CHAMPIONSHIP PLAY OFF FINAL - SCUNTHORPE v POOLE v SCUNTHORPE (2 & 7 October)

[SteveLyric2]

54 minutes ago, alang said:

It's ok. You'll only need 2/3 of a tin

We tend to make a big display of them all from over the years, so several tins are usually required.😇

[Starman2006]

23 hours ago, LisaColette said:

Ok. Maybe i need to be more clear.

1. SCB are saying front wheel over the line and rear wheel on the line is excluded.

2. Ref did it on basis of being over the line imo. Otherwise he would have excluded Zach. This is where interpretation is different. Maybe they should write things better so no misunderstanding.

3. Two other refs have apparently said they wouldn't have excluded Zach either.

4. Josh Pickering even David Howe DID NOT KNOW before superheat that rear wheel on the white line meant exclusion. (360 podcast).

5. Imo they only looked through rules because superheat went against them. If they won superheat, rules wouldn't have been looked at and nothing said or known. 

 

Absolutely , but your never going to please those on here. In fact most of them would have been hanging out the bunting had Poole lost, and Trackprat would have been on here every minute of the day   Those grapes must be getting very mouldy by now 🤣🤣😂😂

[False dawn]

1 hour ago, Starman2006 said:

Absolutely , but your never going to please those on here. In fact most of them would have been hanging out the bunting had Poole lost, and Trackprat would have been on here every minute of the day   Those grapes must be getting very mouldy by now 🤣🤣😂😂

I'll say a few things just to make my position crystal clear.....
1. I'm not a Poole fan. I've been a Bees fan for a lot of years and our conflicts have been "intense" to say the least. And don't get me onto Poole's track preparation. Its a joke.
2. I watched both legs of the final, supporting Scunthorpe, although they mean very little to me apart from their speedway abilities.
3. I was excited to see the second leg go to a Super Heat. I was particularly impressed by Josh Pickering's understanding of what it takes to win a race where coming first doesn't necessarily win you anything.
4. I saw Zach Cook take a "very tight line" when Josh Pickering let him take over the lead. Did he put both wheels where they shouldn't have been? The evidence (so far) is inconclusive. Yes, that's right, False dawn agrees with the referee and the speedway supporting population of Poole.
5. The SCB clearly said that Zach breached the rules.

My conclusion. The SCB ruled on something they didn't need to. They knew before their investigation that the result could not be changed so why do anything? And worse still, why muddy the waters by saying they are 100% certain the rules were breached. And worse still than that, why say the rules were breached without saying how they reached that decision. What evidence do they have that we haven't seen?
So, despite my history with Poole, my argument is not with Zach Cook, the club or anyone associated with them. The SCB have many questions to answer and their response to the controversy is silence. 
I am, first and foremost, a speedway fan. I deserve my sport to be managed better. 

[SteveLyric2]

46 minutes ago, False dawn said:

I'll say a few things just to make my position crystal clear.....
1. I'm not a Poole fan. I've been a Bees fan for a lot of years and our conflicts have been "intense" to say the least. And don't get me onto Poole's track preparation. Its a joke.
2. I watched both legs of the final, supporting Scunthorpe, although they mean very little to me apart from their speedway abilities.
3. I was excited to see the second leg go to a Super Heat. I was particularly impressed by Josh Pickering's understanding of what it takes to win a race where coming first doesn't necessarily win you anything.
4. I saw Zach Cook take a "very tight line" when Josh Pickering let him take over the lead. Did he put both wheels where they shouldn't have been? The evidence (so far) is inconclusive. Yes, that's right, False dawn agrees with the referee and the speedway supporting population of Poole.
5. The SCB clearly said that Zach breached the rules.

My conclusion. The SCB ruled on something they didn't need to. They knew before their investigation that the result could not be changed so why do anything? And worse still, why muddy the waters by saying they are 100% certain the rules were breached. And worse still than that, why say the rules were breached without saying how they reached that decision. What evidence do they have that we haven't seen?
So, despite my history with Poole, my argument is not with Zach Cook, the club or anyone associated with them. The SCB have many questions to answer and their response to the controversy is silence. 
I am, first and foremost, a speedway fan. I deserve my sport to be managed better. 

Apparently the SCB's Neil Vatcher is making a statement in this week's Speedway Star!