Big Al

Even though his record of winning heat 1 when at No.1 this season probably hasnt been all that great, I think Leicester needs Scott Nicholls to get back there from a team point of view. Hopefully the upcoming new averages will bring that about, although it might be a bit tight. If it does, it should ensure he's also there for the playoffs. The lack of a nailed-on winner of heat 1 is putting more pressure on Connor Mountain to deliver a win in heat 2, but too many second places, including behind riders he should be beating in that heat. So that turns up the pressure on heats 3 and 4, and wheras in the early season Leicester were getting great starts to matches, they aren't doing that as much now and there's been too much need to use an early TS.

Thanks. He was like that on Saturday at Leicester, where he collided with the kerb

Ty Proctor to miss Leicester's match at Birmingham tomorrow, due (it says) to a back injury sustained riding for Peterborough at Kings Lynn yesterday. Was there a crash, did he get withdrawn from the match?

In something of a straightjacket though for making multiple changes by the 28th - would need to shed 2 or 3 points from the team average, unless individual changes are made. I can't see any option except to carry on with Lawlor, Proctor may need to be replaced but how easy is finding someone suitable by then, and the Worrall situation has to be resolved too but the longer that goes on, the more it seems like he will be returning otherwise I can't see it being anything different to carry on with guests. At least he would have plenty of Poole matches coming up if he returns at end of this month. So I can't see them making any change. Someone was practicing up at BP this morning by the sound of it.

Maybe NL matches should not be over15 heats anyway, perhaps 12 heats is enough with, if time and circumstances allows, a couple of additional races for the highest scorers with points earned accumulating over the season to an individual award? If the extra heats don't take place, it's a shame but it doesn't mess up the match result. Also it's ridiculous that Leicester, for example, can use r/r at this level for almost the full season. This is another delayer to matches and it should only be allowed in limited circumstances.

When Tom Spencer lay on the track and didn't move, it was obviously a serious and worrying situation but it was reassuring that he seemed able, eventually, to get into the ambulance with some assistance. I went to the loo as soon as the ambulance had left the track, and returned to the sight of a tractor going around, so immediately decided that was enough and left. So I don't know what announcements were made if any to explain what the situation was. But the whole episode has shown that attempting to start a second match at 8.30, especially an NDL match is not a good idea, especially as I think these matches are sadly more prone to long delays due to accidents. And of course that inadvisability includes the possibility that substantial track remedial work will be necessary in order to produce as safe a racetrack as possible for these inexpreienced riders. It was therefore ironic and annoying that, after the lengthy work done following the Glasgow match, the first heat of Cubs v Cradley revealed a lethal fault on the racing line on bend 3 which required yet more time to fix. And if the availability of additional medical cover is problematic when attempting to stage a double header, for whatever reasons whether that is cost or availability, then it's a no-brainer to just not attempt it in the first place.

Not sure if our three Australian team members would appreciate that too much (four if you count Perks)

Pure speculation here, but possibly Cook had access to corporate lawyers via the Glasgow club to put his case forward, but they didn't, for some reason, put quite such a persuasive case on behalf of Vissing? And maybe Eastbourne/Ipswich have already made satisfactory alternative arrangements for Kennett?

So are you really saying these "backers" would chip in to make up riders' reduction/ loss of earnings over a number of meetings, if that were to be the sanction instead of a ban?

I think some balance and sanity would mean either r/r, or a replacement rider with an average 50% lower than the "banned" rider, but really this shouldn't have come about at all if the matter had been dealt with properly. But probably there are no rules in place to properly cater for this situation I thought there was a resolve by BSPA to reduce the number of guests riders, well that seems to have been scrapped to judge by this fiasco.

Crazy situation, taking the Perks case, Leicester have Connor Mountain who is riding in just the CL - with an average lower than that of Ellis Perks - yet Perks carries on riding for Leicester Cubs whilst Mountain would probably benefit from having more matches, if he's available of course.

Completely and utterly absurd situation, this is the sort of thing which makes the sport a shambles and laughing stock. Giving these riders bans instead of fining them from earnings was so obviously going to create these issues, I hope the goons who made the decisions realise what they have done, but I doubt it somehow.

Does this mean Glasgow using Sam Masters as a guest for Cook on Saturday, and r/r for Claus Vissing?

Do I detect from this, that Cook's susceptibility to getting easily wound-up (as recently stated by T. Woffinden) may lead to opposition clubs to deliberately get at him? He is the top rider, in the top team, and as such vulnerable to this. Up to Glasgow and him to wise up to this

Autocorrection, I take no credit

So it looks like Craig Cook and Claus Missing will be banned!

Decision time fast approaching with the return of RW, from what I think he said last month? In the perfect world he will get straight back into the scoring groove but that can't be presumed and even more tricky with him having to return at No.1. But he's also going to need track time, so the two home matches v Gla and Som, plus two away, and Poole matches would be important for him to get that track time ahead of playoffs/finals in September. Trying to come back straight into playoffs & finals wouldnt be too good.

I would question whether some of the team changes made at Leicester in 2018, especially towards the end of the season and which had the outcome of the team plummeting to the bottom of the league, were "in the best interests of the sport"

Who's the stand-in for Worrall on Saturday? New British Champ possible if he's avsilable? Maybe need to try and avoid giving Somerset and Eastbourne riders any more track time at BP from now.

Hope that dates for the Shield final can be sorted out soon, with enough time allowed to promote it well, but not shunting it too far to end of season. The scarcity of available Saturdays could be tricky in achieving that, but if it can be given the priority, and if the final is won with good attendance (and it's a competition Leicester has dominated, so why not) then a trophy on the shelf and in the media locally won't do much harm.

Reads pretty much like routine stuff to me. Problem for me is more the number who became turned-off during the Hemsley era and have stayed away.

Graczjonek, Procter and Morley for Worrall, Nicholls and Bates? Would that get it to under 40?

It's difficult to see how it can be done without having to shed points from the current team total and re-calibrate at a sub-40 total unless there is some very clever manoevring done, something that Dicko is good at. But we have a No.1 whose average is going downwards whilst other sides look to be strong up in that department, and a No.2 whose return is still uncertain.

So Adam Exstance has been involved in both Thompsons suffering bad accidents within a week. I am not pointing an accusing finger at Adam Exstance here but it unfortunately illustrates the point. But the lads will have hopefully learned to be wary of which riders they are trying to get past. It looked like last week Exstance wasn't all that aware of Dan coming past between him and the fence although I wasn't looking from directly behind and the ref decided to exclude Dan and someone has suggested that Exstance slowed up and it caught Joe out, who was probably quicker. Dan performed a stunning overtake of Ben Wilson last week, edge of the seat stuff, but Wilson is an experienced rider who would be expected to have good awareness and he did duly allow Dan the room to complete the pass safely.

So are you saying that because Mr Thomas inferred at one point in time that he was owed money, that was applicable over a longer period of time to more than him? Your comment refers to "riders" - in the plural - so you're going to have to come up with a lot more than this to get out of the hole you've dug yourself into.