|
|
Post by grant on Jan 7, 2009 9:44:24 GMT 12
Smashfest was a good idea. I think what everyone's asking, is if either SNZ are going to get in behind it this time around, if WP are going to adhere to their promises made at the last MOA, or if this is going to result in the same food fight that arose after the last one, and if neither party is going to see eye to eye on the matter, will WP will end up going black as a result of irreconcillable differences between club and SNZ, and what effects this will have on the current membership, classes and attendences if they do. I don't think many people are fundamentally opposed to the idea of Smashfest at all, but the potential fallout if once more, WP gets offside with SNZ over the event once again. Then the obvious answer is for the club to be run within the rules, in the spirit of the MOA and with the backing of SNZ in order to maximise the publicity and exposure of the event and the sport at W/P. Its quite simple really isn't it? The much heralded threat of "going black" was shouted down strongly by the club members so the committee must follow that direction. If the current promoter doesnt like that well too bad for him, he's employed by the club to benefit the club , not himself and despite all the claims to the contrary the documentary did show him as a driving force behind the event. Smashfest is great for the club in terms of exposure and revenue and needs to be an annual event but not at the expense of another fight between SNZ and a few of those in control of ASSCC. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2009 23:30:33 GMT 12
G'day, so how does smashfest make it on to tele and not the super champs, certainly it was better advertised than anything else going on there.oh well, I also enjoyed smashfest the first time it was shown. however i would hope that it is run under snz this time simply so that wp can advertise the Speedway classes that race there. Just like fireworks night heres a great opportunity to get your core product noticed. You dont have to run them on the night, just send a superstock, a supersaloon a mod, a stockcar or a saloon round the track a lap or two between events, explain to the public a little about about them and how they have evolved from what they used to be a few years ago and advise people on when the next meeting is. I would hate to think that the general public believes Speedway at wp is about these old jalopies when folk are spending so much time effort and money on real speedway vehicles. waiting for the uproar,, Mick.
|
|
|
|
Post by bernie on Jan 8, 2009 5:58:30 GMT 12
I note in some threads comments to the affect of, it should be done "this" way to avoid conflict with NZ, or it would be better of it was run under NZ.
My question is why not take SNZ on, why should smash fest or promotions like it that dont fall within teh SNZ rule book be run under SNZ, what if "this" way is good for SNZ but not for a club, any club. I'm not talking about speedway SNZ classes, SNZ should have absolute management right over racing of stock cars saloons etc, I'm talking about classes not covered by the NZ rule book.
Lets say ride on lawn mowers for the sake of discussion.
Should a club be obliged to have SNZ people there and have competitors pay for a SNZ night license to race ride on lawn-mowers at a speedway track. Given that there are no rules for ride on lawn mowers and SNZ have no interest in lawn mower racing, should a club have to apply to SNZ for approval to race ride on lawn-mowers, after the club has completed all of its SNZ calender.
Bernie
|
|
|
|
Post by grant on Jan 8, 2009 7:14:05 GMT 12
I note in some threads comments to the affect of, it should be done "this" way to avoid conflict with NZ, or it would be better of it was run under NZ. My question is why not take SNZ on, why should smash fest or promotions like it that dont fall within teh SNZ rule book be run under SNZ, what if "this" way is good for SNZ but not for a club, any club. I'm not talking about speedway SNZ classes, SNZ should have absolute management right over racing of stock cars saloons etc, I'm talking about classes not covered by the NZ rule book. Lets say ride on lawn mowers for the sake of discussion. Should a club be obliged to have SNZ people there and have competitors pay for a SNZ night license to race ride on lawn-mowers at a speedway track. Given that there are no rules for ride on lawn mowers and SNZ have no interest in lawn mower racing, should a club have to apply to SNZ for approval to race ride on lawn-mowers, after the club has completed all of its SNZ calender. Bernie You may very well have a point Bernie , however I believe the problem arose because of the deliberate "taking SNZ head on" again for the second time after agreeing not to run it again outside SNZ. Didn't SNZ claim ownership of the "Derby" type of event? Didn't the ASSCC committee deny that it was an ASSCC run event and a private promotion with a fee going to the Club for track hireage? Subsequent details and the TV program lead us to believe otherwise no matter which way you now try to twist it. Doesnt the MOA and the track license run for 12 months or does it now only run from the date issued until the last meeting of the season? Not taking a personal dig at you Bernie but as you are open on this board in your information and your attempts to get the committee view across then perhaps a few more honest answers can come. Pity we dont get the same from Ian who would benefit from not hiding under an assumed identity on this board. |
|
|
|
Post by sonic33 on Jan 8, 2009 7:30:34 GMT 12
If you want to run it your way then leave the derby off the programme (or what ever you called it to stop it being a derby). Fill your programme up with ride on lawn mower races, turtle races and little boys doing burnouts etc.
I was under the impression that the only concern that SNZ had was you running a "derby" charging entry fee and not passing the money on to SNZ as derbies fall under their umbrellar.
I could be wrong as I was only half reading because it just seemed more WP politics. With your comments of "why not take SNZ on" would suggest that maybe nothing has been learnt from the past two years and you would do the same againg had your members not voted strongly to stay with SNZ and not run black. Does this mean that promotion would like to head in different direction than their members?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2009 7:39:57 GMT 12
My question is why not take SNZ on, why should smash fest or promotions like it that dont fall within teh SNZ rule book be run under SNZ, what if "this" way is good for SNZ but not for a club, any club. I'm not talking about speedway SNZ classes, SNZ should have absolute management right over racing of stock cars saloons etc, I'm talking about classes not covered by the NZ rule book. Lets say ride on lawn mowers for the sake of discussion. Should a club be obliged to have SNZ people there and have competitors pay for a SNZ night license to race ride on lawn-mowers at a speedway track. Given that there are no rules for ride on lawn mowers and SNZ have no interest in lawn mower racing, should a club have to apply to SNZ for approval to race ride on lawn-mowers, after the club has completed all of its SNZ calender. Bernie As I understand things if a speedway venue is hired out to a promotional outfit for the purpose of Lawnmower racing, then SNZ need (nor would prob) want no involvment in the deal. I know that Speedways are hired every year by the Go-Cart body to run the NZ Dirt Go-Cart champs in difrent age/cc rating groups. Again nothing to do with SNZ The prob, as I would imagine you know only too well Bernie (if not someone hasn't been completely honest with you), any event covered by SNZ rules, being run at a venue where SNZ sanctioned events take place MUST have the entrants licenced (levy'd) by SNZ. So the long and short of it is you can run anything you like at Wai Park (or any other SNZ contracted venue) as long as SNZ don't have rules for it (recognize it as a class)...OR... You can run any class you like SNZ or not, at any other venue anywhere in the country. |
|
|
|
Post by grant on Jan 8, 2009 9:24:33 GMT 12
If you want to run it your way then leave the derby off the programme (or what ever you called it to stop it being a derby). Fill your programme up with ride on lawn mower races, turtle races and little boys doing burnouts etc. I was under the impression that the only concern that SNZ had was you running a "derby" charging entry fee and not passing the money on to SNZ as derbies fall under their umbrellar. I could be wrong as I was only half reading because it just seemed more WP politics. With your comments of "why not take SNZ on" would suggest that maybe nothing has been learnt from the past two years and you would do the same againg had your members not voted strongly to stay with SNZ and not run black. Does this mean that promotion would like to head in different direction than their members?The answer to that sonic is quite clearly ..yes. |
|
|
|
Post by grant on Jan 8, 2009 9:26:10 GMT 12
My question is why not take SNZ on, why should smash fest or promotions like it that dont fall within teh SNZ rule book be run under SNZ, what if "this" way is good for SNZ but not for a club, any club. I'm not talking about speedway SNZ classes, SNZ should have absolute management right over racing of stock cars saloons etc, I'm talking about classes not covered by the NZ rule book. Lets say ride on lawn mowers for the sake of discussion. Should a club be obliged to have SNZ people there and have competitors pay for a SNZ night license to race ride on lawn-mowers at a speedway track. Given that there are no rules for ride on lawn mowers and SNZ have no interest in lawn mower racing, should a club have to apply to SNZ for approval to race ride on lawn-mowers, after the club has completed all of its SNZ calender. Bernie As I understand things if a speedway venue is hired out to a promotional outfit for the purpose of Lawnmower racing, then SNZ need (nor would prob) want no involvment in the deal. I know that Speedways are hired every year by the Go-Cart body to run the NZ Dirt Go-Cart champs in difrent age/cc rating groups. Again nothing to do with SNZ The prob, as I would imagine you know only too well Bernie (if not someone hasn't been completely honest with you), any event covered by SNZ rules, being run at a venue where SNZ sanctioned events take place MUST have the entrants licenced (levy'd) by SNZ. So the long and short of it is you can run anything you like at Wai Park (or any other SNZ contracted venue) as long as SNZ don't have rules for it (recognize it as a class)...OR... You can run any class you like SNZ or not, at any other venue anywhere in the country. Correct Ramjam although it seems very open to interpretation by certain people |
|
|
|
Post by bernie on Jan 8, 2009 17:53:06 GMT 12
[/quote]
As I understand things if a speedway venue is hired out to a promotional outfit for the purpose of Lawnmower racing, then SNZ need (nor would prob) want no involvment in the deal. I know that Speedways are hired every year by the Go-Cart body to run the NZ Dirt Go-Cart champs in difrent age/cc rating groups. Again nothing to do with SNZ
The prob, as I would imagine you know only too well Bernie (if not someone hasn't been completely honest with you), any event covered by SNZ rules, being run at a venue where SNZ sanctioned events take place MUST have the entrants licenced (levy'd) by SNZ.
Youre right Ram Jam accept that SNZ does insist on the right to approve non SNZ events at WP, ie the recent drift car events, WP had to get SNZ approval to run them. Actually we didnt run the event we let the venue to a third party,and we and all other clubs are required to get approval to let our venues to someone else.This was made quite clear to us at a meeting in Hamilton in September and we have followed this since. SNZ advised us that they want the right of approval for anything during the MOA period what ever the event may be, even lawn mower racing. They did also say they would not decline anything that didn't interfere with the SNZ calender.
My only real issue with it is what an unnecessary waste of time for every one to apply for something that isn't covered by SNZ rule and should be approved, even dirt kart racing.
With regard to smash-fest one of the questions is, were cars as raced in smash fest at "that time" covered by SNZ rules of the day. Having put the two sets of rules which were applicable at the time, side by side , I personally am of the view that the two sets of rules were substantially different, different enough in my view to confidently say that a smash fest car would not have been allowed to run in a SNZ demo derby of the day, that the smash-fest racing rules were also sub substantially different, but then I would say that.
To be fair I don't think this was the cause of the spat which has been resolved. But I think it highlights some things that not many people are aware of.
|
|
|
|
Post by bernie on Jan 8, 2009 18:09:39 GMT 12
Grant said The prob, as I would imagine you know only too well Bernie (if not someone hasn't been completely honest with you), any event covered by SNZ rules, being run at a venue where SNZ sanctioned events take place MUST have the entrants licensed (levy'd) by SNZ.
Every body is in agreement with that , apparently what is, and isn't covered by the SNZ rules is can be trying at times.
Ill give you an example, which rules do historic stock cars comply with , I would argue none for most, if not all of the cars, but SNZ Insist they be licensed to SNZ.
SNZ want $150.00 competitor lisecnces or $40.00 night liscenses from a group of people who are generally, but not all, semi retired super annuants with cars that fall outside the rule book.
|
|
|
|
Post by pallmall on Jan 8, 2009 19:03:41 GMT 12
Grant said The prob, as I would imagine you know only too well Bernie (if not someone hasn't been completely honest with you), any event covered by SNZ rules, being run at a venue where SNZ sanctioned events take place MUST have the entrants licensed (levy'd) by SNZ.Every body is in agreement with that , apparently what is, and isn't covered by the SNZ rules is can be trying at times. Ill give you an example, which rules do historic stock cars comply with , I would argue none for most, if not all of the cars, but SNZ Insist they be licensed to SNZ.
SNZ want $150.00 competitor lisecnces or $40.00 night liscenses from a group of people who are generally, but not all, semi retired super annuants with cars that fall outside the rule book. That is not quite correct, SNZ do not want $40 for a day/night licence or $150 per year from historic speedway members who are only giving a 'spirited demonstration', not racing. What they do want is those drivers to be Associate Members of SNZ at $35 per year. Refer SNZ Directors Meeting Minutes from December on the SNZ website. As SNZ do not have rules for Historic Stockcars, as they don't come under any of the rules for Superstocks and Stockcars, and the same would apply to other historic sections, I think they are just being greedy. The Historic Stockcar Club annual fees are only $25 per year, yet SNZ want $35 for absolutely nothing. Eight or nine years ago Hisconz was told by a SNZ representative that they would adjust their rules so the Historic Clubs could become an associate member of SNZ rather than our individual members. Since then we have had one phone call three years ago asking for a copy of our rules and no other communication. The effect of all this is that you will not see the history of speedway demonstrated or displayed at a SNZ track, and that is SNZ 'fostering' the sport!I could write a lot more, but had better shut up as I have some negotiating to do with SNZ on this issue. |
|
|
|
Post by bernie on Jan 9, 2009 7:25:05 GMT 12
Thanks for that Pall Mall thats a psoitive change that has happened since WPs application late last year.
Well done to everyone who helped acheive that bit of common sense.
Bernie
|
|
|
|
Post by jamo91 on Jan 9, 2009 7:30:50 GMT 12
As I understand things if a speedway venue is hired out to a promotional outfit for the purpose of Lawnmower racing, then SNZ need (nor would prob) want no involvment in the deal. I know that Speedways are hired every year by the Go-Cart body to run the NZ Dirt Go-Cart champs in difrent age/cc rating groups. Again nothing to do with SNZ
The prob, as I would imagine you know only too well Bernie (if not someone hasn't been completely honest with you), any event covered by SNZ rules, being run at a venue where SNZ sanctioned events take place MUST have the entrants licenced (levy'd) by SNZ.Youre right Ram Jam accept that SNZ does insist on the right to approve non SNZ events at WP, ie the recent drift car events, WP had to get SNZ approval to run them. Actually we didnt run the event we let the venue to a third party,and we and all other clubs are required to get approval to let our venues to someone else.This was made quite clear to us at a meeting in Hamilton in September and we have followed this since. SNZ advised us that they want the right of approval for anything during the MOA period what ever the event may be, even lawn mower racing. They did also say they would not decline anything that didn't interfere with the SNZ calender. My only real issue with it is what an unnecessary waste of time for every one to apply for something that isn't covered by SNZ rule and should be approved, even dirt kart racing. With regard to smash-fest one of the questions is, were cars as raced in smash fest at "that time" covered by SNZ rules of the day. Having put the two sets of rules which were applicable at the time, side by side , I personally am of the view that the two sets of rules were substantially different, different enough in my view to confidently say that a smash fest car would not have been allowed to run in a SNZ demo derby of the day, that the smash-fest racing rules were also sub substantially different, but then I would say that. To be fair I don't think this was the cause of the spat which has been resolved. But I think it highlights some things that not many people are aware of. [/quote] It may seem a good idea to rent the place to "others" to get around the SNZ problems, but isnt it a breach of the lease to sub-rent the park and also to profit from doing so. I'm over bagging the place too much, but four months out from Smashfest09 the club is already heading down what seems like the same path as the last two years. . . . . . even after its members tell them time and time again how they feel about SNZ affiliation.
|
|
|
|
Post by Geoff public on Jan 9, 2009 10:29:50 GMT 12
I did not watch all of Smashfest. I find that sort of entertainment gimmicky & presents Speedway at a level I believe many sponsors would avoid. However I have read other comments & they show there is a bigger market for this than I thought & it is good for encouraging people to take that next step in competition. Do it , but do it within the guidelines of Speedway NZ. For the ASSCC to allow itself to loose its status as a Speedway NZ track for a promotion it has sublet it's premises to is one of the craziest things I've ever seen. How is a repeat of the clubs expulsion/ non-registration (or whatever it was) in the best in the interests of the members of the ASSCC? Surely they are more important than a privately promoted event. I am just a fan & have no knowledge of the interconnectedness of all this but any involved who wear more than one hat should step down in this issue as they are probably unable to represent the clubs best interests. In my opinion the Auckland calender is not that flash & can hardly afford to loose any more chances to get title allocations.
|
|
