Coventry Vs Buxton/rye

[SCB 0]

Why is it bad sportsmanship to not want to ride in potentially dangerous conditions?

Because when Coventry did it they got fined £3,900 and Poole gained 4 league points. Now look at the EL table, Poole have beat Coventry by 4 league points. Why is it suddenly different? Either Coventry were cheated in the EL or Coventry were cheated in the NL. Which is it?

[Heathen1984 139]

Exactly what I mean Neil Watson, should of been called on before 12 on that day with the amount of rain, joke of a club.

[NeilWatson 1,988]

Exactly what I mean Neil Watson, should of been called on before 12 on that day with the amount of rain, joke of a club.

In your opinion, a phrase that is missing from so much propounded on this site. It was not our opinion, nor that of the referee.

Because when Coventry did it they got fined £3,900 and Poole gained 4 league points. Now look at the EL table, Poole have beat Coventry by 4 league points. Why is it suddenly different? Either Coventry were cheated in the EL or Coventry were cheated in the NL. Which is it?

£4125...

[Halifaxtiger 5,318]

There is a famous old saying...........The customer is always right. even when he is wrong.

Given the perilous financial state of british speedway in general I wouldn't imagine they can afford to lose too many more customers. A little bit of tact could go a long way.

 

While I completely agree with that view, I don't think what Neil has said on this thread is either unreasonable or put in a way that might give offence.

 

I agree with Gem, too. Its most unusual (and equally most welcome)to have a member of a promotion come on this forum and give their side of the story and while I don't always agree with him I think Neil deserves a great deal of credit for it. Speedway fans are always complaining about the lack of interaction between them and promotions and his comments on here are most valuable.

 

When I was critical of a certain promotion this season (after a meeting was abandoned due to the state of the track) all I got from a co-promoter was a refusal to speak to me - even though I was perfectly prepared to speak reasonably - and, eventually, a load of abuse. What's worse, that's not the first time its happened. Needless to say I haven't been back - nor will I be doing so.

 

That's how you drive people away, not by at least attempting to communicate with them.

Edited September 13, 2015 by Halifaxtiger

[Ben91 1,743]

Because when Coventry did it they got fined £3,900 and Poole gained 4 league points. Now look at the EL table, Poole have beat Coventry by 4 league points. Why is it suddenly different? Either Coventry were cheated in the EL or Coventry were cheated in the NL. Which is it?

When Coventry did it in the EL I was fully behind their decision to be honest. Rider safety is paramount.

[arnieg 3,651]

Because when Coventry did it they got fined £3,900 and Poole gained 4 league points. Now look at the EL table, Poole have beat Coventry by 4 league points. Why is it suddenly different? Either Coventry were cheated in the EL or Coventry were cheated in the NL. Which is it?

I don't think the Storm were "cheated" on Friday - the referee assessed the conditions and took the appropriate decisions.

 

From that you would be correct in concluding that I might have a different view of the Cov v Poole fiasco.

[Gemini 4,894]

 

 

I don't think the Storm were "cheated" on Friday - the referee assessed the conditions and took the appropriate decisions.

 

My opinion too and I would add that the first match was run at a fast pace with the 2 minutes being put on whilst the riders from the previous race were still on the track so a good referee that night, who I think was Dave Watters.

[Dave Jones 2,127]

 

While I completely agree with that view, I don't think what Neil has said on this thread is either unreasonable or put in a way that might give offence.

 

I agree with Gem, too. Its most unusual (and equally most welcome)to have a member of a promotion come on this forum and give their side of the story and while I don't always agree with him I think Neil deserves a great deal of credit for it. Speedway fans are always complaining about the lack of interaction between them and promotions and his comments on here are most valuable.

 

When I was critical of a certain promotion this season (after a meeting was abandoned due to the state of the track) all I got from a co-promoter was a refusal to speak to me - even though I was perfectly prepared to speak reasonably - and, eventually, a load of abuse. What's worse, that's not the first time its happened. Needless to say I haven't been back - nor will I be doing so.

 

That's how you drive people away, not by at least attempting to communicate with them.

Hi HT,

 

My posts on this topic were borne out of a concern for the content in many of Neil Watson's posts recently, not just this topic but others too.

The clubs PR is extremely poor in my opinion, and I feel that over the last few weeks some of Neil's replies to posts on the BSF have shown an element of frustration, to put it politely.

I don't buy in to this approach that because he posts on here he must be better than the rest, he should be judged on the content in his replies to customers concerns,many of which have shown signs of someone who is losing his patience.

He put himself up as spokesman for the bees on this forum, and as such has to take the criticism, along with the praise, it's the nature of the job.

[Halifaxtiger 5,318]

Hi HT,

 

My posts on this topic were borne out of a concern for the content in many of Neil Watson's posts recently, not just this topic but others too.

The clubs PR is extremely poor in my opinion, and I feel that over the last few weeks some of Neil's replies to posts on the BSF have shown an element of frustration, to put it politely.

I don't buy in to this approach that because he posts on here he must be better than the rest, he should be judged on the content in his replies to customers concerns,many of which have shown signs of someone who is losing his patience.

He put himself up as spokesman for the bees on this forum, and as such has to take the criticism, along with the praise, it's the nature of the job.

 

We'll have to agree to disagree, I think.

 

To be fair, I haven't read his comments elsewhere.

 

Of course comments count but I think is better than the rest because, for the most part, others simply regard the BSF as a haven for ignorant imbeciles who have no right to criticise. In a refusal to make remarks on this forum about an issue - safety - that rates the most highest, the Kent press officer, for example, described it as being 'utterly without credibility'.

 

While I don't doubt there's a lot of rubbish on here, there are also an awful lot of absolutely genuine, decent fans who spend a great deal of money watching speedway and who have every right to voice their opinions for those reasons.

 

Neil at least tries to respond rather than treating us with contempt and, as I know only too well, abuse. He deserves credit for that.

 

I know ex Sheffield promoter Dave Hoggart a bit and I tried hard to get him to respond to comment on this forum and do so without any side, hostility or aggression.

 

I can remember one occasion when did just that and got 15 likes, simply because as a result of what he did he looked upon the likes of you & I as paying customers, not as unfortunate necessities.

[BuxtonTiger 122]

And the curfew time at Coventry is?

[NeilWatson 1,988]

My comments here are either factual responses to fans' enquiries, or an attempt (often in vain) to bring a balance against a few posters who seem to delight in using insults, innuendo, and downright lies to bring discredit on our Club.

 

This is made difficult at times by the confidential information I have access to that others outside the Club do not, which would often put a completely different complexion on topics where posters are convinced they are right, when in fact they are totally wrong.

 

I am privileged to be a speedway promoter, but I am a fan first and foremost and enjoy sharing my love for the sport where I can.

 

At the end of the day, there is always the ignore button if you're so concerned about my contributions!

 

Back to the racing -Coventry 32, Cradley 24

Edited September 13, 2015 by NeilWatson

[mdmc82 2,878]

Cradley are making a joke of this meeting.

They sneak another reserve in to heat 10 rerun after the other fell, then he gets injured and they bring the 1st one back in.

They are then given ages for him to sort bike problems.

 

Then as heat 11 is due to start, They can't find Neale. Another delay while the ref tries to find out what is going on. It turns out Neale has no other bike so is pulling out. Nice of Heathens to inform everybody else.

We now have Cradley fans pushing the riders bikes. Couldn't make it up.

Perks is then not out in heat 14 due to a hand injury (I'm sure it's nothing to do with the punch he gave the wall earlier)

 

A very deserving win for Coventry Storm who did what they were there to do, race.

They would have certainly have finished slot higher if they had been able to get all their meetings in.

Still think they might fall short of the golden cup due to the abandonment on Rye House's part on Friday.

Edited September 13, 2015 by mdmc82

[Dave Jones 2,127]

My comments here are either factual responses to fans' enquiries, or an attempt (often in vain) to bring a balance against a few posters who seem to delight in using insults, innuendo, and downright lies to bring discredit on our Club.

 

This is made difficult at times by the confidential information I have access to that others outside the Club do not, which would often put a completely different complexion on topics where posters are convinced they are right, when in fact they are totally wrong.

 

I am privileged to be a speedway promoter, but I am a fan first and foremost and enjoy sharing my love for the sport where I can.

 

At the end of the day, there is always the ignore button if you're so concerned about my contributions!

 

Back to the racing -Coventry 32, Cradley 24

Why should I put you on ignore ? You are a promoter of the club I have supported for over half a century. I want to read your posts,I want to know what's happening, and if I feel the need then I will comment on it. I was under the impression that is what a forum was all about.

You don't do yourself any favours by trotting out the well used speedway term " if you don't like it, don't read it" response.

[Alan_Jones 1,005]

From the Coventry web site;

 

COVENTRY Storm are to be awarded a win from their abandoned National League clash with Rye House.

The September 11 fixture was brought to a halt due to rain after eight races with the City Gearboxes Storm in a clear 32-19 lead over the Raiders.

This is two heats short of the official cut-off upon which a result would be declared whatever the scoreline, but the SCB have ruled that score after Heat 8 will stand.

Their judgement is that the situation meets the criteria of SR15.12, incorporating the ability for the SCB to award a meeting that is not completed but is mathematically secure in exceptional circumstances.

Even had the Raiders secured two 5-0s in the next two races, the Storm would still have been in front on the night after Heat 10.

[Gemini 4,894]

Good ~ it would be stupid to have to run the whole match again. Just two to go then.