WalterPlinge

Cook, Starke, Lawson, Tungate, Fricke, Etheridge, Bewley

Danny Ayres is guesting for Clegg

They won't switch the reserves. Makes sense to leave Bewley where he is at No.7 to cover heat 8.

If we take the number of times a team's riders have been chosen, and use this as a form guide, the league table should finish as:- 35 Birmingham 33 Mildenhall 30 Belle Vue 26 Eastbourne 14 Kent 10 Coventry 6 Plymouth 2 Buxton 2 Isle of Wight 2 Stoke

Thought I'd do a bit of analysis on which riders are being picked most often. Not surprisingly, the highly rated 3.00 riders are most popular and fill 3 of the top 4 places. (Kyle Bickley being the only non-3.00 rider in the top 4 picks). Adam Roynon is the highest averaged rider to be picked. chosen by 2 people on 9.67. (Max Clegg, Luke Bowen and Ben Morley are other 9+ riders to be picked twice). 23 teams entered means 161 places available (160, as one person picked a rider who isn't in a NL team). But out of those 160 place, only 32 riders have been chosen. They are (with number of times chosen) :- 21 Drew Kemp 18 Jason Edwards 17 Kyle Bickley 17 Leon Flint 10 Jack Smith 9 Danyon Hume 8 Mitchell Davey 7 Jack Thomas 6 Danny Phillips 6 Jordan Jenkins 4 Jamie Halder 3 Tom Brennan 3 Georgie Wood 3 Henry Atkins 3 Danny Ayres 3 Taylor Hampshire 2 Ben Morley 2 Matt Marson 2 Max Clegg 2 Charlie Brooks 2 Luke Bowen 2 Adam Roynon 1 Josh Bailey 1 Alex Spooner 1 Layne Cupitt 1 Tom Perry 1 Richard Andrews 1 Connor Coles 1 David Wallinger 1 Anders Rowe 1 Joe Lawlor 1 Ben Woodhull

Can see a big home win here. Coventry look solid. Clegg should score big for Stoke, but can't see much support for him.

He's a Poole fan. Rules don't count.

Patrick Hougaard got to be the best choice.

It's not provisional on the date. It's provisional on the outcome of the semi-finals.

None of them came through a year in the MDL as you said everyone should. Bewley only sat on a speedway bike for the first time about 5 months before making his NL debut.

So SteveBrum predicts it will be off. He then returns to boast that he was right. But you say he wasn't right. So you must think it's still on? You really don't help yourself in the silly stakes.

So you think tonight's match is still on? p.s. it's "you're"

Tell that to Dan Bewley, Tom Brennan, Jordan Jenkins, Kyle Bickley, Henry Atkins, Drew Kemp, Leon Flint etc etc

It's just below the regulation that says Woryna and Szczepaniak can come back on ancient historic averages, whilst others can't. Give us a shout when you've located those regulations.

M Davey 8.61 D Ayres 8.38 K Bickley 6.67 D Phillips 6.25 L Flint 3.00 D Kemp 3.00 J Edwards 3.00 =38.91

If you check a calendar, you'll find that 26 March WAS "Monday just gone", as Stevebrum said. You're the one who is wrong. You seem to be a week behind.

No. The governing body don't decide. If there's a tie, and they have a previous average, then the one with the highest average in the previous month takes priority. But in this case where they've all always been 3.00, then it's up to the club to nominate which one goes in the top 5. I just think from a common-sense point of view, it wouldn't be wise to put a 15-year-old into the main body for his league debut.

The NDL is about developing youngsters and Buxton are sticking to that ideal with young Corban. It does leave Buxton with 3 weak reserves though. Surely Whitmore will have to move up and leave the 2 rookiesat reserve. You can't go putting a 15--year-old out in heat 1 for his league debut.

Go back a page. He's already turned Buxton down.

No one needs to pick holes. Too busy laughing at the big one you've been digging. Why not just admit your error? Everyone makes mistakes, but not everyone stupidly compounds their mistakes over the following 7 pages.

Think it's you who needs to re-read your post. The word "just" was not there. You said the track was "raceable, not rideable", which clearly makes no sense. If it wasn't rideable, then it can't have been raceable either. If you had used the word "just" (which you are now trying to slip in) you'd have been saying that the track was "not just rideable, but raceable too" and that would have made sense. By not re-reading your post and correcting your mistake you've just succeeded in making yourself look a fool for about 7 pages.

What's the point in rearranging a 70th anniversary meeting anyway? Already so far behind the times. 70th Anniversary meetings in speedway are so 1998.

The Parable of Poole Speedway. During the winter, Matt Ford decided he would need some help with the club accounts and team building. He advertised the position in the Echo. Three people applied for the job. A Mathematician, an Engineer, and an Ex-SCB official. First up for interview was the mathematician, and Matt decided to test him with a question.... "What is 2+2?", asked Matt. The mathematician looked him in the eye and replied "Under universally agreed mathematical protocol, 2+2 must always equal 4" Next for interview was the engineer. Matt again tested him with the same question. "What is 2+2?", he asked. The engineer looked him in the eye and replied "Under engineering convention, 2+2 equals 4.000, plus or minus the standard tolerance of 0.05%" The final interview was the ex-SCB official. Matt again posed the same question. "What is 2+2?" he asked. The ex-SCB offical looked him in the eye and replied "What do you need it to be?"

I love the way you signed your last post at the bottom. Perfect!