Scunthorpe Scorpions Vs Edinburgh Monarchs ( P L) - Sunday, July 17th (6.30pm)

[Shadders 4,135]

Is there a lawyer in the house?

 

The way I see it is that Edinburgh had a while to choose a guest for Bewley, but left it until the last minute to announce Davey, leaving Scunthorpe insufficient time to lodge a written protest. Clever or sneaky, you decide

Edited July 18, 2016 by Shads

[Halifaxtiger 5,318]

Regardless of the rights and wrongs that was the best speedway meeting ive seen for many years

 

 

 

Me too.

 

Doing the updates, I ran out of superlatives

[Al Stewart 398]

thanks scb

 

So it seems Edinburgh left it til just a few hours before to name Davey meaning there was insufficient time for the legitimate protest to be considered.

 

Im putting myself in the Scunny camp from what ive seen so far.

Edinburgh were instructed by the BSPA to let Bewley go with Belle Vue, because the match at Scunthorpe was rearranged. Therefore Edinburgh were entitled to a 3-point guest and it is irrelevant whether Davey can be a "NL guest" or not.

 

Why on earth would we not have wanted to take Dan to Scunthorpe? He is scoring far more heavily than Mitchell in the NL.

[dontforgetthefueltapsbruv 10,706]

Edinburgh were instructed by the BSPA to let Bewley go with Belle Vue, because the match at Scunthorpe was rearranged. Therefore Edinburgh were entitled to a 3-point guest and it is irrelevant whether Davey can be a "NL guest" or not.

 

Why on earth would we not have wanted to take Dan to Scunthorpe? He is scoring far more heavily than Mitchell in the NL.

so one rule was broken (guest) because another was overidden (pl/nl priority)

So you are saying 2 wrongs sometimes do make a right??

[Young51 156]

M Davey can not take the place of Dan Bewley, first instance is that a PL club will have priority over a NL club so Bewley should have been riding for Edinburgh, secondly M Davey has had an average over 4 at some point in his career, 4.23 I believe?

 

Edinburgh probably didn't check with the bspa for approval, but there pretty shrewd guys in the east normally, this time however they have broke the rules ,

An Aussie riding in a spot meant for British youngsters, no, not on I'm afraid !!!

Do keep up Pogo1..Mitchell Davey is now a British Citizen so it is on im afraid!!!!!

[Al Stewart 398]

so one rule was broken (guest) because another was overidden (pl/nl priority)

So you are saying 2 wrongs sometimes do make a right??

If we are instructed by the BSPA that our rider must be elsewhere, we are entitled to a facility. They are the arbiters on the rules. There's no point trying to be precise about the rulebook because it doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

 

Even if you don't accept that we should have had a facility, the NL Green Sheets are clear that Davey can be a NL guest.

 

There isn't an argument to be made here.

[Alan_Jones 1,005]

 

The rulebook says,

 

3.9 a ii is the relevant bit here. As long as Scunny protested within 4 hours of knowing about Davey (Edinburgh didnt declare him until the morning of the meeting) then the protest is legal.

 

He wasn't legitimately riding for BV though. PL always gets priority over NL.

 

The rulebook says,

He's not an EDR to 16.1.1, 16.1.2, 16.1.3 and 16.1.4 are not relevant. PL trumps NL.

 

PL doesn't always get priority though as in the regs you posted. Bewley is doubling up which brings 16.1.1 & 2 into play, and the PL match was a rearranged fixture (16.1.3) so it's game set and match to Edinburgh.

[lucifer sam 3,953]

If we are instructed by the BSPA that our rider must be elsewhere, we are entitled to a facility. They are the arbiters on the rules. There's no point trying to be precise about the rulebook because it doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

 

Even if you don't accept that we should have had a facility, the NL Green Sheets are clear that Davey can be a NL guest.

 

There isn't an argument to be made here.

 

Al, mistakes on the Green Sheet averages can be corrected. Remember the beginning of last year, when Alex Davies was given a very strange average and was all to set to line up at reserve for Scorpions at Edinburgh, only for Monarchs to put out the error prior to the meeting, prompting a late minute switch of the Scunny line-up?

 

Davey clearly cannot be used as a NL guest. I can't believe that the ever-shrewd Monarchs' management didn't realise that.

 

Oh, and stop all this stuff about NL taking priority. That simply doesn't happen. There may be a gentleman's agreement between Edinburgh and Belle Vue regarding Bewley, but stop pretending that it entitles you to anything but a NL guest.

 

All the best

Rob

Edited July 18, 2016 by lucifer sam

[SCB 0]

PL doesn't always get priority though as in the regs you posted. Bewley is doubling up which brings 16.1.1 & 2 into play, and the PL match was a rearranged fixture (16.1.3) so it's game set and match to Edinburgh.

He's not doubling up. He's full time in both teams. He doesn't share a place in either team to be doubling up. My understanding is doubling up always meant two riders sharing a position, not a rider riding for two teams, because a rider who rides in 3 leagues is not refereed to as tripling up!

 

NL has never had priority over PL.

 

I do agree that the lack of definition of "doubling up" doesn't help here, its the only place it's mentioned in the rulebook.

 

 

edit> Doubling up is refereed to, in EL team declarations. Nothing about it in PL or NL rules. My definition above is wrong though. A "doubling up rider" appears to be a rider riding in two leagues, but not an EDR, they're EDRs and not double uppers!

 

 

How about this rule?

19.9.3 Where a rider is additionally declared in a PL and/or EL Team, the EL and/or PL Team shall have priority, except that a rider nominated for the NLRC must appear in the NLRC. 19

Quite clear to me! Edited July 18, 2016 by SCB

[Al Stewart 398]

So your argument is:

 

The BSPA order us to let Dan ride elsewhere - but we can't have a facility.

 

AND

 

The BSPA green sheets say Davey can ride as a NL guest - but he can't.

 

A bit of a confused argument.

[SCB 0]

So your argument is:

 

The BSPA order us to let Dan ride elsewhere - but we can't have a facility.

 

AND

 

The BSPA green sheets say Davey can ride as a NL guest - but he can't.

 

A bit of a confused argument.

19.9.3 Where a rider is additionally declared in a PL and/or EL Team, the EL and/or PL Team shall have priority, except that a rider nominated for the NLRC must appear in the NLRC. 19

He should NOT have been riding for BV. Argue that, not that Davey was allowed to guest.

 

Just because the BSPA say something doesn't make it right, sadly for you.

Edited July 18, 2016 by SCB

[yoda 81]

M Davey can not take the place of Dan Bewley, first instance is that a PL club will have priority over a NL club so Bewley should have been riding for Edinburgh, secondly M Davey has had an average over 4 at some point in his career, 4.23 I believe?

 

Edinburgh probably didn't check with the bspa for approval, but there pretty shrewd guys in the east normally, this time however they have broke the rules ,

An Aussie riding in a spot meant for British youngsters, no, not on I'm afraid !!!

 

 

firstly Mitchell Davey is British

 

secondly Edinburgh's fixture with Scunthorpe was a re-arranged fixture so belle vue have priority

and .

at no point is a number 7 spot for youngsters ? how old is danny aryes

[SCB 0]

secondly Edinburgh's fixture with Scunthorpe was a re-arranged fixture so belle vue have priority

No, not true.

[cyclone 943]

 

You mean this one:

 

18.10 FACILITIES

a1) Absent #1: G or RR

a2) Absent D-U or EDR (if riding for the “other” team) G or RR

b ) 1 Absent rider (2 – 5): RR

c) More than 1 Absent rider (1 - 5) 1 x RR facility and G for all others

d) Absent #6 or #7: G

e) “No Facility”: NL G*

NL G*: a rider eligible for a NL Team who has never achieved an actual PL MA of 4.00 or above

 

A quick check of the BSPA website shows that Mitchell Davey's average has gone above 4.00 in the past. For example, I spotted that his GSA for October 2009 was 4.23.

 

All the best

Rob

 

What you were looking at is the 2009 Team Declarations, which appear to be calculated differently, and which were used for team building purposes, to the Green Sheets .

 

If you compare them it appears that for every team the figure referred to in the October Team Declarations are there are differences to the Oct 2009 Green Sheet.

 

Here are Glasgow's for October 2009:-

 

Team Declaration

 

1 James Grieves 9.49

2 Shane Parker 9.08

3 Josh Grajczonek 6.21

4 William Lawson 5.56

5 Aleksander Conda 5.00

6 Lee Dicken 4.67

7 Mitchell Davey 4.23

Total 44.24

.

Green Sheet

 

Glasgow M H A R Pts 2008 2009 Previous Club

James Grieves 36 19 17 172 370 8.63 8.55

Shane Parker 33 17 16 157 320 9.01 8.15

William Lawson 35 16 19 160 262 5.56 6.55 See Prev. Club

Josh Grajczonek 27 13 14 124 193 5.25 6.28

Aleksander Conda *Ass* 5 2 3 16 4 5.00

Lee Dicken 24 12 12 128 134 4.67 4.19

Mitchell Davey 38 19 19 209 197 3.00 3.77

 

Looking at the above, can you explain how the likes of Grieves (- 0.94) and Parker (-0.53) would differ so much, given that Glasgow only rode 2 Challenge matches during October, 2009 ?

Edited July 18, 2016 by cyclone

[speed ace 64]

Seems to me the inclusion of Davey was a massive gamble for the Monarchs on more than one front.

Was there no other eligible riders available on the day?, as after only two competitive NL matches in the last three years I don't think his inclusion was done to strengthen their team, obviously they were being loyal to one of their own assets, or am I being naive? Did they know something about Davey the rest of us have missed?