Jayne

The National League Fours is a shared event and as such is protected. As with the EL/PL teams are not allowed to compete against the event.

Todd Kurtz 10 Luke Priest 3+1 Tim Webster R/R Tony Atkin 10 Kyle Newman 9 Aaron Baseby 4+1 Richie Worrall 1+1 Craig Cook 13 Jonathon Bethell R/R Robert Branford 10+1 Adam Allott 9 Nick Morris 10 Lewis Dallaway 5+2 Jason Garrity 8+1

No waiting to hear.

Its as we thought there is no final, so its confirmed the Hitmen are 2010 Trophy winners.

Not to my knowledge and certainly nothing on the minutes from the AGM concerning a change in how the competition is run. It has always been a winner takes all comp but Im sure we'll find out in due course.

No Dudley have won on points difference regardless of the Lynn result. Think we would have to win by 45+ to get top and that isn't gonna happen.

yes we are coming

Dont think so the result wont change anything. Its all on the playoffs.

Seems the rules have changed since the AGM then as only a guest for a number 1 was permitted then and R/R for any of the top five.

Buxton on a date to be arranged.

I presume this has been allowed as Brendan was taken out of IOW 1-7 due to injury. Therefore he his classed as 'returning from injury'. He is also replacing a rider who is injured.

KOC 10/10 & Playoffs 17/10

Unfortunately not, it was suggested as an alternative but Dudley declined. Looks like mid october at the earliest now due to other commitments.

Apologies to those of you who used the txt service and did not get a response. As explained elsewhere the company that runs the service does so on behalf of most clubs. I have today emailed influx marketing to ask for an explanation and will let you know when I hear back from them.

After a further track inspection and looking at the weather forecast the meeting has been cancelled. Sorry for any inconvenience caused.

Yes it is weather permitting. Teams much the same as Tuesday except R/R Morris instead of Bethell for the Hitmen.

Well put Shippy22. This was part of the point I was making in that there are just not enough riders sat on the sidelines to replace the older riders. Reducing the points limit drastically only places a higher price on those with low averages and the potential to improve. It also makes the product we are trying to sell weaker. There are lots of comments in the EL section about supporters not paying inflated prices for inferior products, you have to get the balance right between being competitive and offering opportunities for 'new blood'in order to retain the support.

I personally think that 36 is far too low. Lowering the points limit in the EL hasn't really helped with costs in fact I dont think it will have too much effect on costs in the NL if anything it will push the lower averaged riders demands up because they will be more in demand especially if they are on false averages. Its swings and roundabouts really you push the top guys out in theory to save money but then the lower guys become more valuable. If you listen to the comments made regarding the EL and the lowering of the points limit it has made the product less competitive as the standard is not as high but the costs do not reflect the standard of the league which some feel isn't that much higher than the PL. I agree the league needs a major shake up as costs are spiralling both for riders and promoters how we do that though is anyones guess. As for the Australians in the league you can only have two per club anyway so dont think this needs to be limited any further. What does need to be done though is stringent policing of such riders so that there is no suggestion of ineligible riders competing. I personally just dont see where all the extra riders are coming from if you ban the aussies and lower the points limit drastically. There are only a handful of riders competing in the 500cc class of the U15s this year and very few riders on the sidelines who want to or are able to hold down a team spot.

Don't think you can blame the points limit for that Malcolm more likely the fact that riders are paid above the agreed pay scale and the gates aren't there to support it.

Just got back and what an effort from the lads Lewis has been released from hospital and is aiming to be on track on Sunday

In theory yes but as with all team changes they have to be ratified by the BSPA/MC and there is 'transfer deadline' to take into account although that isn't the phrase used in the rule book.

As 21st CH states the rules should be adhered to else we will have a free for all and I'm sure you dont want that Derek. As for last year perhaps you want to have a look at your own part in that but it has nothing whatsoever to do with Jay Herne or the deadline for NL fixtures. If you want to get into it further or rake over old ground then take it off the forum as I'm sure no one else is interested. I don't want/expect an apology but it would be nice if you stick to the facts and not alter them to fit your own agenda.

Parsloes - I think that you are overstating my post, I'm not sure why you think that by stating a rider is ineligible under the current points limit and Bournemouth's team average is underhand. At the end of the day my understanding of the rules is that you can only build up to the points limit and any subsequent team changes must ultimately be like for like or adhere to the points limit. As for a rider being allowed to return from injury (on a higher average) again my understanding is that is within 28 days which may be extended on application to the MC. So as Jay's average is higher than Jerran's I would not expect that change to be allowed without Bournemouth making additional changes. At the end of the day it doesn't really matter what you or I think it is down to the management committee to approve any team changes in line with the current regulations. As for implying I don't care about the NL you are way off target there. If that was the case why run a team in the third division for the last 16 years, as we have, which takes a considerable amount of time and commitment on a limited budget.

Would have thought that his average is too high unless they make another change as well and not sure that would be allowed at this late stage.

In a word no