Grachan

My first perception was certainly that he was wiped out but not seen a replay.

They just said on BSN that there is the possibility of Cradley Heathens returning next year.

Looked like it. Where's the rest of the air fence?

Imagine if they had just let it go, and stated that they decided to do so because the rule only says "may". A lot more of a corrupt looking decision than the one they made, which applied the rule as written. Besides, the rule said they may and they did. So where's the issue?

Bearing in mind that the rule is clearly stated, they had no other option but to disqualify him to be honest.

So, there are now no riders who have ever won a World Championship riding in this meeting.

Page 5 of this topic.

It would probably be better if it said "up to disqualification", like the other rules do. But the rule is there and this is the first time this has ever happened so they must know about it.

Went back to the beginning. Very little discussion really. Just "oh well, rules are rules" and moved on. Should be a major topic of discussion surely.

Watch from the beginning. Yes, apparently he wore "non-conforming" uniform during the qualifiers. Seriously? They disqualify him for that? Blimey.

Me too. Bizarre that they are now talking about tyre pressure instead!

Watched it on BSN. Well done Ipswich. And well done Adam Roynon for being the only speedway commentator on the face of Planet Earth who actually understands how speedway scoring works and that you don't need a maths degree to understand it.

I wouldn't call it a loophole. Surely a loophole is a way of getting round a rule or finding a way of evading it. So it's not really that. The rule is the rule and they have used it as it is.

That's right. He was. I remember the manner of the win caused quite a furore at the time, and I think it led to just one TR per meeting being allowed.

From memory, I think you could use 2 double point tactical rides per match at that time. Over the 2 legs Peterborough used 4 and Reading used none. Wasn't it something like Peterborough being 16 down with 3 races to go and scored two 8-1s and a 5-1 to finish? Something crazy like that anyway.

I don't even think that is the issue. That applies to all riders. The issue is that a rider is assessed the same in both leagues when everyone knows they should be assessed with a higher average in the lower league. Everyone except the promoters who voted for it anyway! I would be interested to hear from a promoter who voted for it and their reasoning behind it. I could do with a laugh.

It does kind of make you wonder where their heads are when they come up with this stuff, doesn't it!

That says it all, I guess.

The issue seems to be that he was assessed the same in both leagues - which makes no sense. Well done Glasgow for figuring out that the people who make up the rules aren't the sharpest tools in the box and making the signing. Can a Championship side now sign Bartosz Zmarzlik on 8.00?

If that is the case then it is absolutely wrong. There is, I assume, an average conversion between the leagues and that should apply with assessed riders too. Eg an 8.00 rider in Championship becomes 12.00 in the PL - is that correct? So if Tarasenko was a 5.00 in the PL he should be 7.50 in the Championship. That's just plain common sense.

Think I'm going to make this my first visit to Oxford this year. The mini-league for the play-offs is an interesting concept which I think I quite like. Hoping for an Oxford v Poole final, but I think Glasgow might have a bit too much and win this group. Question - are there aggregate bonus points in these meetings?

Is it possible there could be some sort of lookalike around who could have posed as Richie and taken the other test on his behalf? I'm sure there isn't, but I have to admit the idea of it is slightly amusing.

It is now.

Is there any way someone can keep Kelvin and Chris inforned on who is through and who isn't? It would be awfully helpful.