woofers 467 Posted October 31, 2016 What's done is done, and can't be changed but to quote that beloved corporate phrase "lessons will be learnt". But really, if you were the manager of the most successful team in the league this year, having only been beaten twice, topping the league table by the proverbial country mile, coming back from a 13 point deficit to win the play off final, and going into the second leg of the KO Cup final defending a 6 point advantage with a chance to clinch the silverware in the National League, would you - 1. Check the rule book to ensure that the No 1 rider you used last week at the same track and want to use again, would be eligible to ride again this week ? 2. To be doubly sure, check with the governing body / bodies that the rider you wished to use was eligible ? or would you 3. Rely on hearsay that the rule you know exists, is no longer in use ? 4. Rely on the opposition or governing body / bodies and their representatives (referee) to let you know if you've got it wrong ? I think we know what the answer should be, (and it's not 3 or 4). Next we have a couple of press statements whereby the Birmingham side categorically state that the Eastbourne side objected 30 minutes prior to the meeting. Eastbournes statement makes it clear they did not protest. One side is being 'economical with the truth' here, and probably owes the other an apology. IF the BSPA or the SCB have / (want?) an ounce of credibility, there should be an enquiry into what happened and where it went wrong and the findings published. No if's, no but's, Something has gone wrong, the fan's were short changed, and they deserve to know what happened. It's not the end of the world, no one need lose their job over this, but transparency would be of huge benefit to the sport, instead of the usual sweeping under the carpet approach. It shouldn't take long, someone in the governing bodies knows what happened. So now we have the facts. Eastbourne didn't protest - they said so. Birmingham have accepted that Eastbourne didn't protest- from Brummies website is posted Despite no official complaints from the Eastbourne management, SCB referee Paul Carrington brought into question the eligibility of guest No.1 James Shanes under the ‘eight day’ ruling after contact with home supporters just 30 minutes before start-time, and Shanes was subsequently prevented from riding. So, the Birmingham website is now updated with the facts, shame they went ahead with an 'erroneous' statement earlier, (apology on it's way?) From what we can glean - Birmingham management didn't check the riders eligibility Eastbourne management didn't check the riders eligibility The SCB didn't check the riders eligibility The BSPA didn't check the riders eligibility The referee didn't check the riders eligibility So no one in an official capacity checked the riders eligibility No one in an official capacity did their job It was down to some fan's questioning the referee at the match..... And we wonder why Speedway is treated as a joke sport ............. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GASBLOKE 20 Posted October 31, 2016 So we are still in the dark. Only 7+ hours to tapes up on the final home meeting of the season and we don't know if Shanes is eligible or not and we don't even know if Georgie Wood is available or officially what the teams are. There has been nothing on the web site at all about this match. I don't like to criticise after the performance of the last two seasons but it looks like a bad week for the promoters. Talking about Georgie he was said to be off for personal reasons and I believe is partner is expecting. Yet he was off on the Wednesday, back on the Sunday, and off again on the Wednesday. Today who knows? Surely Birmingham is only a couple of hours further from Maidstone than Eastbourne. This IS only National League speedway, Georgie and the love of his life, Lauren are expecting their first child, due date 24 th Oct. Like any responsible father to be, he would not want to be away and miss the said birth. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gazzac 1,015 Posted October 31, 2016 Never ever seen a ref talk to supporters before a match! How on earth can a decision be made like that if true 30 minintes before a match. ... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GASBLOKE 20 Posted October 31, 2016 I take back my criticism of Eastbourne, fair play to Dugard for them comments. Drury can get the blame for not knowing the rules but for me the SCB ref Paul Carrington really should be investigated for clearly not doing his job properly. Quite clearly this error by Graham should have been spotted days beforehand, then we could have used another guest or rider replacement. Instead Birmingham fans travelled hundreds miles to learn we are facing Eastbourne with a depleted team, Eastbourne fans themselves wouldn't have been deprived of seeing them beating a weakened side and poor James Shanes wouldnt have had a wasted trip from Dorset. Such a shame the final speedway meeting in britain for 2016 can end in such farcical situations and I look forward to the SCB investigation into their failure of following procedure regarding tonights meeting. However I reckon theres more chance of Turkeys voting for Christmas then that happening! It is up to the respective managers to declare the correct team, this rule would not have got past big Glen. Drury should know, understand and carry out the rules as they stand, not take it on himself that because that rule has been broken six times this season that he should assume the rule was not being enforced. He has managed to use the rules to his own divide this season, keeping those two at reserve, slowing the meeting down on purpose at Kent so as to win with the aid of the curfew. So it is Graham Drury's fault. £13 to watch a KO Cup final that doesn't mean much anyway (the carry on afterwards you would have thought we were world champion). Then to find out that the oppo's No 1 isn't illegible. Luckily for the Eastbourne fans that would like to see competitive speedway rather than just their team winning, where treated to first class displays from the two youngest kids on show. Without Tommy B and of course JPB the meeting would have been a complete waste of time. Winning the league over 22 matches IS the thing to win, and even with the ridiculous play offs, it was the Brummies who came out on top. I think Eastbourne will have learnt a lot this year and will hopefully put it to good use next year. Tee shirts use to say "Happines is 40-38" how right they were. .................and they call us a win at all costs team haha ; robbed the fans of a close meeting; tbh they had one hand on the cup anyway!! A shame because a good spirit was developing on here between the sets of fans which is now going to fall into acrimony again over this i fear! Yes Shanes name is in the prog and he's at the track ready to race...oh the joys of speedway! All it needed was for the Birmingham manager to follow the rules correctly, if it was up to the BSPA to contact teams to advise of an inillegible rider, they would be doing the managers job for them. If so, the BSPA should have told Martin or Connor Dugard not to use the ineffective Stoneman as guest for the play off 2nd leg, and advised them to choose better !!!!!!!! The speedway season is about the 22 league matches, not plays off, mickey mouse cup matches should be for the also rans at the bottom of the league. Brummies were the best team by far, so well done JPB, you managed to carry them for the whole season. What an upcoming star he will be. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
guitar_art 247 Posted October 31, 2016 Can you advise when and which teams? No I cant but its in black and white in the Eastbourne statement that I am taking to be true. The rule IS crystal clear. A rider can only guest on a track once in 8 days, unless it is as a guest for the home No.1 There haven't. Please provide details of these 5 matches. In fact see if you can even find details of one. As I have already stated. This is something that Eastbourne have stated and I see no reason for them not to be telling the truth. Perhaps you should ask them for the evidence. I have better things to do. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
John Leslie 3,213 Posted October 31, 2016 Perhaps you should ask them for the evidence. I have better things to do. If you're the one believing this myth to be true, and quoting it as a fact, you should be asking for the evidence. Like Jayne Moss, I know that the rule has NOT been broken 5 times this year, so it's pretty pointless asking for evidence of something that doesn't exist. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GASBLOKE 20 Posted October 31, 2016 Because Eastbourne were desparate to win this meeting and from their point of view didn't want to allow Drury to get off scott free for making an illegal guest booking. At the end of the day, it's a schoolboy error on Drury's part. We can blame all and sundry over it as much as we like, but there were even people on BSF debating this rule days ago. If the great unwashed of BSF know this rule you have to expect an experienced team manager to know the rule too, and abide by it. At the end of the day, once again, speedway fans are in apposition of having the piss extracted. We keep paying our money, follow your team at home, some people even to go to away meetings !! Every bloody time, it is one part or another of speedways governing body that makes a big balls up. We all just moan, moan and moan (just like I'm doing now), but like a huge bunch of anortak wearing morons, we will back to witness the next f___ up. And then moan again. If this was the job of the match referee to inform either management of a mistake in their submitted line ups, wether it by averages, guests or R/R, then he MUST come out and apologise to the fans, and except FULL responsibility. I guarantee, we will here no more about it, that big BSPA carpet will be lifted and another load of rubbish will be brushed under it. What's done is done, and can't be changed but to quote that beloved corporate phrase "lessons will be learnt". But really, if you were the manager of the most successful team in the league this year, having only been beaten twice, topping the league table by the proverbial country mile, coming back from a 13 point deficit to win the play off final, and going into the second leg of the KO Cup final defending a 6 point advantage with a chance to clinch the silverware in the National League, would you - 1. Check the rule book to ensure that the No 1 rider you used last week at the same track and want to use again, would be eligible to ride again this week ? 2. To be doubly sure, check with the governing body / bodies that the rider you wished to use was eligible ? or would you 3. Rely on hearsay that the rule you know exists, is no longer in use ? 4. Rely on the opposition or governing body / bodies and their representatives (referee) to let you know if you've got it wrong ? I think we know what the answer should be, (and it's not 3 or 4). Next we have a couple of press statements whereby the Birmingham side categorically state that the Eastbourne side objected 30 minutes prior to the meeting. Eastbournes statement makes it clear they did not protest. One side is being 'economical with the truth' here, and probably owes the other an apology. IF the BSPA or the SCB have / (want?) an ounce of credibility, there should be an enquiry into what happened and where it went wrong and the findings published. No if's, no but's, Something has gone wrong, the fan's were short changed, and they deserve to know what happened. It's not the end of the world, no one need lose their job over this, but transparency would be of huge benefit to the sport, instead of the usual sweeping under the carpet approach. It shouldn't take long, someone in the governing bodies knows what happened. So, the Birmingham website is now updated with the facts, shame they went ahead with an 'erroneous' statement earlier, (apology on it's way?) From what we can glean - Birmingham management didn't check the riders eligibility Eastbourne management didn't check the riders eligibility The SCB didn't check the riders eligibility The BSPA didn't check the riders eligibility The referee didn't check the riders eligibility So no one in an official capacity checked the riders eligibility No one in an official capacity did their job It was down to some fan's questioning the referee at the match..... And we wonder why Speedway is treated as a joke sport ............. Well said, on the same wavelength there. Right, I have a few fireworks to let off for the grandkids, eat a few hot dogs then get my head down to try a find the five instances that this rule was broken. If I find it before I fall into a coma, I'll post later. Better still, someone else do it and I'll have some beers with me hot doggies !!! Well that didn't take too long. On May 6th, Tom Wooley and Joe Lawlor guested for Mildenhall at Belle Vue, then on May 13th, Wooley and Lawlor rode for Belle Vue against Eastbourne. On August 17th, Ben Hopwood guested for IOW at Belle Vue then on August 25th, Hopwood also guested for Kent at Belle Vue. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gazzac 1,015 Posted October 31, 2016 (edited) Unlikely anyone would own up to speaking to the ref, but did anyone see the ref talking to the fans? I was there quite early and didn't see it if it happened. Edited October 31, 2016 by gazzac Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
uk_martin 1,606 Posted October 31, 2016 Perhaps you should quote the 5 previous miscarriages of justice before making such a statement. I've given up caring. If they lied about the 5 previous incidents, then the situation stinks. If they were right about the 5 previous incidents, then the situation stinks. Either way, the situation stinks. Just glad the season's over. Let's see if time will be a healer and the people who were cheated out of a good meeting will forgive and forget in time for next March. ..If this was the job of the match referee to inform either management of a mistake in their submitted line ups... And that's the big question...IF Has anyone spoken to a referee about what their responsibilities are? So, does anyone "know", or are people "supposing that they know", or is it a case of "I don't know but surely it must be the referee's job"? I was always under the impression that a referee takes control of a meeting 2 hours before tapes up. Now I may be wrong about that, but if I'm right, then the team line-ups could have been in the referee's in-tray for as long as you like, there would have been nothing that he would have been empowered to do. Now imaginge for a moment that the referee had spoken to Drury in the week, and given him some advice about what will happen if he fields an illegible guest, how happy would Eastbourne (really) have been? Accusations of referees colluding with the Brummies management would have made this scandal look like peanuts. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
John Leslie 3,213 Posted October 31, 2016 On May 6th, Tom Wooley and Joe Lawlor guested for Mildenhall at Belle Vue, then - Tom Woolley rode for BV - that's his team. Joe Lawlor wasn't a guest . He was a 3.00 rider not listed in any 1-7, replacing a reserve. All perfectly legal on May 13th, Wooley and Lawlor rode for Belle Vue against Eastbourne. - Again Tom Woolley rode for his own team. Joe Lawlor wasn't a guest. He was a 3.00 rider not listed in any 1-7 replacing a reserve. All perfectly legal. On August 17th, Ben Hopwood guested for IOW at Belle Vue then - Ben Hopwood hadn't guested on the Belle Vue track in the previous 8 days. All prefectly legal on August 26th, Hopwood also guested for Kent at Belle Vue. - Ben Hopwood hadn't guested on the Belle Vue track in the previous 8 days. All prefectly legal (He had however guested 9 days ago). So no illegal guests listed in those instances. At least you tried to find broken rules...... but failed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gazzac 1,015 Posted October 31, 2016 (edited) I've given up caring. If they lied about the 5 previous incidents, then the situation stinks. If they were right about the 5 previous incidents, then the situation stinks. Either way, the situation stinks. Just glad the season's over. Let's see if time will be a healer and the people who were cheated out of a good meeting will forgive and forget in time for next March. And that's the big question...IF Has anyone spoken to a referee about what their responsibilities are? So, does anyone "know", or are people "supposing that they know", or is it a case of "I don't know but surely it must be the referee's job"? I was always under the impression that a referee takes control of a meeting 2 hours before tapes up. Now I may be wrong about that, but if I'm right, then the team line-ups could have been in the referee's in-tray for as long as you like, there would have been nothing that he would have been empowered to do. Now imaginge for a moment that the referee had spoken to Drury in the week, and given him some advice about what will happen if he fields an illegible guest, how happy would Eastbourne (really) have been? Accusations of referees colluding with the Brummies management would have made this scandal look like peanuts. Exactly it was up to the Brum management to confirm that Shanes was eligible as said before, they failed to do that. Edited October 31, 2016 by gazzac Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vincent Vega 135 Posted October 31, 2016 Will Eastbourne stay in the NL next season or move up to the PL? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gazzac 1,015 Posted October 31, 2016 Will Eastbourne stay in the NL next season or move up to the PL? Sure it'll be NL again, unfinished business. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OGT 612 Posted October 31, 2016 Rules are rules. In general yes, in British speedway, not necessarily. Open to interpretation, not set in stone. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest GiveusaB Posted November 1, 2016 I blame the Birmingham management !!! What a shambles on such a big occasion !!! No excuses, we 'cocked' up ! Yet again it's the paying public that have suffered..... However JPB's performance needs acknowledging....... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
