arnieg

Neil Watson has correctly stated the position. It is a matter of fact. Whether you chose to believe it is up to you. However it remains a fact. Think of it like football where the ball hits the side netting and the ref erroneously awards a goal. NO MATTER HOW CLEAR THE VIDEO EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY, THE GOAL STANDS.

Of course the FA would never do anything as ludicrous as this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sport/football/fa_cup/544737.stm

The two minute clock was visible on the start line and the exclusion light for TM went on the instant it reached zero. There is no doubt whatsoever that he was excluded under two mins and not withdrawn from the meeting. I suspect that this mistake happened because like most of us at this meeting Chris Gay had rather lost the will to live by then.

Good spot

That really is a tremendous achievement given the troubles of last year and their status as outsiders this year. Very much against the odds even if they did cause Ghostie a few palpitations in the early stages this evening.

To give the discussion about prices some context: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/37985286 £19 for Aldershot v Solihull Moors last Saturday

or did you mean to add them to the list?

You may recall an instance last year where Sam Masters was sat in the Craven Suite at Belle Vue watching Wolves operate R/R for himself after there had been an early rain-off of the Edinburgh fixture. There was an outcry on the BSF over this - ludicrous everyone said. So this year we have seen the practice change and there have been examples of riders slotting back into their original riding position after rain-offs elsewhere. Yesterday's Lambert decision seems consistent with that. Yes Newcastle were 'lucky' that Lambert was rained-off, but if Embelton had ridden I'm sure Redcar would happily have taken the 3/4 points without focusing on how 'lucky' they were to catch Newcastle without a facility for Lambert. The issue here is (given Perks got back) how did we get to the point where Lambert gives priority to Poland over Newcastle (and how can Diamonds fans complain about Holder's absence for Peterborough last month with a straight face).

You won't win many friends at Stoke with that suggestion

But Nicholls could still guest for Harris in the PL (if they weren't in the same team!) - crazy

How about this: http://speedwayupdates.proboards.com/thread/12855/ekstraliga-22nd-september-2013

If there was a rule that a match would be cancelled if a team only had four riders, how long before a visiting team with only five riders available (inc guests) "accidentally" lost another rider and only turned up with four. I'm sure the home promoter would delighted to deal with refunds for all the angry and disappointed fans. RULE CHANGES THAT ARE KNEE JERK RESPONSES TO SPECIFIC INCIDENTS ARE ALWAYS A VERY BAD IDEA.

If I could give multiple likes for this I would. Must bookmark for future use. PS Nicholas Cage really has to stop making films - it is a matter of life and death 😜

Which means that with T/S a rider could have eight rides in 13 races. There may be others, but Bernie Leigh certainly came out 8 times for Reading at Newport that year.

Or is it like last year - top 2 to final and 3rd to 10th to semi finals from which only the winner qualifies for the final

Leicester have had more absences through doubling up than any other team (inevitable because they were so late in confirming their PL participation) Leicester have also had more riders missing than any other team (bad luck and having Jason Garrity in the team!)

Bare in mind Lions Guests Schlein and Heeps didn't score many either. The heat 15 decision was a 50/50 call and with another ref it could easily have gone the other way. Robbo's superb form compensated for KK's indifferent display.

surely you mean 'better' :nono:

Even odder the previous Friday Somerset management rang the referee to check that Heeps was eligible before nominating him in heat 15.

Nope, rule says: (NB: No facility is available allowing another rider to be elevated to the qualified list if any of those top 3 points scorers are unavailable due to be withdrawn or has no equipment).

Exactly my thought (as posted on updates). Incidentally last Friday at Somerset every single Somerset rider was eligible for heat 15!!!

But it wouldn't stop Somerset changing their race night to another day (say Wednesday). They'd just need to apply for a change in the wording of the planning condition.

Here are the PL stats for 2017 to date: Guests 2017 @ 8 August 2014 2015 2016 2016 up to 8/8/16 2017 @ 8/8/17 Matches 144 112 111 83 74 Total Absences 319 277 175 112 127 Absenses per match 2.22 2.47 1.58 1.35 1.72 Guests 282 246 116 70 87 Rider replace. 36 31 58 41 39 No rider 1 0 1 1 1 Reasons for absences: Injury 159 182 73 44 71 Double up riding elsewhere 60 40 22 18 23 Riding abroad 73 32 58 35 27 Illness 6 4 10 7 2 Suspended/w’holding serv. 18 16 8 5 1 Other 3 3 4 3 3 Commentary: Fewer matches ridden at this point in the year than last year, there will be a struggle to complete matches by the cut-off When comparing with full season figures note that there always tend to be more absences for matches in Aug/Sept (more re-arranged dates with fewer alternatives, AND in 2017 no ability no replace injured riders in a team's named 7) Absenses higher than 2016, but still lower than previous two seasons, Increased absences due to increased injuries (a return to 'normal' levels after an exceptionally good year in 2016) and an increase in doubling up absences As usual substantially more guests are used by away teams than home ones

I updated my PL guest stats yesterday morning. Will post a summary in the PL section Now here: http://www.speedway-forum.co.uk/forums/index.php?showtopic=84894&hl=