Call me wolfie

True

Would make it 2 cracking meetings

I guess we’ll find out on Monday

Sorry assumed there would be 2 legs, if it's purely up to him I imagine he'll give it a go.

2 meetings in 2 days may be too much for him, plus will Wroclaw let him ride? It will be a bumper crowd at Monmore if he does.

Just feel a little sad that it's become all about bending and twisting the rules and finding loopholes etc especially as it had such a profound effect on the outcome of the playoffs. As you say though, it's sad for Joe, it would have been a good experience for him

The no more than 2 changes rule may be specific to the premiership, as you say, but as I've said that just means you could make additional changes to your line up in cases of long term injury. Why should that override a regulation stating no team changes to be made after said date except riders RETURNING from long term injury. The intention of the regulations is clear. Regarding Joe, if there's nothing in the regulations stopping him, then he should be allowed to ride, I've not felt the need to check the regs regarding this but I'll take your word for it on that one.

There was a separate regulation which you’ve failed to mention. No team changes to be permitted after August ## (can’t remember exact date) except for a rider returning from long term injury. you would have thought if it was intended that you could change a rider who got injured after said date it would be included in this regulation. The regulation you quote is merely trying to say you could make changes on a 3rd occasion if one was for a long term injury. so actually yes, there is ambiguity, massive ambiguity in fact, hence their 1st attempt to sign him was rejected. Actually it’s not even ambiguous, it’s pretty clear, I’m amazed the BSPA backed down on it to be honest. Please check your facts before quoting selective parts to support your argument. You will be pulled up on it.

It wasn’t within the rules that were intended, there is a difference.

How's that aggressive?

If you think they were the rules then carry on, shows your mentality really.

Quite sensible at the time as they were the only like for like guests available

It doesn't make it okay though does it. And answer me why certain BV fans still bring up Tai in 2016 as a 'ringer' when that was perfectly legit and within the rules (and still is today) with no bending or twisting of the rules required. I can probably guess why, because you lost.

The rules weren't intended to allow it to happen hence the original attempt to sign him was rejected. It was only when Lemon threatened legal action because the rules were so poorly written that it was finally allowed. No one was allowed to due it in the years prior and no one's allowed to do it now. That's why it's such a sore point with many.

In other words he signed during the playoffs, not before them

Looks like they’re showing the 2nd leg from BV on Monday instead of Wolves v Sheffield

I see Freddy Hodder has been named as a no 8 for BV, makes me think Norick may not be 100% fit

Not unless Eurosport use Sam Ermolenko instead of Scott!

Who knows, maybe by a few days he means the mandatory concussion period

I wouldnt expect anything else from the troll to be honest.

Yet strangely what we did that year is still perfectly acceptable as proved by Sheffield. What strange logic you have.

You think Sheffield will beat Wolves without Woffy and Musielak?

Yes they are because they’re carefully chosen for the opposition, we had to make do with Bomber and rr in 2017.

Better than ringers imo

What about Sheffield? Losing their top 2, reminds me of 2017 losing Freddie and Jacob in the semi.