szkocjasid

All great points.

I think we need to be realistic, there's not gonna be a temp signing to replace Woffinden. Sheffield really need to look at a new riders(s) for the season. It's not even a case of giving Tai time to recover without the pressure of when to return, I'm sure both Sheffield management & Tai's families are only concerned with him making a full recovery at this time. When that does (fingers crossed) happen, then he can think about riding speedway again, if he wants to.

Well I don't like the GP scoring system either, but that's for another section of the forum.

My first instinct was "yeah that's right" but Boughen pulled out after 2 rides for Glasgow & was replaced by a reserve on his other two.

Like you said each to their own & I know many people like finals, but I don't get excited about them as I feel the meeting should've been won by Worrall. I guess I feel like Harris was winning a competition set up to give a second chance for people who weren't good enough to win over a fair 20 heat format. I don't get the logic of rewarding riders who were near the top, but not the best. "Finals exist to not only crown the most consistent performer, but also the person who can prove it under pressure" I can agree they may prove who is the better under pressure, but finals don't crown the most consistent performer, Harris was quite inconsistent. You make a fair point about the mental aspect of a low pressure qualifying system vs an all-on-the-line-final, but if there was no final, then there wouldn't be a low pressure qualifying system. I agree the final can make an exciting end to the meeting, however they do take away a bit of excitement from all of the rest of the races, fans know that the first 20 heats aren't so vital. In Worrall's last ride instead of being excited about watching the Championship decider, fans know it's just another heat. So is a final "creating" excitement or just "transfering" it from elsewhere? Finally I was a Rye House / Arena-Essex but now really a neutral fan. I like the excitement of every race counting, not one more than others.

Depending on the heat 8 rules, might be stronger if he pulls out mid meeting. I'm not suggesting Lynn would plan that beforehand, just that Lynn are the one team who will cope with injuries better than anyone else. Even if a top 5 rider is out, wether it's r/r or IRR, having a strong reserve allows them to cover or even potentially be stronger.

If Barker did in fact drop his average the most, then what did the BSN do wrong? I'm sure they also posted the biggest improvers. So just honest journalism really.

Anders wasn't eligible for the Pairs (4th in the averages) or the riders Championship (average too low). I guess the reason Paul (Starke) won nothing is because he wasn't riding?

I see that Klindt was missing because he was racing in the Alfred Smoczyk Memorial in Leszno. I would've thought the league riders championship would take priority for being an "official" meeting, rather than an "open" meeting? It's not like Klindt would get banned in Poland for declining an invitation to ride in the meeting.

I really dislike having finals after the 20 heats. I know all the riders knew the rules beforehand & officially Bomber is a deserving winner. I can't say that Worrall is "unlucky" as the top scorer has no "divine right to win" but I think any extra heats are unnecessary & that it should be decided over 20 heats.

Adam Roynon rode ONE match in the Champ last year, but didn't ride in the National league. Maybe they're using double his Champ ave as his "most recent average". That leaves 4.42 for Harris is he's been reassessed? Steelers Nathan Ablitt 8.33 Luke Harrison 7.66 Adam Roynon 7.10 Mickie Simpson 4.49 Luke Harris (4.42 remaining) Jamie Etherington 3.00 Harrison Rogers 3.00 Total 38.00

Adam Roynon has previously averaged above 6.00 in the Champ, does that not mean he's ineligible? Looking at how it was originally written when they announced the ruling Roynon is eligible. Any rider who previously (prior to the 2024 season) had achieved a 4.00 average in the Championship, and currently has a Championship average of below 6.00, and are not declared in a Championship or Premiership declaration would be eligible for the National League / Trophy in the 2025 season. No wonder fans easily get confused if the people in charge post differently worded rulings, which mean two different things!

While Ben Cook hasn't made a good start riding at number one, the NSS should be a track he can perform well on. Obviously racing against Bewley & Kurtz will make it hard to pick up a big score. If Cook beats everyone bar the Aces top 2, he could score 9 (5)

I like that rule tbh, gives the next batch of "rising stars" a chance to prove their worth. Nathan Ablitt, Joe Thompson, Luke Harrison, Vinnie Foord, Ben Trigger all have a Champ ave above 3.00. Plus Freddie Hodder as he will be used to the track.

I don't understand the silence. If Cookie has been to a doctor & been signed off work with a mental health issue, can they not just admit that? Would that not be a good way of letting all men know "it's ok to ask for help / it's ok not to be ok / mental health is nothing to help ashamed of" if Cookie doesn't want his issues made public, Berwick could simply say "Cook has a doctor's note & isn't fit to ride" I imagine that basic information isn't breaching any confidentiality laws? If I tell my work I'm unable to come in because of stress / anxiety / depression then that's acceptable, if I just didn't turn up then I'm breaking the rules. If Cook has simply not replied to any of Berwick's attempts to contact him, then I don't get why they haven't admitted that (and shifts the blame away from then). Missing the Pairs wasn't breaking any rules (Lawson missed the meeting too) so unless he has a meeting abroad (like Klindt) you'd assume he should get a 28 day ban for "withholding his services" now.

I was under the impression it was a flat fee all round, don't know if that is correct or has changed. Having watched the re-run of the final, Riss rode sensibly, even though he didn't need the win, it wasn't like he tried a crazy pass that could've cost Redcar the title.

Clubs can pick 2 of their top 3 riders anyway. Even if Castagna felt 80% fit & would normally ride through the pain for a league match, could have decided an 100% Thomson gave Monarchs the best chance of success.

Maybe there's too many foreign fixtures to avoid all of them, but the idea of the early riders Champ so they'll have the strongest possible field doesn't seem to have made a difference. I've also heard Flint is in Germany, so not available. Thankfully doesn't sound like many of the injuries are serious, so riders won't be out for long.

While I can understand arguments for and against the refs decision, some of the comments on FB especially are so over the top. Saying Riss pulled a massive locker, almost stopped the bike dead, parked it in front of Kerr etc. If you watch Riss going into the bend & ignore Kerr for a moment, you'll see he doesn't lock up much at all & may even feel he's a fault. But let's be realistic about what actually happened!

A couple of the replacement riders are not in average order. Zischke (6.96) chosen ahead of Castagna (7.11) - before Castagna subsequently got injured. Although Tate would've gotten a pick if Bachelor pulled out. Not sure if Batch will be riding after missing the Pairs. Now Vuolas (6.40) picked ahead of Flint (6.85) & Thomson (6.53)!

The downside of that would be referees could end up doing multiple all-fours to avoid having to make a decision & multiple re-runs with all-four mean the match goes on for ages. That happens in cycle speedway lol! But I do feel it would have been a fair call this time. Maybe restrict that ruling to shared events / GPs / play-offs etc. Or just explain to the referees only use it in exceptional circumstances, where there really is no-one at fault? Not to use as a get out of jail card & give the ref an easy night? Don't think any fans in attendance would've minded an all-four here.

To defend Riss, when he got past, Kerr was virtually on the white line, when they clashed they were both a meter further out. Had Kerr stayed on the white line & they clashed I definitely would've excluded Riss, but the fact Kerr drifted makes it more of a 50/50 decision for me. Still think either could've gone, still think I wouldn't blast the ref no matter what he decided, still think they should be allowed to call an all-four here.

Agree with all of that.

Good point!

Now I've seen the final I can understand why the ref made the call he did. Riss pulled a slight locker but nothing major that gave Kerr nowhere to go. Kerr did drift out a little, had to stayed on the line & collected Riss I would've excluded Riss as he would've had "nowhere to go". That being said I think it was close enough to be a 50/50, that whatever decision the ref made, someone will feel hard done by. In this instance think an all four call would be totally acceptable (especially for a pairs event).