BWitcher

Irrelevant what your opinion is, they are factually nowhere near. It's a nonsensical statement. However, to give you a chance, name TWO (as you said some) Championship teams that are stronger.

No they don't.

Thorssell will need to do more than hit the ground running. Even with a number of big names out of the league, no 1 is a far tougher position than 4.

For an £18 cost.

Neither would be the second best choice.

Of course I'm not missing the point as this is EXACTLY what I said would happen over ten years ago.

Hardly surprising. Many of us predicted this over ten years ago. NO business survives by constantly cutting the standard. Not enough fans.. cut the standard.. fans walk away.. AGM.. Not enough fans.. cut the standard.. fans walk away.. AGM.. Not enough fans.. cut the standard.. fans walk away. Season after season. Eventually you get to a point where it's just not viable to operate anymore as you can't cut any further.. we're approaching that point.

Was it? Two people attended, one said CVS mentioned Ford, the other said he didn't.

Greaves average is primarily from beating other weak no 7's. If other teams don't have such riders in their lineup he would be likely to struggle.

Not sure, but it makes perfect sense. You can be sure Ford would have been aware of it though.

Almost right, Piort Pawlicki had also been in contact with Wolverhampton about a return too. It's stated on another thread that CVS stated that Matt Ford was the driving force behind the 9pt rule.

Oh how naive you are. Of course Ford can say he was against it, of course he can vote no in full safe knowledge the vote would go the other way. That's called being clever, which Ford most certainly is.

Same, mine are in a folder somewhere in the loft at home. Happy days!

No, cancer is not a nice disease. The word has several meanings. an evil or destructive practice or phenomenon that is hard to contain or eradicate.

It is reported CVS stated it at a Wolves talk-in.

It's a good point, I suspect that is due to the start/finish line in the main though.

er yes? What you mean to say is, I apologise for inferring you were talking rubbish, when in fact it was I (Steve Roberts) who made a ridiculous post, incidentally with nothing backing it up, you know 'for clarity' and then mocked someone who pointed out it was wrong.

So it now seems that Ford is the driving force behind a new rule that any GP riders who didn't ride in the league last year will be re-assessed at 9. Who does that effect? Zagar.. Pawlicki.. Kildemand.. Ah yes. That's Poole's three biggest rivals again. Got to hand it to him, once again he pulls the strings to ensure his club are up the top... but once again taking the sport down with it.

Bundesliga isn't in the real modern world Iris!

I do wonder if you are living on the same planet at times. Top ten programmes week ending 19th November on Sky Sports 1: 1: LIVE Arsneal v Spurs 805 2: LIVE Watford v West Ham 698 3: LIVE: England v Australia (Rugby) 574 4: LIVE Italy v Sweden 393 5: LIVE: Leeds v Middlesbrough 272 6: LIVE Republic of Ireland v Denmark 245 7: LIVE: Arsenal v Spurs Pre Match 154 8: LIVE: Grand Slam of Darts 143 9: LIVE Ireland v Fiji (Rugby) 129 10: LIVE Grand Slam of Darts 123 See a pattern? Top Ten on Sky Sports 3.. All Live events The highest 'Highlights' programme that can be found is European Tour Highlights with a viewing figure of 59. Still, you know better... next time the rights are up for renewal, let Sky, BT etc know so they can have a bidding war for the 'Highlights' package.

Hardly sweeping statements. It's been happening for years.

So once again, Ford engineering things for his benefit. The cancer returns.

Yes of course. Far better to attract 1/10th of the audience. Just because you might not like watching 'live sport', it doesn't mean that is the norm. This is the issue with some on this forum, they base their opinions on what is best purely on their personal preference and nothing else. What evidence do you have that it would be 'far better' to show an 'edited' version? You do realise that the demand is for live sport more than ever these days? Don't you think if it was 'far better' to show edited, after the event, versions that TV companies/stations would be doing that? It would be much cheaper for them. The simple answer is, they don't do it because it isn't far better at all.. quite the opposite.

Isn't this supporting that the younger you are the more interested you are in this sort of thing? And it's the younger generation the sport needs.