Kent Vs Birmingham 7/9/25

[Fozzie4388]

SCB STATEMENT: KENT v BIRMINGHAM (SEPT 7)

Monday, September 8, 2025

ON Monday 8th September the Speedway Control Bureau investigated the reasons why Vinnie Foord did not ride for Kent at their home NDT fixture versus Birmingham on Sunday 7th September when the original fixture that Mr Foord was meant to be riding in on the 7th Workington v Berwick in the Cab Direct Championship had been postponed some 15 hours previously.

 

It was stated that Mr Foord who currently cannot drive himself and is based in Scotland has no means of transport to arrive at Kent in time for the 12pm start time.

 

The SCB Referee at the Kent fixture had been informed that Mr Foord was unavailable for this fixture and having consulted the SCB had at that time had correctly allowed a facility, however on further investigation this should not have been authorised and the score of the guest for Cooper Rushen will be deleted from the meeting result.

 

The meeting result will now be amended to –

 

Kent 39 – Birmingham 35  

 

[P T Preece]

Even when they adjust the score, we still lost.

[arnieg]

40 minutes ago, P T Preece said:

Even when they adjust the score, we still lost.

If done correctly [i.e. logically] then remove Coops points and promote the riders behind and Kent lose 11 points while Birmingham gain nine.

I make that Kent 43 Birmingham 44.

Of course if ht 14 had been called correctly it would be 44-43 to Kent.

[Son of Shaleman]

1 hour ago, arnieg said:

If done correctly [i.e. logically] then remove Coops points and promote the riders behind and Kent lose 11 points while Birmingham gain nine.

I make that Kent 43 Birmingham 44.

Of course if ht 14 had been called correctly it would be 44-43 to Kent.

I thought ht 14 result announcement was wrong but came to conclusion places had changed on last corner and I’d missed it. 
Separately, does Vinnie get a ban?

[arnieg]

46 minutes ago, Son of Shaleman said:

I thought ht 14 result announcement was wrong but came to conclusion places had changed on last corner and I’d missed it. 
Separately, does Vinnie get a ban?

I assume not as it would surely have been dealt with in the same statement.

[ONTWOMINUTES]

5 minutes ago, arnieg said:

I assume not as it would surely have been dealt with in the same statement.

Like any Speedway ban as such , it'll make very little impact on vinnies season next year as he'll be banned for the off season,  I doubt any action will be taken anyway.  

[Barrow Boy 2]

Will Cooper be allowed to keep his points money?

[Islander15]

When did ‘any other reason’ get removed from the NL facility rulebook?

[HGould]

Thankfully Cooper Rushen emerged fit and well, god knows the ramifications had he been injured.

There is no justifible reason NOT to pay Cooper Rushen, he scored points in good faith, he was in no way at fault and only he had the rides.

It does beg the question, who knew what and when?

Presumably the Referee , experienced one , asked the question about the dispensation for the Guest and that it complied with the declared 1-7 and advertised team, I can't see how the Referee could be held responsible.

The $64,000 question is who is responsible for the fact that VJF could and should have met this commitment and who knew what and when, and if the transport question passes the "sniff test" of credibility?

The rider must surely be sanctioned and if Kent management knew in advance that the dispensation for Rushen was not actually valid and failed to tell Rushen, the referee or the BSPL then what sanctions should be applied to them. Or do you spin the coin and say the BSPL should have not assumed kent would change their team and told them that a Guest was no longer applicable.

One suspects that had this been a PL or CL match that the BSPL would have been FAR MORE proactive but the fact they don't seem to be merely sums up their complete indifference to the NDL or what ever different bits are now called. 

 

 

[Sargent10]

29 minutes ago, HGould said:

Thankfully Cooper Rushen emerged fit and well, god knows the ramifications had he been injured.

There is no justifible reason NOT to pay Cooper Rushen, he scored points in good faith, he was in no way at fault and only he had the rides.

It does beg the question, who knew what and when?

Presumably the Referee , experienced one , asked the question about the dispensation for the Guest and that it complied with the declared 1-7 and advertised team, I can't see how the Referee could be held responsible.

The $64,000 question is who is responsible for the fact that VJF could and should have met this commitment and who knew what and when, and if the transport question passes the "sniff test" of credibility?

The rider must surely be sanctioned and if Kent management knew in advance that the dispensation for Rushen was not actually valid and failed to tell Rushen, the referee or the BSPL then what sanctions should be applied to them. Or do you spin the coin and say the BSPL should have not assumed kent would change their team and told them that a Guest was no longer applicable.

One suspects that had this been a PL or CL match that the BSPL would have been FAR MORE proactive but the fact they don't seem to be merely sums up their complete indifference to the NDL or what ever different bits are now called. 

 

 

Personally I think it’s absolutely ridiculous, no one is coming out of this mess with any credibility, firstly the club (Kent) must have known something ,  Vinny situation and realised how to spin it to get coops in, Vinny for the obvious but he’s like lots of young riders relying heavily on others to get him there so presumably things happen and was stuff, bspl and bspa, when they make decisions like this they just don’t seem to realise how it looks in the eyes of people looking at speedway as a professional sport, the referee, he’s obviously not double checked it the day before after coops was announced, but finally it is the fans who suffer, Birmingham on the day had to field a team that was half full of lads who were genuinely happy to ride and do their best and yet they still had to have R/R for a rider?? What the fans really want is 7 riders each team, possibly balanced but 7 v 7, this is the start point for most teams and not premier league, god sake just let kids race and get on with it, embarrassing day on top of other days 

[gazzac]

4 hours ago, Barrow Boy 2 said:

Will Cooper be allowed to keep his points money?

Absolutely, no fault of his and no way will the club management not pay him.

[leander]

20 hours ago, Son of Shaleman said:

I thought ht 14 result announcement was wrong but came to conclusion places had changed on last corner and I’d missed it. 
Separately, does Vinnie get a ban?

If he does I'd assume it's only for 28 days, which would be served before the end of the season which, I believe, is 31st October. If a rider hasn't served his full ban by the end of the season, as  far as I'm aware, the outstanding days are served from the beginning of next season (i.e. probably 1st March).

[Sings4Speedway]

Another classic for sport credibility. Rushen is now track record holder despite being ineligible to ride. 

Ultimately he was ok to ride up until the point when Foords meeting was called off, at that point Vinnie should have resumed his place and failure to do so would not have resulted in a facility being granted. 

The unanswered questions are

did Kent know that Foord should have resumed his place in the starting line up? (id guess not)

Did Foord realise that once the CL fixture was cancelled he was due to resume his place in the Kent meeting?

is Foord actually 'based' in Scotland full time?

3 hours ago, Islander15 said:

When did ‘any other reason’ get removed from the NL facility rulebook?

Now states "NDL and NDT only: absent for any other reason - applicable to riders 18 years old and under, providing 3 days’ notice is given"

[BryanUgest]

On 9/8/2025 at 4:31 PM, P T Preece said:

Even when they adjust the score, we still lost.

lol - no wonder with the team they assembled! 

[Technik]

I always believed Vinnie was from Sussex