permission for dave to go on loan as he had to problem with david wanting to ride again but asked (i quess the manager) that if i lend you him please dont use a quest for sarjeant," so for rob to ok davids move glasgow must of done a gentlemans agreement which they have backed out of? hence the "win at all costs" i also think that sarjeant was missing because he was doubling up, he wasnt missing got he got injured as he would of been missing any way, with the summers incident at the tapes... seemed to me that he did delay the start because his bike stopped, he was the primary cause of the stoppage ,if his bike hadnt packed up then everthings hunky dory, the ref put the red lights on to halt the start? , maybe to stop all the riders revving up etc? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nagy1 246 Posted June 20, 2015 No agreement was made!!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
racers and royals 8,745 Posted June 20, 2015 How ironic Scunny moaning about an "illegal guest " when on at least 1 occasion they have used an illegal guest for a rider away longtracking. !!! 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
June 203 Posted June 20, 2015 The rule was dubious because if the r/r rule states that it is intended for an injured rider, that should be it. doesn't matter when or how the injury occurred end of! guest cancelled. In the same way I believe the rule for No 1 is the allowance of a guest that we used. Us using r/r of Ryan one would have cancelled the other. Not Glasgow's fault but that of BSP rule. Would Glasgow had beaten Scunny doing r/r I doubt it. Your guest turned out to be your 2nd best rider on the night. He got 3 wins from 4 races. 10 + 1 A very good showing, impressive rider! Not the best meeting. Missed you Josh you'd have been in your element on that outside line. Sure we would have won it with you! Hurry up to get back SCORPIONS need you! 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Al Stewart 398 Posted June 20, 2015 Fair play to Glasgow for winning on the night. But to use a guest when Rob G requested rider replacement, after he allowed you to track David Howe last night, is poor form. As well as written rules, there are unwritten ones. A gentleman's agreement should be just that. Instead the Tigers management have shown themselves to be win-at-all-costs. As you know I'm often sympathetic to Glasgow, but not in this case. All the best Rob You are learning. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nagy1 246 Posted June 20, 2015 You are learning. Shock horror, a Monarch jumping on the anti-Glasgow bandwagon! Your meeting reports are more than enough! Glasgow have done nothing wrong or illegal here so stop the stirring!! 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gazc 7,137 Posted June 20, 2015 Gaz, did you hear what Rob Godfrey said last night? Fair play to Glasgow for winning on the night. But to use a guest when Rob G requested rider replacement, after he allowed you to track David Howe last night, is poor form. As well as written rules, there are unwritten ones. A gentleman's agreement should be just that. Instead the Tigers management have shown themselves to be win-at-all-costs. As you know I'm often sympathetic to Glasgow, but not in this case. All the best Rob Fair do's Rob but no i didn't hear what Rob Godfrey said i am sure he is saying what he believes be interesting what our take is on those comments and if this agreement was in place i am sure we will have our version off what was said and Rob G has his but as i have now read some posts since i got back in i see nagy1 has referred to there being no agreement which knowing our management team would seem more plausible as they are not in the habit off shafting anyone. The rule was dubious because if the r/r rule states that it is intended for an injured rider, that should be it. doesn't matter when or how the injury occurred end of! guest cancelled. In the same way I believe the rule for No 1 is the allowance of a guest that we used. Us using r/r of Ryan one would have cancelled the other. Not Glasgow's fault but that of BSP rule. Would Glasgow had beaten Scunny doing r/r I doubt it. Your guest turned out to be your 2nd best rider on the night. He got 3 wins from 4 races. 10 + 1 A very good showing, impressive rider! Not the best meeting. Missed you Josh you'd have been in your element on that outside line. Sure we would have won it with you! Hurry up to get back SCORPIONS need you! But it is not as simple as that Glasgow had provided details off there team line up 3 days prior to the meeting with Covatti included as a guest for James who was riding for Coventry last night but was then injured on Wednesday after the team was declared either way he was going to miss last night as he was due to ride for his parent club and under the rules we had the facility to field a guest which we have done legitimately wether people like it or not. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
george.m 3,063 Posted June 20, 2015 Appreciate I might be seen by others as being biased, but a genuinely neutral view on this, and for any other time/club who act similarly. Surely the ultimate job of promoters is to have as many riders racing as possible to entertain the public? Not restricting who should had shouldn't appear? Short changing your customers ... not good business practice. And yes I appreciate it depends on folk's interpretation of the word "entertain", because for some that means winning. And yes I know some may call me naive, but I'm not talking about whether or not it happens. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tyretrax 2,255 Posted June 20, 2015 You are learning. Ofcourse the Moanarchs never bend the rules. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thebaron 434 Posted June 20, 2015 Would this work rather than running with a guest rider?. Simply allow the team minus a top rider due to injury; to start the meeting on +his average. So last night Scunny start on 8 Glasgow 0 and Scunny then bring in a No8 say Matt Williamson. We promote Lunna into the team. So Glasgows task is to ride down our +8 start. This way we field a genuine Scunny 1-7 and the need to include guests at every turn is lessened. If you think about it the whole premise for building a team is based on numbers on paper not on the track.So its not incomprehensible that a team losing a top man be permitted to start with a points "loader" equivalent to his average. Its up to that team to defend those points and the opposition to chase it down. That may add a bit of extra spice to meetings As well as giving No8s experience. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
