arnieg

That misrepresents the way the Golden Helmet works - he didn't ride in his third semi final heat because he had already qualified. If you look at the scorecard you will see several riders missed their third group ride for that reason. This is hardly a new situation, I recall Matej missing a Racers meeting with a pre announced injury. It will be fun watching Rossiter hyperventilating this evening.

Now down to occasional drizzle -think it will be OK

Sheet grey sky and steady light rain (am 5 miles away )

So if the application has not been submitted that means it is unlikely there can be a start for a month or more - two if the issues are substantive

Richard May is the son of former Wembley rider Charlie May. I am fairly sure Garry May is not related to either of them. Ah those memories of beating Barry Briggs at Swindon (twice) as the glorious Racers sped to the first (of many) wins at Swindon. And challenging Ronnie Moore for the Golden Helmet at Wimbledon.

Whether they win the PL or crash out ignominiously Peterboro' will need a team in 2016 and some fans will already be discussing it, so I can't see the problem with this thread. However without knowing the Leagues will line up or what the points limit is going to be it's not going to be the most focused of discussions. FP's opening post seems a reasonable statement of which riders he would be happy to see return.

Jason DoyleChris Holder I make that two

I didn't need three points I am NOT a King's Lynn fan. I want Belle Vue to win for reasons that should be obvious.

I think it a bit rich the Belle Vue fans moaning about their bad luck. They won well and should be pleased about their performance. If you want to see an example of bad luck how about King's Lynn - injuies to Schlein and Kerr and having their match against Leicester rained off after nine heats when well ahead and losing the restaging. Aces wouldn't even have been in the playoffs if Lynn had had a fair rub of the green this season.

I'd suggest Anders Thomsen

I don't think the Storm were "cheated" on Friday - the referee assessed the conditions and took the appropriate decisions. From that you would be correct in concluding that I might have a different view of the Cov v Poole fiasco.

£20 for PL double header tonight a 33% increase Cov was a 50% increase on normal yesterfay and Wolves last Monday was 57% up on usual price

The flimsy excuse was that the developers [YES the developers] had failed to submit detailed plans on reserved matters. So it's hardly the council’s fault that the stadium work couldn't start.

However last time a double header at Rye House failed to go the distance we did get a refund. (When Rye v Eastbourne was 'dusted' off). A re-admission policy for double headers is needed though. I would suggest that if you get less than 20 out of 30 heats, which pro-rata is equivalent to 10 out of 15 races in a standard match (ignoring the possibility of MDL races etc) then there should be some form of credit.

Oxford, 8 May S Wigg 13 J Doncaster 12+3 J Davis 12+2 M Cox 11 A Silver 11 S Schofield 9 A Galvin 9 S Cross 9 ------------- A Rossiter 8 M Holloway 7 A Campbell 6 C Blackbird 5 M Dugard 3 Andy Grahame 3 I Stead 1 D Walsh 1 N McCarthy (res) 0 (1 ride) Sheffield, 8 May K Tatum 14+3 C Morton 14+2 N Evitts 11 N Collins10 R Knight 10 A Smith 9 S Wilson 9 G Havelock 9 ---------------- P Thorp 8+3 S Wilmott 8+2 N Tatum 4 L Collins 4 M Loram 4 M Graves 3 D Sumner 3 M Courtney 0

Just finishing off my analysis of EL guests for 2015, and one thing that stands out is that Leicester tracked at least one guest in every match!

In truth the margin between the bottom three teams is so slim that all one can reasonably say is that Wolves, Lakeside and Leicester were equally bad.

As a neutral don't care in the slightest what the result of this match is. I think you are taking my comment a little too seriously

Childish homophobia alert

Don't see what this would achieve. It would make the NL more expensive and I fear that in the long term it would reduce the number of opportunities for British youngsters as fewer teams are willing to enter.

Both are clearly ready for the PL, not just based on their NL averages, but also on their rate of improvement. They won't come cheap so unless Ipswich transform into big spenders I doubt that they'd both be at Foxhall.

Don't Cov have to avoid winning by more than six to ensure Wolves finish bottom? Surely that's important.

16.3.4.1 stipulates the signing of riders not in current EL declared line-ups so Doyle and NKI are non-starters (and both have GSAs too high to allow them to guest for Zagar). Also 16.3.4.1 uses the phrase 'long term' and if Zagar rides in the GPs I think it is open to interpretation what long-term means. (It is not defined in section 2)

And the answer was a resounding yes. There was a huge contingent of Aces fans and a healthy Leicester presence, and I think it is fair to say both groups thought they got value for money. Not sure the Wolves fans felt the same after their team's dismal performance.

Lakeside don't even need to win - the consolation point for losing by six or less will be sufficient to put Wolves bottom. A very healthy crowd but judging by the responses to Aces and Lions victories the home supporters were almost outnumbered. Wolves performance in the first match was one of the worst by a home team I have ever seen. Just three race wins, and conceding 11 heat advantages (would have been 2 and 12 if heat 14 had been awarded). The Leicester match took just 65 minutes. Swidders winning a race was a bit of a shock, and Woz rode very authoritatively, but Masters didn't look race fit.