szkocjasid

Such a shame, looked very promising last year, easy to say with hindsight but shouldn't have moved up to the Champ so early in his career. But then a rider like Ingram after one NDL season with a sub 6.00 ave is having no difficulty.

Totally agree with this take. I can't think of an obvious rider to drop (including Lambert) they were all riding close to their averages, but the team was 2 points weaker than all the others. For all the stick MPT gets, what do fans expect putting a 6 point rider at number 5? Mountain maybe the biggest underachiever, plus Harrison away from home, but they've all had good & poor matches, so hope is there they can turn it around? Now Ingram is flying, especially at home, they're kinda back on a par with most teams (built to the limit) Ingrams improvement cancelling out Pickering's average drop. Had they managed to find a heat leader to replace a second string, they'd look a decent bet for a play-offs spot.

I very much enjoyed that season, but it's not quite how you remember it. Every club didn't have an out & out number one, as the Previous Div 1 sides wouldn't share them out, same still happens now. Back then there would be enough number ones for 15 clubs, now we don't enough for the 6 Prem teams. Plus not enough riders to go around. If it ever happened, there would be more guests available, but don't see how it can. For now, who could Belle Vue bring in place of Bewley? Any top riders willing to ride in GB & affordable, would likely already be here.

I'm pretty sure the 8 point rule was for initial declarations, so any team should be able to sign a second 8 pointer now, if there's anyone available that is?

It does seem odd signing Pickering, knowing his average will drop & leave them under the limit, but the only change was to bring in a like-for-like change.

Tbh, I think 8 Champ clubs could say the same thing, can't see past Poole for the treble! Can't see what change any team could make to challenge them. But changes could be sought to reach the play-offs?

Did they really? I thought the majority wanted to keep Newman. Most of the ones who wanted Gilkes back, seemed to suggest doing it because of morals, rather than Gilkes being stronger? I suppose on Gilkes FB Poole were getting flak, but that's not really unbiased opinions.

While I wish Bowes well in his recovery, this doesn't hinder Poole at all. For the rest of this month Cairns & Rushen at reserve, plus Kerr & Newman can take r/r outings. When Rushen gets a new average, Cairns & Newman at reserve, Rushen can take a r/r outing. Bowes won't drop to reserve till July at the earliest. Besides if Poole can win at Redcar without Rushen, who can challenge them at all?

Really? They stopped giving wildcards to riders because of their nationality ahead of their ability, looks the strongest field since the Russians were banned to me. Not sure why people are saying it's virtually over after one round, Zmarzlik will always be favourite, but it's not like he's miles in front, he's not even leading the series yet.

Not sure if agree with that because 1) what of no ex-riders want to become referees & 2) when I see an ex-rider on commentary they often excuse falls & blame the track, rather than the opponent, I feel this could lead to multiple all four re-runs because they side with both riders? I'm not sure the answer to poor refereeing, even with video footage, you often see bizarre decisions made.

Interesting idea, could Belle Vue bring in a 28 day replacement, then revert back to guests r/r for Bewley though?

I understand that, for a one-off, you could argue that makes sense. But what if the forecast is poor for half a dozen (or more) meetings, will they keep calling them off? Eventually they'd have to race them, could end up racing in poorer conditions / on a off race night / twice in a week / running double headers because there's a rush for the cut off date for the play-offs. Sounds like they are trying to avoid costs now, while hoping they'll be no more issues later on, but can't guarantee the weather will indeed be better on the re-staging date.

There's no such rule, if Hellstrom Bangs was withholding his services Ipswich would be due a guest, if he was missing for a reason they don't get a facility for, then it's a "75% guest".

I understand the logic of wanting the best riders picked, but "modern" speedway isn't about being the best over a season (play-offs) or the best over a meeting (LCQs / semi finals & finals) so picking riders based on one meeting falls in line with being able to be your best on a particular day / or particular race. I wouldn't say he wasn't good enough to get an attempt at qualifying for the GPs, he had that chance at the British final, just wasn't good enough on the day. Actually he had a second chance of qualifying for the GPs by winning the SEC, a competition he didn't qualify for either. I'd agree it would be odd Brennan not getting picked if they just chose 4 wild cards, but nothing odd when you know how the riders were selected. You can probably guess, I dislike all wild cards / seeded riders, would rather everything was decided on track.

I'll respectfully disagree, if they're good enough, should've finished ahead of Harris in the British final. Glasgow promotion will likely be pleased. You could argue Robert Lambert is the one "taking opportunities away" as he's almost guaranteed a wildcard if he doesn't finish in the GPs top 6! But he earned the right to choose.

The GB picks appear to be in the order of British final positions, which is exactly how it should be imo. Robert Lambert (1st), Chris Harris (4th) Adam Ellis (5th) & Anders Rowe (6th) in qualifiers. Reserves Dan Thompson (7th) & Tom Brennan (11th). I'm guessing Wright (2nd) misses out through injury, Bewley (3rd) thinks he'll finish in the top 6 of the GPs & King (8th), Cook (9th) & Flint (10th) didn't want to be 2nd reserve?

While the forecast isn't awful, it's wet enough that a postponement is understandable. Surprised they're getting so much grief after what happened at Ipswich last week.

Good post, but I have to say is Cook really "too good" for the Championship? Not even averaging over 8!

This conversation shows the issue of guests not being decided by averages, you think Foord & Lambert are similar, I think Lambert is clearly better. If it's not worked out by averages, who decides who can & can't guest? Interesting comment about Lambert's home form, I wouldn't be against using away averages to decide who can guest away from home. In an ideal world teams should sign replacements (even temporary) rather than use guests. Currently the rules don't really encourage that at all, that's one of the reasons why I don't mind teams being weaker with guests.

If planning changes to strengthen up, need to do it soon, Ingram races his 6th match tonight & his average will go up.

Yeah, I didn't find it value for money, could fill in the program after half a lap in virtually every race. I've been 3 times this year, because I've been working within 5 miles of the stadium, but I wouldn't be bothered if I didn't get back this year. The same riders who look so commanding out front, can't make up any ground from behind.

Agree, Edwards had a poor match, Jenkins has had a poor season, big difference between the two.

I think that would make things far worse, could replace the weakest with the strongest, i.e replacing Kildemand with Lawson or Masters, replacing Mountain with Howarth or Craig Cook, replacing Spencer with Cairns or Battye (before injury). I personally don't think having to use weaker guests is an issue, in every sport injuries can make a team weaker, I don't know why Speedway fans & promoters expect otherwise? Plus any rule that allows teams to be stronger through injuries by the use of guests discourages looking for replacements. One change I would make is opening up the guest rule to include riders not currently racing in GB. For example Lambert, Bowtell & Morley can guest because they have NL teams, if they didn't they wouldn't be allowed, when surely it should be preferred that unattached riders get picked first?

Should run a NL team, especially for a club that puts effort into the under age categories.

Should run a NL team, especially for a club that puts effort into the under age categories.