4thbender

This is the speedway equivalent of Mo Salah being brought down by Kyle Walker in City's penalty area in the 90th minute of the cup final with the scores level at 2 - 2 and the ref saying to Mo "Don't bother with the penalty, I'll just award Liverpool the goal." Bet you'd have something to say about that!

This is an important decision - it affects the outcome of the 2022 Speedway Premiership Grand Final and it seems to hinge upon the referee taking out a crystal ball to predict the outcome of a re-run which never happened. So instead it would appear that the efforts of the two riders who legitimately crossed the line first - the riders in Yellow and blue (the rider in red having been excluded) - were leap-frogged by a rider lying on the track 80 metres back from the chequered flag. The two legitimate finishers were in no part to blame for the demise of the fallen rider, so I simply put it to you that they are deserving of the points for first and second place respectively. I don't believe this precise situation has ever occurred in 94 years of British speedway history. But it makes a massive difference to the outcome of the single most iconic event of the 2022 British Speedway calendar. I don't know what the ACU will make of it.

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?

You omitted to add "with the help of the referee" after "BV riders just raised their game".

Natural justice cannot be overruled.

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.

Three.

That was the oddest decision I ever remember. Kurtz was awarded 3 points whilst laid on his back on the fourth bend, whilst three riders had passed the finishing line ahead of him. If the referee reckoned Tobi had cheated and deserved exclusion, surely the race should either have a) been re-run with three riders, or b) awarded to Belle Vue as a 3 - 2 victory. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems odd to base the score on the assumption that Kurtz would have won had he not fallen off. Passing the finishing line first is usually the criterion for the awarding of 3 points.

Big matches come and go and, should I live long enough, I expect I'll see more in the future. For me the Tigers' victory at Ipswich in 2017 to win the Championship was a great highlight, as was the winning of the knock-out cup in 1974. Both occasions were the result of long campaigns where good and bad fortunes were overcome along the way. The one feature that stands out is that on neither occasion did we use "ringers" to score our points.

Winning and losing are both aspects one becomes accustomed to over time.

That's quite correct. It's the manner of winning that matters.

I'm not concerned with the fact that Sheffield lost - I'm used to that. But the fact remains that whilst Jack's low score had a part to play in the overall outcome, so did Lambert's 25 points over two legs. The difference is Jack had a right to be there and Lambert didn't.

Mikebv has put his finger on it there! As a died-in-the-wool Tigers fan for 56 years, I'm actually glad to see Belle Vue win the title, for the simple reason that it highlights the sheer hypocrisy and corruption of the ruling authorities in allowing a rider who has shunned British racing for three years in pursuit of personal treasure to suddenly turn up for three matches in the colours of a team for which he has no past or present connection and have the audacity to collect a champion's medal on the rostrum. A "ringer" by any definition. Surely the authorities will now be shamed into ensuring no such aberration will ever occur in the future. As for the real championship, whichever team wins the Sheffield v Ipswich tie two weeks' time can hold its heads high and rightly claim to be the season's champions - an accolade won over the course of twenty matches home and away and without recourse to underhand and devious chicanery, the stench of which will always hang around this alleged Belle Vue "victory".

Clarification here please. Is it being suggested that BV 'fixed' his average to get him demoted to reserve, and hence eligible for seven rides?

Wolfie was alluding to the fact that the BV second strings would be required to score at least 11 points between them in order to achieve the 40 points needed to secure overall victory. Do keep up.

Who knows? They'll make the rules up as they go along (as they always do). Sheffield may even "do a Belle Vue" and find some way to bring Szmarzlick in as a late reserve.

The disruptions to Sheffield's season just go on and on. As well as our usual ration of weather interruptions, we've had meetings postponed or severely disrupted by the bursting of an air-fence linkage, failure of the starting-tapes, fence-posts damaged by contractors, a shortage of tyres, the death of a monarch and now - it would appear - a murder. I'm seriously expecting a sink-hole to open up and swallow the stadium. It's never-ending: you couldn't make this stuff up.

Has no-one noticed that every member of the Sheffield team scored a bonus point (except Connor Mountain - he scored 4!) Has that ever been done before?

It's raining.

I stand by my assertion that there is some major malfunction in the way speedway is being run. As I pointed out earlier in this thread, Sheffield's home calendar for 1967 shows a grand total of 31 Thursday race-nights, all with packed houses of paying customers. Perhaps those were the days when we had people running the sport who knew what they were doing, but If the league management fail to organise the weekly arrangements for what is barely a dozen meetings per team throughout the season, there is something amiss. Even your friend Peter Mole wrote in tonight's programme notes that the last home fixture "was almost like an away fixture for our lads, we've had so few meetings at Owlerton recently." Says it all, really.

The rules state that the semi-final play-offs will be 1st v 4th and 2nd v 3rd. How will they decide who is first and who is second with both teams tied on 43 points and the decider yet to be contested?

Judging by the announcement placed on the Tigers' website today, it would appear the home PL fixture with Ipswich will take place AFTER the play-offs. The announcement seems to suggest that Sheffield can still finish top of the Premiership table ahead of the play-offs if they win both of their remaining meetings at Owlerton against King’s Lynn and Belle Vue this Thursday and next. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but six points from those two matches will give us 43 points, matching the 43 that Ipswich already have in the bank. In other words, the outstanding (as yet uncontested) home match with Ippo would effectively be the decider, but it can't happen until AFTER the play-offs! In those circumstances, how will they decide which teams will race against each other in the semi-finals with finishing positions undecided? If I was confused before, my mind is now completely frazzled. Whatever else happens, I'm still betting the Tigers v Ipswich match will be quietly forgotten (or decided BEFORE the play-offs by the toss of a coin), once again short-changing the Sheffield paying customers. After all, when the play-offs have taken place and the league champions have lifted the trophy, what's the point of a further league match that can't have any impact on the result? Considering all the Thursday nights throughout the summer when there's been no action at Owlerton, this position takes some believing. You can't make this stuff up.

Lightweights. Between 1967 and 1971, riders representing British League teams took part in 36 league matches per season, plus countless world, European and British League Riders' Championship qualifiers, KO Cup fixtures and sundry open events. A glance at Sheffield's home calendar for 1967 shows a grand total of 31 Thursday race-nights, all with packed houses of paying customers. I even remember in the late sixties Sheffield hosting a 'B' team which raced on Sunday afternoons. By 1971 there were 36 teams in British League Divs. 1 and 2, all reporting good crowds. What would today's promoters give for that kind of support?

I feel really sorry for Sheffield's riders. Between now and the end of the season they have to race in at least nine (possibly eleven) fixtures: Three home league fixtures (in 9 days), two (possibly four) play-off matches, two cup-final matches with Kings Lynn and two pairs events (Sheffield and Belle Vue). That's almost as many as they've had in the previous five months! We'll still be racing at Christmas.

With the cut-off date having been set as the conclusion of fixtures on Thursday September 22 and the meeting with Ipswich next Monday having been cancelled, I'm guessing that the match with Ipswich won't now take place at all. The ridiculous prospect of having to organise a last-minute 'double header' (or determine final league positions on the toss of a coin!) just adds further hilarity to the laughing stock that is premiership speedway. Between April and September there have been 26 Thursdays and 26 Mondays, yet the league management and Owlerton hierarchy have conspired to make a cock-up of fitting in ten home league matches. Considering the vast length of week-after-week inactivity that have dogged us throughout the summer, it is yet another shameful spectacle that we should encounter such a backlog of fixtures at this late stage. But the season's not over yet.... as well as the Ipswich fixture, we have home matches with Kings Lynn and Belle Vue also to fit in, and just nine days to do it! What's the weather forecast for this Autumn period?