szkocjasid

I am a big fan of the RS system, probably a few times riders who have not been the strongest options have been picked, which is the clubs fault not the systems fault. As long as there are at least 5/6 riders with a Champ average over 3, then I'd keep the system, don't want to force any riders weaker than that up. I agree it's not ideal to that there can be a big gap between ability, each club having 2 RS could solve that i.e whoever gets first pick also gets last pick, but there may not be enough talent to have 2 per club (unless upping the higher limit from 4.00). Think we'll always agree to disagree on the RS system anyway 👍

Probably an unrealistic team, but a title winning one imo Chris Harris Kyle Howarth Leon Flint Nick Morris Mitchell McDiarmid Jordy Loftus Cooper Rushen * I know Rushen is rumoured for Poole, but until he's 16 can't sign a contract, who knows maybe after watching the play-off final would rather ride at Ashfield than Wimbourne Road lol! I'd expect Loftus to return to Edinburgh, but would've said the same thing about Bewley in 2017!

Yeah, I don't mind that idea at all.

Fair enough. I reckon if Champ clubs want more riders who won't miss so many matches, need to lower the limit & include more NDL riders, no doubt fans would moan about the league being weaker though!

If Edwards is eligible he'd be a great RS, if he's too old now would be available on a 3.00 ave, while Jenkins would be on 3.46. Singing a former RS with a 25% reduction worked wonders for them this year.

looks a strong team, I'd have Edwards as RS if he's still an option.

That's a great point, just feel it would be more beneficial for a 17 year old after a season racing in the Champ. As brilliant as Cooper has been this season, he lost to Mulford at Ipswich, lost to Harrison & Scott at Workington, lost to Morley & Foord at Iwade. Now these riders would be the easiest opponents he'd get to meet in the Prem, even as a RS. So my concern would be it could hurt his confidence racing in the Prem so early in his career, I can't see any negatives to waiting till 2027? Now this is no slight on Cooper, there's no reason why a 15 should be expected to beat all these guys in his first season, which is the reason why I wouldn't recommend racing in the Prem, just too big a jump for me. Even if Ipswich said "no pressure, just enjoy yourself" no-one likes to lose each time, plus why wouldn't Ipswich use the best RS possible? Last time they overlooked Kemp & Rowe for Joe T, didn't work out (till they signed Dan). If he does sign, I hope I'm proved wrong & he does well, I just can't help but think would Boughen have been better taking one step at a time & don't want Cooper to follow suit.

I was thinking back to Screen & Loram, then remembered Lambert started in the top flight. Although interestingly both Loram & Lambert rode in the second division soon after riding in the first division. Screen & Bridger are the ones who stayed in the top league for most of their careers.

I think it's too early for him, should concentrate on Champ & National leagues next season before stepping up imo. I know every rider is different, but didn't do Bridger or Boughen much good racing top league racing as soon as they were 16. Who was the last 16 year old in the top league who excelled?

I'm gonna side with Colsimmo58 on this one. While I agree it's not ideal signing a rider who was always available, the fact Nagel signed after the season started so missed matches he'd already agreed to can't be avoided. I'd say a far bigger farces would be the riders who were injured on GB, while for in Poland, or Klindt who picked & chose his Plymouth matches without receiving a ban. Can't be easy finding a replacement who wouldn't miss any matches, look at Redcar, Riss has been missing since June, I'd argue using guests for more than half of the season (fixture wise) is a bigger farce than signing a rider who missed some matches.

Looking at the scores either Howarth or Dan T could've partnered Harris in heat 15. But once Howarth ran a last, I was quite surprised Cami used him in heat 16. With Harris finishing 3rd in heat 16, even if Dan had won the race, Poole still become champs. Of course we'll never know what would've happened with Dan on the first bend, could he have made a difference?

have to disagree with forever blue & dean machine & side with you have 2 minutes. if referees only make a decision when there's a faller, that only encourages riders to lay it down & penalises riders who try to stay on. Mind you there was an exclusion in the SON2 I think? I rider lifted on the first bend, avoided everyone & got excluded!

should the referee have excluded Howarth then? I notice people are blaming Howarth, but not mentioning the referee?

You say the team is 1.4 over the limit, but also comment that Rew for Doyle or Emil makes the team weaker (obviously). But it would be very hard to avoid having a weaker team (of the rules stay the same). Rew for one of the top 2 would still leave a very strong looking team imo.

Most of the comments defending the track seems to be suggesting Poole could either have a track that allows passing or a track that allows them to win easier. Is it not possible to have both, do the Poole promotion not think their riders are good enough to win on a track that allows passing? I'm not saying make the track designed for Bomber, but if Poole riders can't pass either, what if Glasgow gated better? I would've thought a track that allows for no passing takes away the home advantage cause anyone can win? Were Poole just extremely confident they had the best gaters / knew the best set-up to get round the first bend in front?

I'm basing it on Poole having won at Glasgow in the league, Glasgow only winning by 8 points in the KOC & Poole only once failing to score 40 points in 15 away meetings this year. Do you feel differently?

Can't see Glasgow pulling back 12 points. Poole big favourites, of course it's not an impossible task, but a very difficult one facing the Tigers.

Tbh I don't understand why these promising youngsters think a season (or more) racing at Poole is best for their career?

I personally think it's cheeky to charge the fans £2 more for a match that is no different to any other this season, same riders, same format, same amount of heats etc. Of course I expect fans will still pay in large numbers, so can't blame the promotion too much I guess. I guess if there's a massive crowd, there's nothing to stop the promotion adding £3 to the admission next year!

If anyone is planning to take Northampton into the Prem, they must know the Prem needs them more than they need top tier racing. Should be in a strong position to dictate that heat leaders get shared out etc. Could say the same for Oxford, if they'll only be left with Birmingham's riders, stick to Champ racing?

Agree, a very hard final to predict, maybe slightly favour Poole as they seem to be able to "step up" when it matters most, plus Glasgow may not be able to find a reserve guest to score points at home.

I would imagine Dan T may go Prem only along with Poland / Sweden? I'd think Tigers would want to hold onto Harris & Nagel at all costs. Assuming the points limit doesn't chance, I'd stick with Hodder & Perry*, most clubs will have at least one 2 point reserve, Tigers pair will have a bit of experience over some. While everyone wants stronger reserves, doesn't always mean. ore success, last year Glasgow started with Pijper & Smith didn't make the play-offs. This year Scunthorpe, Oxford & Edinburgh have had at least one strong reserve, while Workington are a lot stronger at the bottom end compared to last year, but had a less successful season. If Glasgow could fit in 6 of this years 7, would mean a powerhouse top 4, but running with 3 reserves! * unless they can sign Cooper Rushen / Jordy Loftus

I'm not denying it's heat advantages, I'm not saying the rule isn't simple. I'm asking, why are two 4-2s better than a 5-1 and a 3-3 to decide a tie? Normally they are of equal value.

I agree wanting the second leg at home could be beneficial from that point of view, no advantage over 30 heats (unless it's a tie). A good away performance could mean a big crowd. Only danger is having a 30 point away loss, meaning a poor home crowd.

Can someone explain the logic behind the rule. If most heat advantages decide the tie, what's the reasoning behind two 4-2s being better than a 5-1 & a 3-3?