szkocjasid

Need to do something special to avoid the wooden spoon

I'd agree with you if you said the 5th place team, 6th place team could qualify by being the best of the 4 poor teams.

You get to pick your two opponents is the advantage to the team finishing top.

Poole don't need an "easy" path to make it to the final do they? Obviously finishing top does have a small advantage, but as there are 5 teams a cut above the rest, top will most likely pick 6th plus one other strong team (injuries permitting). Besides still have to beat another strong team over 3 legs in the final. Even so, one loss at Oxford doesn't mean Poole aren't favourites to finish top imo.

I agree, not sure why any Poole fans would be concerned about their title chances. I'm pretty sure ONE away defeat will not stop them getting into the top 6 in a 9 team league!

How could you overlook Lynn's biggest signing in their recent history lol!

Think Poole missed a trick not giving Roynon his 3rd (& final ride) in heat 6. Once Atkins was excluded I'd keep Newman in the pits for the re-run, then use Roynon for the 2 minute exclusion. Newman can then take the rest of the reserve outings. Second thought was - I'd give Roynon his 3rd ride in place of Lawson. Lawson wasn't going to beat Masters off 15 meters!

"For some reason" it's pretty obvious the reason was so they could sign Laguta! Couldn't do that without lowering the points limit. Hence Kye for Josh.

I can't understand all the palava over the Pickering "saga" I feel it's a situation where no one is to blame for anything, but some are trying to blame people for everything? It made sense for Lynn to drop Josh when making a double change (he was injured) they also said they wanted to try & bring him back when fit (obviously could have replaced Jakobsen when he quit) so I don't see how even Josh's most ardent fan could say he was hard done by. Also don't understand comments I've seen of people laughing at Lynn, saying they shouldn't have dropped him! Personally I think it was a "win/win" situation for Lynn, it gave Klindt, Jakobsen & Jorgensen time to find their form, then once Pickering was available, they could drop the weakest of the three (average permitting) to bring him back. I see Buster Chapman says he wouldn't have dropped Josh, which is easy to say, but he doesn't say what he would have done! Does that mean he wouldn't have signed Laguta or would've dropped Klindt / Jakobsen / Jorgensen, while using guests for Josh - odd of that would be his plan? I do feel Lynn should be congratulated for making signings to cover injuries, especially as so many fans moan constantly about too many guests being used. For once Lynn were proactive, but still get grief! Obviously Josh had a choice of going back to Lynn or joining Sheffield (or Ipswich of they wanted him) that's his perrogrative, Lynn can't moan about that, but will obviously feel disappointed. The thing I feel most sorry for Lynn is when Pickering had a great season for Sheffield, they then dropped him (due to a high average) but Lynn were willing to sign him, it's a shame that has apparently been forgotten? What's to stop Sheffield doing it again?

Most important thing is to sign a rider on a 5.01 or above average so Tarasenko drops to reserve, that wouldn't be Barker.

As long as the teams are even should be a close match with close racing. As for who cares, probably Berwick, Birmingham, Edinburgh & Plymouth supporters?

Plymouth look to be heading for the wooden spoon! Unless Berwick, Birmingham & Edinburgh also keep losing at home that is

I'm talking about using at 4 in general (not just tonight) for tactical reasons. I get the impression it's at 4 tonight because they weren't allowed to change it at short notice?

I still don't understand why being ill means leaving straight away? If I had driven 7 hours to get to a track then took ill, the last thing on my mind would be turning round & driving straight back! Surely he could have let Ashton ride, slept in the back of the van to get his strength up, then gone home?

Personally I think it would suit Oxford better having r/r at 4. Feel Kerr would be "wasted" having his extra ride in heat 8 (as is bound to happen). Using r/r at 4 gives Oxford a strong finish: Kerr in 12, Masters & Nicholls in 13, Kerr in 14 & 2 of them in 15.

Not sure I understand the logic, Plymouth have him a NL spot & gave him the harder rides at number 6. Oxford gave him a NL spot but preferred Killeen to him last year (after only one NL outing). This year as at Plymouth he's been given the harder rides at number 6! Not much has changed imo (maybe it has behind the scenes) apart from Atkins scoring better.

Personally don't think it should be allowed, just messes up everyone's programme & besides there's no reason they can't use r/r at 4

Narrow win for the Cheetahs tonight

I'd have zero issues with that. They did have something similar a few years back, but that only lasted one season (as usual) That idea is even better than awarding races after 2 laps, means more chance of fans getting their money's worth

I've read many commenting on Ipswich being unlucky losing Thomas, but there were rising stars just as strong as him available (Kemp, Rowe) but for whatever reason they chose to go elsewhere. That's when I'll no longer call it bad luck, but poor team building.

Given how poor Kyle Howarth has been going at home recently, I'd have been tempted to leave Kerr at 2 to get off to a strong start (but not if they're using r/r for Jenkins)

Because the Championship is incredibly harder than the NL. Just look at the scores of several doubling up riders, many NL heat leaders struggle in the Champ.

Thomsen, Borke & Fredricksen x2 doesn't seem bad r/r cover though!

Don't forget if you sign a couple of world class riders, their team mates are likely to be weaker than most other teams, that's how the points limit works. Unless you have the likes of Lidsey on an old average etc.

The points limit doesn't matter if you're replacing a rider on an equal or lower average. Ipswich would have 6.14 available to replace Riss (if they wanted to)