Vincent Blachshadow

I'd say it's the Mickey Mouseness of that rule, and the effect the same rule has had on the world stage in the WTC. Personally, I don't agree with any artificial attempted leveller - if you're behind, pull your socks up and catch up - and I fully understand that the previous benefit-the-losing-team scheme could have a greater effect on a score, but a bloke changing to a black and white hat and going for double smacks too much of 'It's a Knockout'.

Yes, but only for the play-offs. Shame they don't bother going to the qualifying matches which TWK and hundreds, no, thousands of others did go to.

Have they changed the system now then? When I subscribed to the mag up to some three years or so ago the match reports were by a local journalist and some were so home-orientated it wasn't true.

You still haven't got the point of that initial post. Never mind, let's leave it there.

No, I think I've got it right. Maybe you'd like to read my initial post again and see the point I was making. It wasn't the use of guests per se.

Well, what a surprise. I post I would prefer a championship to be decided by a team's efforts throughout the season when incidences of injuries and the like even out between all the teams rather than by a scramble to beat the opposition for the services of some other team's rider to win it for you over a couple of matches and you answer, what it is Drop a cog's posted, '....they're brilliant because they attract huge attendances.......' What is it you posted, oh yes, 'the same old same old'.

Much is being made of the fact that the team with most money will win the championship by virtue of being able to throw most at the best guest available. Is that really the way a season-long competition should be decided, by scrapping to procure the best rider available from another club's team for a couple of matches? At least during a season injuries, bad luck, poor refs usually even themselves out.

Why don't the promoters get off of their collective backsides, go out and find a sponsor. Oh, hang on, they couldn't even find a sponsor for (what they want to call) the League Champions now the one's that devalued the League have stopped so what chance have they got of finding a sponsor for what is merely a qualifying competition. After all, do qualifying group winners get a trophy in major competitions like football's World Cup or Champions League?

I've got a feeling the ones complaining about the sacking have an ulterior motive.

Depends if you include the top continental riders in this 'full strength' scenario, as the poster I quoted was. Most of the top continentals would opt out of riding here if Monday was the race night.

One night a week may or may not bring the top liners back to Britain but if it's a Monday it won't. Belle Vue and Wolves riders know the deal before they sign but the rest prefer to go from Poland to Sweden direct not via GB.

But not every team would get away with what you suggest in your next post. And some may not wish to!

But that's the very reason they remain the top club in Britain. As you post, Poole haven't always been as well supported and as financially healthy as they now are. Ford has got them there by bringing and maintaining success to the club. I wonder what would happen after a couple of years of mediocrity, will they slip back to where they were pre his arrival? Ford can't take that chance so does everything in his power to keep the club up there. The trouble is, this may keep Poole at the top but it doesn't do the rest of the teams any good and can only go on for so long before everything goes knockers-up, and we're going that way fast!

We could try to change things!

There were two. Somebody didn't like that and did their best to alter it!

Not sure the crowd will be bigger any more. To be bigger, there's got to be more people in the vicinity that actually give a toss about the sport and read about who rides for whom these days and I don't believe there is. I reckon most who care go anyway now.

True. It's the 'mitigating circumstances' bit that made that a little thin. There are none for drunk driving/riding.

Not where the breathalyzer's concerned. If that were the case they may as well dump the things since 'no intent' gives at least three ways to not guilty - no intent to go over the limit, no intent to smash into the bollard or whatever, no intent to be in the right place for that idiot to be on my side of the road and hit me. And there is also the old adage that ignorance is no excuse.

Isn't this two separate issues though? They should have an opinion on their star rider failing a breathalyser test and being thrown out of an important meeting regardless of any further penalty imposed. Or are they waiting quietly hoping he gets no further ban so they can sweep this under the carpet?

Or maybe they haven't got a pet MC member.

That's the impression I got - no remorse for the alcohol but bemoaning his luck at not having drunk enough water.

Is it known exactly why he was picked to take an alcohol test? Since it's not even regularly done, somebody must have had a reason for him to be tested.

Yes, they have. And, when it was unwise to do so (shall we say) and got collared by the authorities, paid the price, in many circumstances with their jobs. I had no sympathy with those, I have none for Ward. Drinking alcohol is an option not compulsory. The wise know when not to take the option.

According to Shovvy it was because they rode as Bournemouth so the local folk didn't realise they were Poole's 2nd team.

That's where Muddlo went wrong. There are absolutely no mitigating circumstances to have an alcoholic drink at all, never mind the night before a speedway meeting starting at lunch-time. We don't have to imbibe alcohol, we choose to. He should not have chosen to. Seems to me Muddlo added the mitigating circumstances bit so he didn't upset the poor lad!