Starman2006 2,356 Posted April 23, 2017 It was decided at about 2.30 in the afternoon. Weird how I knew at about 3.30 but nobody thought to tell Brady And your point is, you knew at about 3.30. So what. Matt would have been told.. I get the impression your trying to make some sort of point here... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waiheke1 4,295 Posted April 23, 2017 And your point is, you knew at about 3.30. So what. Matt would have been told.. I get the impression your trying to make some sort of point here...Yes the point is why wasn't Brady told when the decision was made? Not waiting til he got to the meeting? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Starman2006 2,356 Posted April 23, 2017 (edited) Yes the point is why wasn't Brady told when the decision was made? Not waiting til he got to the meeting? So, whats up, had a bad day have you.. Thats the second dig at me in two posts.. Must have been a reason for it.. Edited April 23, 2017 by Starman2006 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Najjer 2,890 Posted April 23, 2017 So, whats up, had a bad day have you.. Thats the second dig at me in two posts.. Must have been a reason for it.. How is that a dig at you? He's made a valid point. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waiheke1 4,295 Posted April 23, 2017 So, whats up, had a bad day have you.. Thats the second dig at me in two posts.. Must have been a reason for it..You asked what scbs point was. I explained his point for you, even though it required no explanation for anyone else. Answering your question is a dig? 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Starman2006 2,356 Posted April 23, 2017 You asked what scbs point was. I explained his point for you, even though it required no explanation for anyone else. Answering your question is a dig? No as i said, must be a reason that Brady "alledgedly" didn't know. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lisa-colette 6,049 Posted April 23, 2017 No as i said, must be a reason that Brady "alledgedly" didn't know.Some promoters aren't great communicator's?! Some riders get told by fans on twitter when a meeting is called off!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DunRobin 465 Posted April 24, 2017 Absent 2-5, I think you'll find!? ;-) Sorry my mistake, typo. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Catalan 717 Posted April 24, 2017 Yes the point is why wasn't Brady told when the decision was made? Not waiting til he got to the meeting? From the horses mouth Brady was told at 2.20 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skidder1 7,658 Posted April 24, 2017 Surely the point is not the time of the day but why it took til raceday to confirm/announce the ruling when the team line-up inc. Kurtz, was advised 72 hours previously??! 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Catalan 717 Posted April 24, 2017 Surely the point is not the time of the day but why it took til raceday to confirm/announce the ruling when the team line-up inc. Kurtz, was advised 72 hours previously??! That is my point, all was OK when the teams were declared but why at 2.20 on match day was it deemed not correct. If it was incorrect for Brady to guest should have been picked up straight away. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waiheke1 4,295 Posted April 24, 2017 From the horses mouth Brady was told at 2.20ok fair enough, Skidder1 had posted only in thr pits.But I agree, it was picked up on here immediately that no guest was allowed, why did it take the authorities longer? Why did they allow Schlein to illegally guest for Riss against Poole? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SCB 0 Posted April 24, 2017 Surely the point is not the time of the day but why it took til raceday to confirm/announce the ruling when the team line-up inc. Kurtz, was advised 72 hours previously??!Because Swindon get something like 48 hours to appeal the Somerset line up. That would be 24 before the meeting. Then the BSPA will need time to get together to agree what is right/wrong. I'm really not seeing the issue here. Just a few Poole fans who are shocked that a team have not been allowed to cheat. I guess it's a new one to them after all their stunts over the years. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waiheke1 4,295 Posted April 24, 2017 Because Swindon get something like 48 hours to appeal the Somerset line up. That would be 24 before the meeting. Then the BSPA will need time to get together to agree what is right/wrong. I'm really not seeing the issue here. Just a few Poole fans who are shocked that a team have not been allowed to cheat. I guess it's a new one to them after all their stunts over the years. Surely the issue is the ridiculous rule that puts the responsibility on the opposition, and not the authorities, to detect any illegality on a named line up? 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skidder1 7,658 Posted April 25, 2017 Because Swindon get something like 48 hours to appeal the Somerset line up. That would be 24 before the meeting. Then the BSPA will need time to get together to agree what is right/wrong. I'm really not seeing the issue here. Just a few Poole fans who are shocked that a team have not been allowed to cheat. I guess it's a new one to them after all their stunts over the years. But Swindon didn't appeal it!! Rosco was quite happy for Kurtz to race and said so publicly. My issue is that a rider and/or a promotion is out of pocket - if only for travelling expenses - because the authorities didn't act quickly enough!! 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
