Phil The Ace 2,860 Posted June 19, 2016 today's meeting is off. I'm looking forward to hear the reasons for this. Sounds like a lot of petty antics from mildenhall promotion. All though it's best to wait for mildenhall press release Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shadders 4,135 Posted June 19, 2016 Surely not the weather? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Phil The Ace 2,860 Posted June 19, 2016 Maybe something to do with Matt Williamson guesting for chessell Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
davi 5 Posted June 19, 2016 Maybe something to do with Matt Williamson guesting for chessell I can imagine Mr Yawnthorne and his Spoon mates will be on over drive now on the NL facebook page Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Slip Slide 0 Posted June 19, 2016 This will take some explaining Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
greyhoundp 990 Posted June 19, 2016 I can imagine Mr Yawnthorne and his Spoon mates will be on over drive now on the NL facebook page Well dont they have every right to be ?. My take on all of the goings on today is that Speedway once again shoots itself in the foot, is it on or off ? The Mildenhall Team Manager was saying it was off at around 9-30ish, but his assistant and PO was saying at 11-00ish that it was on, whatever the reasons are its done no good for the Sport in general, and shows why its losing fans year in year out and seems utterly incapable of doing anything to stop it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shadders 4,135 Posted June 19, 2016 Considering the tough stance the SCB took on Belle Vue over the famous "burst pipe" fake call off, they're going to have to come down like a ton of bricks on Mildenhall as this is far worse. You can't have clubs spitting the dummy and calling meetings off because they don't like the opposition's choice of guest. That would be setting a dangerous precedent. There's got to be a big fine, docking of 3 points, and a sanction on Mildenhall not calling off meetings without an SCB officials permission for 2 years. And looking at how David Hemsley was treated for his conduct, I'd be sweating about whether I'd be able to keep my promoters' licence if I was Kevin Jolly. Feel some sympathy for Mildenhall. Kevin Jolly is obviously upset, I don't blame him. Not sure if this is the correct way to go about things though 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bandits4eva 1,003 Posted June 19, 2016 I'd like to know how Cradley were looking to get a facility because one of their riders doesn't have machinery.. Read that Mildenhall were going to loan out an engine too... 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shadders 4,135 Posted June 19, 2016 Why? As long as the guest is legal and has a lower average than the rider he is replacing, what right has Jolly got to try to choose the opposition guest rider? What right has he got to call a meeting off because he wants to have a tantrum? I had some sympathy for Belle Vue over burst pipe gate. They faced a huge financial loss if they ran a one-sided meeting without top stars due to an unfortunate missed flight. Mildenhall haven't done this due to facing a financial loss (in fact it was an attactive fixture which would draw a big crowd). They have done it purely due to having a tantrum. If Mildenhall thought there was anything wrong with the eligibility of the guest, they should have ridden under protest. Why? I don't like Cradley supporters Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Alan_Jones 1,005 Posted June 19, 2016 I'd like to know how Cradley were looking to get a facility because one of their riders doesn't have machinery.. Read that Mildenhall were going to loan out an engine too... In the NL you can have a facility for any reason. At the end of last season we had a guest (or may have been R/R) for, funnily enough, Luke Chessell and he was in the pits supporting the Raiders. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Halifaxtiger 5,318 Posted June 19, 2016 (edited) Why? As long as the guest is legal and has a lower average than the rider he is replacing, what right has Jolly got to try to choose the opposition guest rider? What right has he got to call a meeting off because he wants to have a tantrum? I had some sympathy for Belle Vue over burst pipe gate. They faced a huge financial loss if they ran a one-sided meeting without top stars due to an unfortunate missed flight. Mildenhall haven't done this due to facing a financial loss (in fact it was an attactive fixture which would draw a big crowd). They have done it purely due to having a tantrum. Because there's no way on this earth you should be allowed a guest because a rider doesn't have machinery (although according to the Mildenhall facebook page there was a bike waiting for him at West Row). That's beyond reason, and makes the use of guests (already a major sore point with a large number of speedway fans) farcical. What makes matters worse is that Jon Armstrong's wife recently had a baby that was some months premature. I don't think there was any serious risk to the child, but clearly there was some hospital treatment over and above the norm that was necessary. Not surprisingly, Armstrong wanted to be with his wife. Mildenhall were refused a guest and had to run with rider replacement. How can you justify allowing a guest for a rider without a bike - when in actual fact he has one - when you refuse to do so for a father with a new born child ? Its just another appalling example of the shocking and irresponsible decision making that the sport is subject to, and one thing is certain - we won't find out who made the decision or why. As far as I am concerned, Shads has it just about spot on. Kevin Jolly has every reason to be furious, but he shouldn't have called the meeting off because he'll be poleaxed for it and it looks like little more than spitting a dummy. I should add this is all speculation; the actual reason for postponement hasn't been made public. Edited June 19, 2016 by Halifaxtiger 6 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shadders 4,135 Posted June 19, 2016 Halifax Tiger is spot on. The Armstrong incident is probably why Kevin Jolly has behaved in this way. I fear for Mildenhall Speedway. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Alan_Jones 1,005 Posted June 19, 2016 Because there's no way on this earth you should be allowed a guest because a rider doesn't have machinery (although according to the Mildenhall facebook page there was a bike waiting for him at West Row). That's beyond reason, and makes the use of guests (already a major sore point with a large number of speedway fans) farcical. What makes matters worse is that Jon Armstrong's wife recently had a baby that was some months premature. I don't think there was any serious risk to the child, but clearly there was some hospital treatment over and above the norm that was necessary. Not surprisingly, Armstrong wanted to be with his wife. Mildenhall were refused a guest and had to run with rider replacement. How can you justify allowing a guest for a rider without a bike - when in actual fact he has one - when you refuse to do so for a father with a new born child ? Its just another appalling example of the shocking and irresponsible decision making that the sport is subject to, and one thing is certain - we won't find out who made the decision or why. As far as I am concerned, Shads has it just about spot on. Kevin Jolly has every reason to be furious, but he shouldn't have called the meeting off because he'll be poleaxed for it and it looks like little more than spitting a dummy. I should add this is all speculation; the actual reason for postponement hasn't been made public. The NL allows a facility for any reason. One rider missing it's R/R, 2 or more missing and it's R/R and guests. Like it or not, both decisions are correct. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
zlata prilba 320 Posted June 19, 2016 Surely Williamsons average is higher than Chessells Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Halifaxtiger 5,318 Posted June 19, 2016 The NL allows a facility for any reason. One rider missing it's R/R, 2 or more missing and it's R/R and guests. Like it or not, both decisions are correct. I stand corrected, Alan (I 'd like to thank Neil Watson for doing so by pm). I suppose 'I got wrecked last night, am hungover and don't fancy riding but will be in the bar having a few beers in the stadium bar instead' is reasonable grounds to allow a guest, isn't it ? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
