szkocjasid

Great result for Oxford's, makes them favourites in the battle for 4th imo.

Certainly not.

Why is the rulebook so confusing?

Hagon was much more likely to win ht 14 than ht 13, so Garrad should've taken his 3rd ride in place of Etheridge, leaving Hagon in 14.

It's a situation I've not seen before, normally if you're not replaced after a 2 minute or tapes exclusion, it counts as a minimum ride. But as Garrad was brought in as a replacement, who knows? Dickson still got it terribly wrong though.

Very odd team managing going in here. Hagon replaces Etheridge in heat 13 (after Jye had beaten Flint in his last ride). Then drops Hagon for Garrad in heat 14. Does that make sense to anyone? As Garrad wasn't replaced in heat 8, that would count as his mandatory 3rd ride, right? If not, you'd use Garrard in heat 13 & leave Hagon in 14 surely?

How do they (promoters) know it won't work till they try it?

Every time Belle Vue do poorly, I think the same thing "you could have had Brennan"

As Workington's top 5 are all good, I see no reason not to swap riders round & give different pairings a try.

Scunny have a good top 5, all riders get a ride, so I don't see r/r as a weak option. Look at Poole, used a guest who scored 0 when they could have used r/r. Maybe r/r saves money, doesn't mean that's why they've done it. But definitely should be stronger at reserve, former Monarch Jacob Hook being an obvious guest choice. EDIT A further thought, from Scunny's point of view, you could say "what's the point of having a NL side if you don't give riders a chance" but Simpson isn't a strong NL rider, especially compared to Jody Scott who's averaging 9+ so deserves his chances with Oxford?

In this match number 3 could be easier, gets an extra race against Lambert & a reserve in heat 12, rather than Mountain & a reserve in heat 8.

Agreed. Play-off chasing teams, but not play-off challenging teams.

Looking at the stats on the Speedway GB website, Atkins has a 1.14 home average & 0.00 away average. Roynon can hardly do any worse.

They've been below the limit for some time now, don't seem to have any plans to improve the team imo. Seems strange that they'd give up on Klindt so early, but not bother making changes when they have points available (for both teams).

Back in April Oxford would've had over 6 points to replace Atkins, but either weren't ruthless enough / or very loyal & kept Atkins. You can be sure a team like Poole would've made a change, probably one of the reasons they always finish near the top.

So a fair replacement for Atkins then (based on his 2024 scores). But will Roynon score more than the guests have done?

Think that's a fair ruling. SCB obviously cracking down on riders missing fixtures compared to recent seasons.

I read the comment he was missing tonights fixture before I realised he didn't complete his last match in Poland. However, what if a rider agreed with his Polish club to take his first 3 rides each match & pull out of his fourth, then not race in GB or SWE, saying he agrivated his injury? Not saying this is what Kurtz is doing, but there would have to be rules in place to stop that happening.

Gotcha, yes Oxford getting a "second chance" of the win, greatly helps their play-off hopes.

Kurtz not riding at Sheffield, has to get the same ban as Musielak. Writing on Facebook, Kurtz said: “I have a lot of damage to my right lateral ankle ligaments. An MRI scan showed a grade 3/3 tear to one, grade 2/3 tear in another and grade 1/3 to the last. “My absence right now is because I’m currently unable to walk on it, and if my ankle was to take any more damage in its current condition, surgery will be required to repair it. “The recovery from that surgery would most likely end my season. My focus now is recovery and getting myself in a position to return to racing, but also when I know it will be safe to do so.” No mention of how he was able to ride in Poland.

How would you rotate the superfinal if different clubs qualify each year?

A run-off? I wasn't disagreeing with your idea of only using if for aggregate wins, still prefer a run-off though. Don't know what's wrong with having a draw after 15 heats?

Don't see Poole winning at Scunthorpe or Workington tbh.

I would say Oxford won the meeting & Poole drew the meeting. Easy to understand - not!

I think it is a very pointless rule.