waiheke1

Wasn't Ole co promoter at Vojens while a rider Seem to recall Ivan complaining about Oles influence at the 81 inter continental final when ole was a promoter and the meeting was completed despite riders voting 14-2 to abandon it (Ole was one of the 2)

Have watched a couple of meetings on DVD recently from Hyde rd in the 80s run in wet conditions- the 83 overseas final and sn early 86 league cup match. If you were told that that was arguably the best race track of all time I doubt you'd be tempted to attend another meeting -very much from the gate.Stopping cancellations would be a good thing, but only if the solution means meetings can be run in good conditions. I still can't believe an affordable covers system hasn't been devised - wouldn't help if it rains during the meeting but would if the rain was in the lead up to it.

Surely if the league goes to 12 teams the point limit is more likely to be 40-42 than 42-45?

Remember all the whinging when baby bjerre pulled out of the 2nd leg of a double header because his equipment got damaged in the first leg? Have every sympathy for jake knight, and clearly he should have been advised that he would cop a ban, but at the same time the bspa have probably acted correct rly in following the rules, the issue is all the times they haven't. Yes you jack holder.

If it's a 42 point limit then I assume you would simply swap Schlein for an NL 2 pointer (Clegg?I think that fits. Greaves could step up to bring senior reserve and Riss to 2nd string. Woffy in for masters or thorssell if he fitted and was interested? Of course if the league goes to 12 teams then unless the fixed race nights brings back some big names the limit may need to drop to say 40 to free up riders for clubs moving up?

Zmarzlick can be a nasty rider...a quality likely to help him become world champ.

Yeah, had to cram 14 meetings into 6 months, tough ask...

The one point I would note is that just because we thought this year we had the top 15 riders in the world in the GPS, it does not mean that in fact the top 15 riders in the world have been the 15 riders in the gp field.The likes of Laguta lebedevs Milik have been better than say Holder. That's not to say Hokder shouldn't get a place, but that is based on his performances in previous years as well - on 2017 form he wouldn't deserve one.

It's the kind of strategic thinking that wins titles that is...now that Rosco has explained that watch his side rack up 50+ tonight.

Vaculik 70 more Holder 70 more Dudek 20 more Zmarzlick 20 more Doyle 20 less

of course you could argue that Wigg only joined Oxford in the first place because the 83 Cradley team were forced to release Wigg (and Ravn, and Jan O) in 1984 in order to get under the points limit. plenty of team had to release HL over the years - I remember in 85 for example Aces needed to release 2 out of Ross, Courtney and P Carr (they ended up releasing all 3 and bringing in Andy Campbell, surely one of the worst decisions of all time). if Oxrod hadn't released Wigg in 87 they would have likely needed to release Cox and Grahame to get under the points limit - hard to build a team with two 11+ riders, between them Hand and Wigg would have taken up over half the points available for team building. hard to argue Wigg wasn't a number one when he averaged 11+ in 1986, which put him 3rd in the averages I believe (behind Hans and Eric). i know he dropped a couple of points riding as number 1 in 1987, but he was hardly the worst number 1 in the league even then.

OK to clear this up: I'm the one Flange is accusing of making a hompohobic post and being a homophobe. Did I have a post removed that made a suggestion of what Flange and another poster should do instead of polluting the forum? YES Did I get a warning or a ban for that post? NO Was that post homophobic? NO Am I homophobe? NO. I've been accused of being a limp wristed liberal and a member of the PC brigade, but never of this, by anyone other than Flange. It's frankly a libellous statement, but I doubt anyone on here places any credence in anything Flange posts, and would assume that other forum members gave read enough of my posts to realsie this is just another one of his lies (see also repeated claims about steve Brum having multiple FB accounts). I'm more than happy to be on Flanges "blocked list" as he is the only poster I have ever blocked on here. I've got no idea why Flange is permitted to continue trolling, making libellous statements and constant personal attacks on Steve Brum and others. But would suggest everyone sticks him on ignore, refrain from quoting his posts and simply stop responding to his trolling. No idea why anyone would get their kicks in this way, it's very very sad. Not going to post any further on this,enough of this thread which should be about speedway is taken up with this rubbish.

How would that help them even if the rules allowed it (which they don't)?Same riders could take RR but you'd reduce the points available for the guest?

Yep. I'd say Lindgren should have gone but it's not clear cut.Bewley could have been excluded in the first leg when he locked up and Greaves went into him. And Tungate was possibly unlucky to be excluded in heat 14 first leg. Two 50/50 calls going wolves way, one going the Aces. Enough to swing the tie with only 1 point in it, but end of the day wolves scored the extra point and deserve to be in the final. Hope Freddie ok.

An NL rider can miss a meeting if he fancies an evening in front of the telly, a session at the pub, has ballet lessons or is washing his hair.

The rule hasn't changed though?What's changed is some of the riders who are eligible to guest. Which is the case with most rained off meetings?

As you say Poole WERE in the play offs. At the time of this fixture they are not in. How are we supppsed to know what they mean? If they wanted it to mean any team who had qualified for the play offs that was easy enough to specify - but they didn't. So it is just guesswork to say what the intention was. It could be argued the intention was simply to stop a rider from influencing who his side would meet in the final? In which case SCBs interpretation, based on meaning in everyday use, is consistent with the intent.

Tbf he did say "completes the series" which I assume means he would consider places for Hancock nicki and Puk.

A rider can miss an NL fixture for any reason...

But the same guy will then come and ask why the team building limit is now 10.5 and not 46 when u need 45 points to win a meeting...

You do realise that there is zero difference between the two approaches?

Looks like a contradictory rule.As "regardless of MA" is surely meant to indicate the facility is there for all riders? But as you say if that is the intent then there should be no need to refer back to "if permitted by 18:10"

Holder pretty clearly hasn't been one of the top 15 riders in the world this season. So the argument for a wildcard is based on previous seasons performances, which indicate he has consistently been one of the worlds best. I don't think he's nailed on, but no objection to him getting one. The more I look at nicki p record the more I think he deserves first pick of the Danes if fit. And then maybe PUK deserves one ahead of Holder? I'd say Hancock is the only rider nailed on for one, then you have arguments for a range of Danes, holder, lindback, whoever finishes 9th, lebedevs and milik. The latter two would be the most exciting additions, and on form this season u could argue lebedevs is the most deserving, but not convinced they have done quite enough to change the conventional approach that 9th and 10th are close to assured a WC

Hard to believe this needs explaining again...

Surely his pronunciation would be a little bit Sami Hyppia?