|
|
Post by BarryB on Feb 11, 2014 13:56:13 GMT 12
There's always the BIG RED BUTTON option macgor........
Barry B
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 11, 2014 14:08:49 GMT 12
There's always the BIG RED BUTTON option macgor........ Barry B You mean the 'Self Destruct' one Barry , that's tempting  |
|
|
|
Post by graemeh on Feb 11, 2014 14:24:25 GMT 12
Rod might have been head Ref but he has other also able Refs assisting. We will always go on about Ref's calls no matter who is doing the calling. It's the nature of the beast and the same as any other sport. But your claim was of bias and you should substantiate that claim rather than deflect by generalising about Ref's calls. You were calling into doubt a mans professional reputation. I find that offensive. head ref has final say regardless how many other refs are assisting. i would also like to point out that at palmy teams as i have done many many times before the refs has had a significant influence. every other event i have witnessed has on the odd occasion a rough call but palmy teams is guaranteed. i have always said the refs and promotion has been bias, nothing is new there. over the years we have discussed the many issues, this years officiating was so fierce a meeting had to be called to calm them down........ you are entitled to your opinion, i am sorry you find mine offensive. hate to think what you think of others that are less controlled with their views. I doubt there is anything anyone can say, trying to justify refs decisions, that you would agree with, But it should be made known that when the original teams racing "Code of Ethics " was introduced Rod McNaughton (back then was Rotorua based dont know if he still is or not) was the Team Managers choice to be the Head Referee at all major teams events. Most tracks were represented and were unanimous in him being appointed. Although I am not as in touch with recent speedway developments I would imagine the issue of refereeing at teams meeting still remains. With all my past dealings with speedway officials there probably still isn't a better choice to be in charge of refereeing teams racing. ( I'm sure if I am wrong someone in the know can put me straight  ) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2014 15:07:20 GMT 12
I think far worse than the Harwood one, was whatever Scott Joblin was meant to have done?
|
|
|
|
Post by Crow on Feb 11, 2014 15:20:37 GMT 12
If all the drivers race by the rules and do it on the track then no one should be pulled off. They all know the rules and if they are told breaking them will see you pulled from the race fair enough no matter how big or small the discretions. At least this is consistant or should be and the drivers can blame no one apart from themselves. Having said that mistakes do happen by drivers and officials, no ones perfect but I think this is an even base to start from.
PS (a lot can be gained by putting one wheel on the grass)
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 11, 2014 15:33:39 GMT 12
I think far worse than the Harwood one, was whatever Scott Joblin was meant to have done? Turn 1 lap 1 Scott dived in over the pole line to hit 32b? Fair cop  screen capture open source |
|
|
|
Post by BarryB on Feb 11, 2014 15:38:52 GMT 12
If all the drivers race by the rules and do it on the track then no one should be pulled off. They all know the rules and if they are told breaking them will see you pulled from the race fair enough no matter how big or small the discretions. At least this is consistant or should be and the drivers can blame no one apart from themselves. Having said that mistakes do happen by drivers and officials, no ones perfect but I think this is an even base to start from. PS (a lot can be gained by putting one wheel on the grass) Whilst I agree with your post in theory, theory often doesn't work in practice. People don't pay $50 at the gate per night, maybe $1k all up for their weekend away to the greatest show on dirt, to see cars parked up for indiscretions so minor that a slap with a wet bus ticket, or maybe a 1 spot relegation after the race, would suffice. EVERY infringement is NOT worthy of a sending off, in my book at least. Some are, definitely, but ones so small nobody can even pick the reasoning behind it? I don't think so........ Let's do it on the terracotta, Barry B |
|
|
|
Post by BarryB on Feb 11, 2014 15:40:52 GMT 12
I think far worse than the Harwood one, was whatever Scott Joblin was meant to have done? Turn 1 lap 1 Scott dived in over the pole line to hit 32b? Fair cop screen capture open sourceA one spot relegation? Perhaps. A sending off offence within the first 200 metres of the race with 8 cars jostling for track position? Sorry, you've GOT to be kidding me.......... Barry B |
|
|
|
Post by Ford Prefect on Feb 11, 2014 15:42:41 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 11, 2014 15:47:40 GMT 12
A one spot relegation? Perhaps. A sending off offence within the first 200 metres of the race with 8 cars jostling for track position? Sorry, you've GOT to be kidding me.......... Barry B Seems harsh , but it wasn't part of the jostling as such. I won't guess what the intent was on Scott's part but I suspect it may have been his car had a mind of it's own. I had to watch the start of the video several times. |
|
|
|
Post by BarryB on Feb 11, 2014 15:53:37 GMT 12
I'll have a watch tonight. At least we know what we're supposed to be looking for now anyway, which certainly tells us it was never obvious. To me, if it wasn't obvious, it was hardly worthy of a red card. I'm not blaming the ref's here, as if they were policing the rules as asked it means our rules need yet another long hard look taken at them.
Let's do it on the terracotta,
Barry B
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 11, 2014 16:14:10 GMT 12
I'll have a watch tonight. At least we know what we're supposed to be looking for now anyway, which certainly tells us it was never obvious. To me, if it wasn't obvious, it was hardly worthy of a red card. I'm not blaming the ref's here, as if they were policing the rules as asked it means our rules need yet another long hard look taken at them. Let's do it on the terracotta, Barry B Teams had said they would prefer a car was pulled of rather than be relegated after a race that way the team would not be relying on a car to win a race only to have it taken off them. They could then have a chance to change their game plan. After Friday night's event the Teams decided they'd actually rather the car stayed out there and then get relegated which is what happened to the Tigers. Some drivers then said they would rather do it the other way again with cars being pulled off at the time of offending. darned if you do , darned if you don't Personally I'd prefer more use of fines if the offending causes no real damage or gains no real advantage. Not my decision though. |
|
|
|
Post by Crow on Feb 11, 2014 16:17:41 GMT 12
I Just think the more responsibility you can take away from the refs and put on the drivers the better. Then it is decided on the track. Pulling cars off is harsh but if its the same for all and the drivers know this then it is there responsibility to race cleanly. This should also give the referees less to act on hopefully making there job easier to officiate and get it right.
|
|
|
|
Post by BarryB on Feb 11, 2014 16:26:13 GMT 12
A one spot relegation? Perhaps. A sending off offence within the first 200 metres of the race with 8 cars jostling for track position? Sorry, you've GOT to be kidding me.......... Barry B Seems harsh , but it wasn't part of the jostling as such. I won't guess what the intent was on Scott's part but I suspect it may have been his car had a mind of it's own. I had to watch the start of the video several times. I say it was part of the jostling. 9p puts 32b onto the grass at the start, 32b rightfully gets out of the gas. Should 32b have been looping around to rejoin on the same corner he left the track? I'm not sure...... Meantime 35b makes a hard left hand turn contacting with 6p, sending him across the pole line and into 32b who just happened to be there. A crime punishable by relegation? I think not. A crime punishable by being sent infield? Not in a million years. A racing incident. Surely to goodness. What was Joblin supposed to do? Turn invisible? Macgor is right though. The members voted that the refereeing be done differently. One night of seeing that in action was enough, and things reverted to normal for night 2. They've got 12 months now to get it right for 2015, cos that was just wrong!! Barry B |
|
|
|
Post by mcfly on Feb 11, 2014 16:45:50 GMT 12
A one spot relegation? Perhaps. A sending off offence within the first 200 metres of the race with 8 cars jostling for track position? Sorry, you've GOT to be kidding me.......... Barry B Disagree Barry. HB had their whole winning race disqualified a couple of years ago for a mistaken start by Paul Demanser that did not even result in a scratch in the paint. So a 25% loss in capability for an offence that resulted in a worse outcome is getting off lightly don't you think. I get annoyed when people keep going on about small indiscretions not worthy of the penalty, and things like the paying public deserve to watch 4 on 4 etc. The fact is that the drivers know the rules, the penalties were pointed out, so the drivers have an obligation to their team mates and fans to follow the rules or suffer the consequences. We should be winging at the drivers involved, not the refs, after all, which one the two factions was following the rules? If the officials allow these indiscretions to continue, the cheating will only get worse! Look at the before mentioned problem with gaining ground under the reds, it's a bloody joke, the cars seem to be able to slow down well enough when under attack, but nothing will change for the better until those that continually cheat with this rule and the others alluded to are punished. Continue being harsh I say, and it won't take long before the drivers start driving to the newly enforced standards. |
|
|
|
Post by Ford Prefect on Feb 11, 2014 16:52:07 GMT 12
In Joblins case, what was he supposed to do? make his car disapear so he doesn't contact the car inside him after being hit by another opponent...................
|
|
|
|
Post by mcfly on Feb 11, 2014 16:55:08 GMT 12
Seems harsh , but it wasn't part of the jostling as such. I won't guess what the intent was on Scott's part but I suspect it may have been his car had a mind of it's own. I had to watch the start of the video several times. I say it was part of the jostling. 9p puts 32b onto the grass at the start, 32b rightfully gets out of the gas. Should 32b have been looping around to rejoin on the same corner he left the track? I'm not sure...... Meantime 35b makes a hard left hand turn contacting with 6p, sending him across the pole line and into 32b who just happened to be there. A crime punishable by relegation? I think not. A crime punishable by being sent infield? Not in a million years. A racing incident. Surely to goodness. What was Joblin supposed to do? Turn invisible? Macgor is right though. The members voted that the refereeing be done differently. One night of seeing that in action was enough, and things reverted to normal for night 2. They've got 12 months now to get it right for 2015, cos that was just wrong!! Barry B Have another look Barry. 32 had slowed and was already behind the car that forced him over the pole and he attempted to re-entered on the same part of the track, so all good. Joblin then came from out wide and deliberately attacked the right front wheel looking to disable it, also all good, except that the HB car had not fully regained the track, so effectively Joblin was then attacking a car that was NOT in an attacking position or part of the race. |
|
|
|
Post by Ford Prefect on Feb 11, 2014 17:05:26 GMT 12
Guess it depends which part of the country you are in as to how you will read he Joblin incident I saw it on the Videohub replay on Saturday arvo and I paid particular attention to the Joblin one as I had no idea what had happened to cause his sending off from my spot in the grandstand. After seeing it from their camera angle which basically was looking down on the start I just sat their dumbfounded as to what he should of done in that situation.................I spose if he was quick enough he could of stood on the picks and avoided it but from Vudeohubs camera angle their didn't seem to be a lot of seperation between the cars at that point so I don't know if even that could of stopped the contact from occuring |
|
|
|
Post by BarryB on Feb 11, 2014 17:31:29 GMT 12
Disagree Barry. HB had their whole winning race disqualified a couple of years ago for a mistaken start by Paul Demanser that did not even result in a scratch in the paint. So a 25% loss in capability for an offence that resulted in a worse outcome is getting off lightly don't you think. No, I don't. Two wrongs, years apart, don't make a right. Resulted in a worse outcome? Nothing happened. Oh, you mean there was a wee scratch on the paint this time?  Don't go back and analyse something from back in history and justify it that way. Just analyse this race at this event. The only thing you've found wrong so far didn't even happen in this race, at this meeting, this year...... Let's do it on the terracotta, Barry B |
|
|
|
Post by BarryB on Feb 11, 2014 17:38:57 GMT 12
Have another look Barry. 32 had slowed and was already behind the car that forced him over the pole and he attempted to re-entered on the same part of the track, so all good. Joblin then came from out wide and deliberately attacked the right front wheel looking to disable it, also all good, except that the HB car had not fully regained the track, so effectively Joblin was then attacking a car that was NOT in an attacking position or part of the race. You can look at it any way you like, to get the result you want. I say another HB car (35b) pushed 6p into 32b and that 6p couldn't vanish into thin air. You say 6p deliberately attacked 32b's right front wheel without mentioning being knocked off-liine by the 35b, as that doesn't suit your argument. I say one is a result of the other. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. I still say it came from turn 1 jostling which should have resulted in no penalty whatsoever. There was no cheating involved and no damage done. I'd even suggest that if Joblin had of attacked the 32b, he'd of hit it a lot harder than that. To me it looks like he's getting out of the gas. You're a HB fan, I'm certainly no PN fan, so perhaps, just perhaps, I'm viewing it with a more open mind? I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree...... Let's do it on the terracotta, Barry B |
|
) 
Don't go back and analyse something from back in history and justify it that way. Just analyse this race at this event. The only thing you've found wrong so far didn't even happen in this race, at this meeting, this year......