Grachan

It would have to be someone who could work out that 2x10=20, so I guess that would rule out Peterborough.

You do kind of wonder why Peterborough are suddenly so keen to offload so many assets. But then, how come they ended up with so many in the first place who they clearly can't fit into their side? I appreciate that the riders are their own assets, but if rules were put in place to insist on only 2 riders from the top 20 per side, why would the BSPA then insist on excess riders being bought? It makes no sense. The whole point of such a rule was surely to help the sides be competitive, but then they start saying "oh, by the way, you have to buy these riders that aren't needed". Weird. I do understand Peterborough's position to an extent, but they are going a bit over the top with all this. Maybe they are just playing a few games until they are sure of getting a number one. And, of course, Swindon - after being told they had to loan out Miedzinski last year - are not going to be impressed with then being told they have to buy riders.

Oh shut up. You know exactly the point I was trying to make... actually, maybe you don't.

I agree. I think it's an idiotic decision, but that's pretty par for the course really. I guess that the sides lower down the pecking order were complaining that the top sides got all the best double uppers etc etc. Swindon won the league using their own riders this year. Under this rule they would have had to use a guest in the final. How can that be better?

Surely they wouldn't release Stead on 5.75 and then bring Kennett in on 6.25. That would be plain silly!

Batch always falls out with a club that doesn't pick him. He did the same with Swindon in the past.

Shouldn't take you long, then, if you stick to one user name.

If the limit was 42.50 (which I doubt) this comes to 42.39 based on the averages put here: Andersen 8.18 Kildermand 6.98 Doyle 6.50 Morris/Stead 5.78 (D/U) Zengota 5.57 Cook/Alden 5.52 (D/U) Aspregen 3.86 Decent team assuming PK steps up a level as expected, and good continuity providing Zengota also steps up to take a third heatleader role. Would love Craig Cook. Very promising rider. Could average around 7 next year.

I don't think it's possible to do that. Teams can't build up to the champions every year or the sport would just go bust. I think the points limits are far too low though and I think it affects the sport because teams have to fit a jigsaw together to get within the limit so it forces complete line-up changes and you lose continuity. I think that has an effect on crowds.

I was a heatleader for Poole from 1975 to 1981, winning two world championships during that time and also riding for Great Britain in the World Team Cup. I certainly don't remember anyone of that name being in my team at that time. The man is clearly a charlatan.

No it hasn't. Nobody really is disputing Chris nudged Nicki. It's whether there should have been an exclusion or not.

Er, I think the point was that Chris Holder is World Champion, not that Speedway Star matters. Good decision by the ref in my opinion. It wasn't neccesary to make an exclusion and he took the best option. Bottling it? I suppose some people could see it that way, but it made a lot more sense to have the title decided on track - and the differeing poinions on here show that it was far from a clear cut thing over who was at fault. As to whose fault it was - well if Holder had been excluded it would have been understandable and if Pedersen had been excluded then it wouldn't have been so I guess I'd say it was more Holder's fault. But all 4 back was the best call and, in any other race or any other meeting, there wouldn't have even been a debate about it. Craig Ackroyd clearly didn't want to be remembered in the same way as Tore Kittleson either. Can't say I blame him.

I thought you'd said your bit.

Hate to say it, but this is the only post on here so far that makes any sense! THJRacing. The voice of reason.

Strange times. Did it start raining or something?

Andrew Silver and Shawn McConnell. And Per Jonsson.

Guess what, Sidney. I remember seeing Mark Loram as a 16 year old at Hackney too. Hackney v Swindon when Simon Wigg was in the Hackney side. There was a "Yoof TV" station filming and it was on later on Channel 4 I think. Loram was featured because he was the youngest rider in the league at that time. I've probably still got it on an old video tape somewhere!

Didn't Hull win the National/Premier league once with a team of that sort of make up?

This is the World Cup though. I'm not so sure that Sky have much influence on that even if they do with league racing.

I don't think he was. It's the rule that's the farce. sky have constantly gone into a state of frenzied excitement at the prospect of Jokers and double-points ride while fans around the country cringe at the very thought of them. It was funny to hear Nigel getting indignant about what was happening. Seriously. Double points just for being behind in a match? Think about it. It's bloody stupid!!!!! And of course team managers are going to do what's best for the team to win a match. It's just so bleedin' obvious.

I agree, but for some reason these embarassing double-point fiascos keep being talked up on tv as if they are something great. Seeing girls dressed up all sexy and prading Jokers cards is, quite simply, a load of old nonsense. And well done the Danes for not only using the tactics they did but also openly ridiculing the rule in their interviews. Still think their tactics were prefectly legitimate though, bearing in mind the rules as they stand.

In the context of the meeting that's exactly what they WERE doing. I just don't see why some people are so outraged that Denmark were trying to make sure they won the meeting.

I suppose the closest thing in football would be away goals taken into account if scores are level on aggregate on champions league matches. A team could play accordingly to use that rule in their favour - so even though it's a draw they win. As for cricket it just baffles me. One team is all out for 40. The other team gets 742 for 1. So it's a draw. Or, at least it seems that way to me.

Blimey. And to think Iris thought my analogies were bad

It wasn't cheating. No more than, say, a football team going a goal up and then sitting back and defending the lead. Or a cricket team just running a single in the final ball of an over when they could have got two so that the best batsman faces the bowler again. There is absolutely no way that was cheating. Why be ashamed of trying to get your side to win the meeting?