PE7Panther

he's injured at the mo. anyway, it seems the proposed changes haven't been ratified by the MC. So far anyway...

Some muddled thinking there! Nobody's suggesting that any of the Panthers actual fixtures get moved to a different day of the week. All they'd need to do is change the nominal race day, which at present is Friday. Riders' calendars wouldn't be affected as you incorrectly assert. And other teams wouldn't need to be accommodated simply because the fixtures themselves wouldn't be changing. Some teams can nominate a regular race day. Not that they always stick to it, what with bank holiday meetings, Sky etc. But in Panthers' case it's a pointless exercise. Whatever date is nominated, Panthers have to fit in with the overlords at the Showground who dictate when the track is available. So even if Panthers were to inform the BSPA that their nominal race day is now, say, Sunday it wouldn't mean that any of the actual fixtures are going to change. It'd still be the same mixture of Fridays & Sundays plus a couple of Bank Holiday Mondays that are in the fixture list. This season Panthers declared "Friday". But that was more in hope than expectation! There are 16 home meetings in the fixture list, with Plymouth at home still to be arranged. It breaks down like this: Mondays: 3 meetings Fridays: 7 meetings Sundays: 6 meetings So, 9 non-Fridays and only 7 Fridays. Hardly makes us a Friday track, does it?! There are also four Fridays that are "reserved" but, as any Panthers fan will tell you, that doesn't mean that there will be a home meeting on any of those dates! Another thing to bear in mind is that if any home meeting gets rained off, past experience tells us that a Friday is the least likely day for the rearranged fixture.

maybe so, but it doesn't alter the fact that there isn't a 'rule' covering what we're talking about. Even the BSPA mentioned only that handy catch-all rule (16.3.5); the one that gives the MC carte blanche to do pretty much anything that suits them. http://www.speedwaygb.co/news.php?extend.30415 "Promoter Ged Rathbone has been informed the decision by the sport's bosses to reject the move was made in line with rule 16.3.5 of the 2016 Speedway Regulations, which states that the BSPA management committee monitors all proposed moves and has the sole responsibility to approve all (re-)declared team line-ups having been satisfied they are in the best interests of the sport."

Well, a couple of things didn't help. Having to use the alternative car-park in the field wasted a few minutes. And the entrance huts were the usual shambles. I realise that the women in there are probably just volunteers, but they're as slow as ar5eholes! (Did they use to work in the Grasmere van? ) When I got there at about 7:15pm [edit 4.45pm] - which is plenty of time to make the start - the hut on the right had already started to cash up! Yet nobody told the steward who was still telling people to join that queue. Inside the other hut there were three (maybe four?) women chatting away like it was a coffee morning. No wonder they fumble around with change, asking you to repeat what you want, forget to give you the ticket, and so on. There were loads of people still in the queue/s and it was slow progress - I think only one was actually serving people. A woman with a walkie-talkie was relaying this to somebody and maybe that had something to do with the delayed start. Was that the correct thing do do? There's an argument both ways. In an ideal world everybody would get to the EoES by, say, 30 mins before the start. But life simply ain't like that. And not everybody wants to sit around for an hour before the meeting starts. It's bad enough that it usually takes two hours to get through 15 minutes of actual racing. It was a decent crowd, but not huge. If we ever do start to get bigger crowds again they need to make sure it's a lot more efficient and slick at the entrances. p.s. I wish they'd bring back the 'pay online' thing. Yes MorrisseyFan is a d!ckhead, but he's spot on about K.Hansen. Maybe he is happy at Workington - but anybody who actually saw him, and especially heard him, at last night's meeting would tell you where he'd rather be. He made it clear he'd love to be back at Panthers and even said "maybe next year..." And I don't recall ever seeing a guest celebrate heat wins with such exuberance and making it clear to the fans, by pointing to his race-jacket, that he was delighted to be doing it for Panthers. I think most Panthers fans would love to see him riding for us again. It's not just the points that he scored last night, which were obviously the key to the victory. It's the way he attacks the track, storming around the boards - we love riders like Buczkowski for the same reason - and the team spirit he shows.

Ged has gone on record as saying that there isn't a rule.

and yet you, like several others, are unable to refer to a RULE that backs up your assertion

Firstly, I wasn't having a pop at Porsing. Secondly, whilst you're right when you say that I don't know what Ged said in that phone call to Porsing's rep, it's quite obvious that he gave an explanation as to why Porsing was being dropped. DWP himself said that Ged had told him that the plan was to bring in Cook. My point is that DWP blabbed about it on social media when it wasn't his place to do so. To avoid my comments being misconstrued (again) I'm talking about the Cook plan, not the dropping of Porsing. So how an I being harsh? maybe Ged intended to dump Porsing in any case..... His one mistake was mentioning Cook (or other riders) during his phone call to Porsing's rep.

Nobody is pointing the finger at Porsing. Just you. Godfrey hasn't made anything clear at all. Where is the RULE that covers clubs having the same race-night? All Godfrey has said is that the MC don't really like it. And he cites the Lewis Kerr case, but at best that's disingenuous; at worst it's utter bollox! The Kerr thing was nothing to do with any "rule", or even the BSPA. It was a decision made by the rider and the two clubs involved. The only "rule" Godfrey comes up with is the ubiquitous Rule 16.3.5 of the 2016 Speedway Regulations. That, of course, is the catch-all one about "in the best interests of speedway" that they always use for anything and everything that suits their own purposes ;-) Even if there are concerns about doubling-up riders missing meetings - which always happens everywhere anyway - surely it's far more "in the best interests of British speedway" to be supporting British riders......

He didn't. It was Porsing's lickspittle who put it out via social media. And that forced Panthers into making an announcement before they really wanted to.

It was your prerogative to announce that the rider you represent, Porsing, had been dropped by Panthers. But it wasn't up to you to go blabbing in the social media about what Panthers were planning to do as regards new signings. It makes no difference whether or not Ged told you anything about BSPA ratification, one way or the other. It had eff-all to do with you anyway, so why would he?! Bottom line, it was all down to YOU that the plan to sign Cook went into the public domain when it did. And, crucially, it was before Panthers wanted it to, i.e. before they'd had a chance to get it ratified. At that stage Panthers hadn't said anything in public about Cook, and Ged was waiting to get it all nailed on before announcing it. But your ill-considered blabbing forced them into it. Ged's big mistake was paying you the courtesy of explaining why Porsing was being dropped. In hindsight he would have been wise to fob you off with a blank reply like "it's all part of our plans to improve the team". It's pity you didn't show the same courtesy.

Oh ffs, do give it a rest! Ged Rathdone didn't mean "money is not an issue". You've twisted what he said just so that you can make yet another snidey comment about Panthers. Of course finances are always an issue for all speedway clubs. But all Ged has tried to do in his New Year message is reassure Panthers fans that, despite the bollox posted on here and elsewhere, the reason they haven't signed the final rider is not because they're struggling to afford it. ".... we have the finances to put tigether a package to attract any of our targets for the number one spot" Ged also said, quite sensibly, that it doesn't mean that they will be held to ransom or pay over the odds, and it will be a rider who will be PL No.1 standard. "What we will not do is pay over the odds for any riders who are not of what we regard to be proven Premier League number one standard." I think most Panthers fans will be happy with Ged's NY message.

Yes, all clubs use guests and riders "on loan" from other clubs. So why the f*ck do you keep on and on and on about Panthers doing it? Do you think anybody at Panthers was actually happy at losing their No.1 (Ollie Allen) so early last season? Not to mention a raft of other injuries during the season. Same goes for Sheffield last season. And it'll be the same for other clubs this coming season - maybe you own club will be the biggest sufferer this time around. The probable reason that you keep banging on about Panthers is that you stumbled upon a rather lame play on the words "borough" and "borrow" - and you're like a 4 year old who has discovered a swear word and keep repeating it. No doubt you think you're being very witty, but it wasn't really funny the first time and it's become tiresome. FFS give it a rest mate! Of course, what the aforementioned kid really needs is a damned good slap to shut it up........ Form an orderly queue here!

thanks for that info

Are we bothered either way? Nope. What is PK's average for the PL?

from what I hear from a friend who is ITK and usually reliable, wealdstone is spot on [edit] and BCD confirms it 👍

point of order: it can't be an "emergency" AGM (ANNUAL General Meeting). It can't really be both. I think they probably mean EGM (ExtraOrdinary General Meeting - although if they're in headless chicken mode, which it sounds like they are, then "emergency" is the word that would be bandied about. Either way, I don't see it as being any reason for most of us to be getting our knickers in a twist. I personally don't even know the name of anybody involved with the SC, let alone know one. So I won't be losing any sleep. Now if Ged or TS has called a special meeting of fans..... then we'd have reason to be a tad concerned. Maneacat asked a simple question and only one person has given a reply that enlightens her/us. Sadly it's just woken up the usual muppets on here who seize upon any little snippet to have a snidey little pop at Panthers/Panthers fans no matter how tenuous it is. It'd be ok if there was some intelligent humour, but mostly it's dimwitted drivel.

seems we're back to inane chit-chat........

To be fair, I don't think anybody has actually been rubbishing Simon Lambert or saying that he should be dumped per-se. Some people on here are so keen to have snidey little pops that they twist what's actually been said. And then we get stuff along the lines of "oh you Panthers fans are so fickle, you reckoned he was your best rider last season, now you want to dump him before the season even starts". Oh ffs!!! It's cropped up in the context of 'what if' Ged & Co end up being unable to get a suitable No.1 on the 8+ we have available. Then maybe it would need a rethink. In that case it'd mean Ostergaard at No.1 and instead of 'wasting' a couple of points it'd be better to strengthen the team lower down. That'd inevitably mean replacing a rider. It couldn't be Tom Perry, so that leaves either MPT, NBJ, Grondal or Lambert. I don't think anybody would consider losing NBJ or Grondal. So it'd have to be either MPT or Lambert. A lot would depend on which two riders they were thinking of bringing in and what points they had to play with. Before anybody leaps in, I'm not saying this scenario should or will happen. FWIW, I have confidence in Ged & Co and I think we'll end up with a decent No.1.

Presumably you mean stick Ostergaard at No.1, and then dump one - or two - of the six we've got at the mo. I guess that's a possibility but it just gives Ged & Co a different headache: who gets dumped and who gets brought in? I can't see it myself simply because they seem so set on the six riders signed so far. Hmmm, yeah I like the idea of the first three - but not so sure about THJ. Would they fit? Calling BCD.....!

I heard a whisper that they want KBjerre, but cost/money is the problem. If they can't sort out a deal with KBerre then my hunch is that they'll go for PK. Mads K is another good shout though.

I agree.If Ged's waiting for the fixtures it could mean he's thinking about KBjerre. But it's not an exact science; how many meetings actually go ahead as per the initial fixture list? Loads of our meetings get chopped and changed, so no matter how smart he tries to be there's bound to be several meetings where we need a guest at No.1 Then again, there is an argument that it could turn out be a positive and not a negative ;-) at least we're back to talking about Panthers!

Hmmmm...... that's a decent shout ok, so that's him off the list then Good point. So that's him off the list too. So..... KBjerre, PK, Zetterstrom, Smolinski, Michelsen, Sedgmen................. any more runners?

KBjerre, PK..... who else is there? Are Thorssell and Porsing still possible runners? Are they really genuine No.1 class anyway? The big hope is that Ged & Co have somebody lined up, or at least have a couple of possibles that they're speaking to. The big worry is that they're struggling to find somebody decent.

Not correct. The fact that "no money has (yet) changed hands" is irrelevant; the contract remains valid. provided both parties have legal capacity, both intend to create a legal contract, and it isn't involving anything illegal, immoral or contrary to public interest, they can contract to whatever they like! So the contract could, if both parties agreed, stipulate that the rider only rode home meetings that took place on a Wednesday (or whatever day). In practice such a contract would be unlikely though. It might contravene league rules anyway :-/

Maybe, but only because of his age. Who else is there anyway? KBjerre keeps getting mentioned but if he's committed to Poland it will be a problem for our Sunday meetings. TBH I'd prefer PK. I doubt if many visiting riders would beat PK around our track. And I'm sure he'd be a big help and inspiration to the rest of the team.