Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 26, 2009 15:28:02 GMT
Am I the only one who finds this whole sitation and the uproar it's caused - especially in Dorset - hilarious? Poole are the team who started this fiasco by fiddling their averages this year to get Andersen in, yet Matty & his disciples are now screaming blue murder. I'm more with the other 7 teams who don't like what either Coventry or Poole have done. But the simple fact is that Coventry's newly declared lineup was not approved by the MC and they went ahead and rode with an illegal side when told not too. Even if Coventry are right with the line up and prove the BSPA wrong the simple fact is they should have fielded a legal side and awaited an appeal on the new line up.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 26, 2009 15:30:21 GMT
To be fair Squirlie, Matt may have kept quiet personally, but his forum mouthpiece hasn't.
I can see to some extent why people are quoting the unfairness of Screen having an ave based on 11 meetings where as Frampton hasn't.
Maybe it has got something to do with Frampton being a d/upper, or maybe the BSPA think that the poor form from some of Pirates and the unfortunately spate of e/f's was a little bit suspect and have used their discretion in approving team changes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 26, 2009 15:34:45 GMT
Am I the only one who finds this whole sitation and the uproar it's caused - especially in Dorset - hilarious? Poole are the team who started this fiasco by fiddling their averages this year to get Andersen in, yet Matty & his disciples are now screaming blue murder. I'm more with the other 7 teams who don't like what either Coventry or Poole have done. But the simple fact is that Coventry's newly declared lineup was not approved by the MC and they went ahead and rode with an illegal side when told not too. Even if Coventry are right with the line up and prove the BSPA wrong the simple fact is they should have fielded a legal side and awaited an appeal on the new line up. Sorry, have I missed something here? Bloody work been getting in the way of important business today. Have the BSPA said somewhere then that the team Cov tracked last night hadn't been ratified?
|
|
|
Post by admin on May 26, 2009 15:36:42 GMT
I'm more with the other 7 teams who don't like what either Coventry or Poole have done. But the simple fact is that Coventry's newly declared lineup was not approved by the MC and they went ahead and rode with an illegal side when told not too. Even if Coventry are right with the line up and prove the BSPA wrong the simple fact is they should have fielded a legal side and awaited an appeal on the new line up. Aside from Coventry not being able to be right - as I understand it the decision of the Management Committee is final and inviolate - if they are "in the right" then so are Poole. They cannot have one rule for Poole and another for Coventry. In fairness to Matt Ford, he has taken the Management Committee decision on the chin, while the shameful crew at Brandon seem set on huffing and puffing about it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 26, 2009 15:38:08 GMT
Yep, Oakesy has today said that the team was illegal, but they rode with it anyway because they are confident that they're going to get their own way on this line-up change. Ippo rode under protest apparently. Not that you'd have known from the sky coverage!!!
|
|
|
Post by admin on May 26, 2009 15:40:06 GMT
Sorry, have I missed something here? Bloody work been getting in the way of important business today. Have the BSPA said somewhere then that the team Cov tracked last night hadn't been ratified? It appears you have. Peter Oakes, in his pansy voice, has explained things in an audio interview on the Coventry website (MD has provided a link, although I can well understand people not wanting to listen to it). Coventry's re-declared team was thrown out by the BSPA Management Committee, but Coventry elected to ignore that. Ipswich raced under protest. And the smug, pansy-voiced Oakes doesn't care if the global superstar's points are removed as the Bees would still take three points. Coventry deserve a much harsher punishment.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 26, 2009 15:41:41 GMT
To be fair Squirlie, Matt may have kept quiet personally, but his forum mouthpiece hasn't. Just be thankful that Steve is currently away for a few days and missing today's goings on. Although in Steve's defence, with this latest round of rule spin the bottle, Id be inclined to agree with him that there seems to be one team having to abide by one set of rules, whilst Coventry don't like what they're hearing and doing their own thing.
|
|
|
Post by admin on May 26, 2009 15:42:58 GMT
Not that you'd have known from the sky coverage!!! You'd have thought that would be the sort of thing Sky would love, but I guess the BSPA ordered it to be kept under wraps and that the screaming imbecile - also the BSPA's press officer, as well as Sky's front man - complied. Had the whole thing been aired, it would clearly have been more compelling than the "on track" action, which was pitiful.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 26, 2009 15:47:30 GMT
Ahh ok. ta squirlie. Tell you what, it's not that bad really having no team to support anymore! You can take a step back from all the bs and just think, at least I'm not spending £30-£40 a week anymore for this sideshow.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 26, 2009 15:57:38 GMT
This is why I only go to NL meetings away from Poole! You'd have thought that would be the sort of thing Sky would love, but I guess the BSPA ordered it to be kept under wraps and that the screaming imbecile - also the BSPA's press officer, as well as Sky's front man - complied. Had the whole thing been aired, it would clearly have been more compelling than the "on track" action, which was pitiful. Possibly...but then perhaps it's a good thing that the general populace isn't shown what a mess the sport really is.
|
|
|
Post by admin on May 26, 2009 16:06:20 GMT
Possibly...but then perhaps it's a good thing that the general populace isn't shown what a mess the sport really is. That I guess would be the argument. And it is much the same as arguing that it would be a good thing if the general populace hadn't discovered about the extent and scope of MPs expenses.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 26, 2009 20:30:31 GMT
It's a vicious circle - I'd guess if the play-offs didn't even exist or if it wasn't for this Top 6 qualify nonsense. You wouldn't get teams scrambling for new riders etc. to make some attempt at claiming the top 6.
|
|
|
Post by admin on May 27, 2009 20:48:04 GMT
I notice the pornmeister "Outraged of Dorset" is back and turning up the heat on his favourite target.
|
|