Sheffield vs. Belle Vue Grand Final 2nd Leg 13/10/22

[Ace no.5 169]

5 hours ago, 4thbender said:

Here’s a different view…

If the integrity of speedway racing is to be maintained amongst the panoply of British sporting endeavour, the outcome of the Speedway Premiership Grand Final must be reversed forthwith and awarded to the Sheffield team, on the following basis.

Heats 1 and 3 were the subject of re-runs after riders fell, the riders adjudged to be at fault having been excluded (rightly so) from the re-run. In heat eleven, the rider in white fell and the rider in red was adjudged to have been at fault. In keeping with the correct procedure carried out in the earlier heats, the referee should have initiated a re-run of heat 11 with three riders, the rider in red being excluded. In a totally unprecedented interpretation of the rules however, the referee failed to initiate a re-run, but pre-empted its result by awarding Belle Vue a 5 – 1 race victory… .. in a re-run that had not taken place!

As witnessed by thousands of spectators in the stadium and countless thousands of viewers of the Eurosport TV broadcast, the rider in white failed to finish the race and was laid on the track 80 metres short of the finish line, and yet was inexplicably awarded 3 points (see the referee’s race card), in contravention of the spirit (if not the written rules) of speedway racing, the conventions of which stipulate that points are awarded according to the order of riders crossing the finishing line after the completion of four laps.

It is utterly unconscionable and against the spirit of speedway racing than a race non-finisher, regardless of circumstances, should be arbitrarily awarded a race win ahead of riders who completed four laps and crossed the finish line in open and fair competition.

Having failed to initiate a re-run therefore, the only fair and equitable option open to the referee (with the rider in white having failed to complete the race and the rider in red having been excluded) was to award points to the only two riders to legitimately finish the race, i.e. three points to the rider in yellow and two to the rider in blue. This gives Belle Vue a 3 – 2 race victory, bringing the total accumulated points after heat 11 to 37 – 28 in Sheffield’s favour. Given that in the remaining four heats Sheffield scored 14 points to Belle Vue’s 10, this brings the final totals to 51 – 38 in Sheffield’s favour, giving Sheffield a victory by a single point over the two legs of the Premiership Grand Final.

Are you on crack? You go on about the other 2 riders having "passed the chequered flag before Brady who was on the floor"... No they didn't as the incident happened on lap 3 so nobody passed the chequered flag! 

I also notice that you have chosen to omit commenting on the awarding of the race in heat 5 that Howarth won when Ellis was on his backside? Maybe that should have been re-run with 3 riders too?

Edited October 15, 2022 by Ace no.5

[B.V 72 1,054]

1 hour ago, r8gdp said:

Think this threads going to go on for sometime with differing views from the Sheffield and Belle Vue fans .My view is that Belle Vue were always going to win when they signed R Lambert.With M fricke in the side I am sure Sheffield would have won.But hey ho it’s done .Hope everyone that turned up enjoyed both meeting s .Me personally I am not a lover of the play offs and have lost a lot of enthusiasm for the sport , only been to 2 meetings this year . Watched most of the gps on the tv but being in the beat the bookie Comp run by R/R keep s that interesting lol.

The only way we can see if Belle vue could beat Sheffield without Lambert in the side is to go back to the 4 league matches we have ridden against each other this season. Home and away first meetings Belle vue  on agg won 94  to  86 .On the second meetings Sheffield won 93  to  87. Thats one each add all the scores together to get a winner and the score is 181  to 179 in favour of belle vue another just 2 point win so we kinda beat you three times on aggregate.

[OveFundinFan 4,150]

Just watched all 15 heats, just the races…none of the in between stuff, on Discovery+ and I thought this 2nd leg was more exciting, by a short head, than the first leg. A really good meeting, well done to both teams.  Usually good meetings between BV and Sheffield, even back in the 60’s and 70’s.

[DazS 480]

i was on the 4th bend enjoyed the night even though was looking thru a mesh of rope and between the scaffold of the tv postion. 

[mikebv 10,381]

Sheffield Heat Leaders..

18 off 14 rides in leg one..

25 off 14 rides in leg two..

43 off 28 rides in total..

And that includes a gifted 5 points in Heat Fifteen of leg two which was a dead rubber..

A collective average of 6.14 for the three Sheffield HL's..

And some still suggest it was 100% the refs fault that the Tigers lost...

[r8gdp 478]

4 hours ago, B.V 72 said:

The only way we can see if Belle vue could beat Sheffield without Lambert in the side is to go back to the 4 league matches we have ridden against each other this season. Home and away first meetings Belle vue  on agg won 94  to  86 .On the second meetings Sheffield won 93  to  87. Thats one each add all the scores together to get a winner and the score is 181  to 179 in favour of belle vue another just 2 point win so we kinda beat you three times on aggregate.

I ve not got a problem with the result Belle Vue won Sheffield lost that’s it done people on here have all got their own opinions and are going to be discussing it for a few weeks but nothing going to change the result 

[r8gdp 478]

8 hours ago, mikebv said:

Not with those two teams...

I would have hoped they'd both lose....

Take it you re a Man Utd fan 

[GeneralMelchett 555]

23 hours ago, 4thbender said:

Can anyone provide a single example in the history of speedway when a race non-finisher was awarded three points for a race win, ahead of two other riders who had legitimately finished the race?

No one 'legitimately' finished the race as it was stopped as they started the 4th lap - He (Kurtz) was awarded the win as the race positions at the time of the incident are taking into consideration -  there was actually nothing remotely controversial in the decision to award to race once the decision to exclude someone was made - given it was on the end of lap 3. I do not keep up with the rules but referees have for a long time been given the power to award a race that is either on lap 3 or 4 I think.

In 1988 Arena-Essex were knocked out of the KOC at Mildenhall, with the match on aggregate tied at 78-78 Martin Goodwin was leading heat 11 from Mel Taylor with Chris Cobby in 3rd, Michael Coles 4th. Goodwin fell on the last lap (I think his chain went) blocking Mel Taylor who pulled up and this allowed Chris Cobby to undercut Mel Taylor to take the win. The race wasn't stopped as it was on the last lap but the result was amended to a win for Taylor,  Cobby 2nd and Michael Coles 3rd turning a 2-4 to Arena (as I think Taylor had coasted over the line in either 2nd or third) into a 4-2 to Mildenhall. 

The referee awarded the race based on positions at the time of an incident with the leader who fell excluded - I am of the view that Taylor didn't finish the race certainly he never finished first.

[GeneralMelchett 555]

22 hours ago, Sir Sidney said:

Or of course you could just read the regulations 

011.1.15Awarding a Heat
If the leading rider has completed at least 2 laps, then the Referee shall 
have the sole discretion to either order a re-run or award the heat based 
upon the positions when it was caused to be stopped; riders, other than the 
one disqualified being advanced one place.
 

So  my interpretation is what caused it to be stopped was Kurtz being hit by Musielak. Therefore, given that at that point Kurtz was on his bike it is perfectly correct for the ref to award him the race win.

The regs are available to download online. No mystery, no secrecy, no conspiracy.

Give it a go. They are quite interesting  

this backs up my previous post thanks! If people read the rules first!

[Roger Jacobs 558]

On 10/14/2022 at 2:49 PM, Trevor said:

<snip>

The issue that should be considered for the future was, the one fron the first leg. Wright was injured and BV had to go with only one rider. Surely a team down to five riders should be able to bring in a replacement on a lower average? The five one Sheffield got in Heat 14 brought it closer than it would have been. If a team went down to five in the first few heats, it would ruin it as a match with only three riders in a race.

IRR is used if a 1-5 rider is lost early in the meeting, and the Regulations state that IRR can't be used if a rider has had three programmed rides, so BV's only option for Wright was a reserve change - one was already riding, and the other was injured.  It was an unfortunate situation, but a rare one. 

[wtf 621]

On 10/15/2022 at 10:22 PM, mikebv said:

Sheffield Heat Leaders..

18 off 14 rides in leg one..

25 off 14 rides in leg two..

43 off 28 rides in total..

And that includes a gifted 5 points in Heat Fifteen of leg two which was a dead rubber..

A collective average of 6.14 for the three Sheffield HL's..

And some still suggest it was 100% the refs fault that the Tigers lost...

People see what they want to see, and will apportion blame where it suits. Some will seek to blame the referee, some will choose riders, some will choose the rule makers. I think the one point I would make was that for me Christina was very consistent in her application of the "rules" Personally I disagree with most of the decisions made these days, where the slightest contact results in a rider taking a dive and getting the decision, but that is very much how the sport is decided these days. Anyone thinking Holder should not have been excluded when Wright went down in the first leg must also agree that Brady shouldn't have been excluded in heat 1 of the second leg, both occasions where a rider made a forceful move with minimal "rubbing" on the way through, the rider on the outside could easily have straightened up and conceded the move, but instead chose to take the contact and chance a get off and reinstatement. For me this is how speedway is going. I'm not keen on it, but it seems to be the norm. The reality of both legs was if you went up the inside of someone and there was the slightest of contact, you were deemed the guilty party. At least she was consistent in that regard

[Ace no.5 169]

She absolutely was, very consistent! The riders knew the script... She didn't make one decision that went against the concept of excluding for initiating contact from the inside out.

[foreverblue 6,125]

25 minutes ago, wtf said:

People see what they want to see, and will apportion blame where it suits. Some will seek to blame the referee, some will choose riders, some will choose the rule makers. I think the one point I would make was that for me Christina was very consistent in her application of the "rules" Personally I disagree with most of the decisions made these days, where the slightest contact results in a rider taking a dive and getting the decision, but that is very much how the sport is decided these days. Anyone thinking Holder should not have been excluded when Wright went down in the first leg must also agree that Brady shouldn't have been excluded in heat 1 of the second leg, both occasions where a rider made a forceful move with minimal "rubbing" on the way through, the rider on the outside could easily have straightened up and conceded the move, but instead chose to take the contact and chance a get off and reinstatement. For me this is how speedway is going. I'm not keen on it, but it seems to be the norm. The reality of both legs was if you went up the inside of someone and there was the slightest of contact, you were deemed the guilty party. At least she was consistent in that regard

I don't agree it was all the referee's fault, Sheffield didn't ride well enough especially on their own track but the Holder /Wright incident in the first leg was completely different to the Kurtz exclusion in the second leg. Overall the decisions went against Sheffield but it wasn't the reason they lost.

[topaz325 1,878]

Still a few on Speedway friends ranting about the refs decisions, “ I ,m still not happy you're all wrong “ This from mature men.   

Edited October 17, 2022 by topaz325

[Ace no.5 169]

1 hour ago, foreverblue said:

I don't agree it was all the referee's fault, Sheffield didn't ride well enough especially on their own track but the Holder /Wright incident in the first leg was completely different to the Kurtz exclusion in the second leg. Overall the decisions went against Sheffield but it wasn't the reason they lost.

I'm intrigued. What was your "take" on both incidents? For me, both Holder in first leg and Kurtz in second leg went for a gap that ultimately didn't develop. Both had to be excluded. Correct decisions.