MattK

Most promoters have other incomes, usually from other businesses they run.

You could clone Jason Doyle seven times and they'd all find a team spot.

There is a restriction that no more than 200 houses can be occupied until a contract is signed to build the new stadium.

I think it's quite cool. Obviously my wife would go berserk if I hung an old tyre on the wall of our spare bedroom though.

Because fans enjoy playing "fantasy teams" over the long winter months and you'd think that promoters might want to go out of their way to keep the few remaining paying customers happy?

Does Rugby Council have an asset register? If so, had anyone reviewed this for potential sites?

The list will have to be published imminently, so how would they know? Remember the "will he/won't" last season with Kildemand?

Great news for the GPs, bad news for us. I wonder if Kildemand will be on the heatleaders "list"? If so that will potentially leave us one short.

Top trolling by the Shov. We've missed you!

Very true. This is why we need to be looking at riders such as Michelsen, Kolodziej or even Thomas H Jonasson who could comfortably do a "Zengota" and add two points to their average.

TR's "Budget is not an issue" Robins Doyle (9.44) Przemyslaw Pawlicki (6.75) Morris (6.70) Michelsen (5.67) Sedgmen (4.70) Wright (4.13) Stefan Nielsen (3.00) 40.39 TR's "Poundshop" Robins Zengota (7.79) Watt (7.19) Batchelor(6.91) Morris (6.70) Sedgmen (4.70) Wright (4.13) Rose (3.00) 40.42

I'm sure everyone agrees with me when I say you have been genuinely missed.

Yes. Zengota rode most of the season as a secondstring. With his average of of 7.79 he would also certainly have to ride as a heatleader in 2016. In the five meetings he rode for Swindon as a heatleader he averaged just under 5.5.

Woffinden's average is 7.03. Kyle Newman averaged 8.00 in his first four meetings of last season. Would Poole replace Newman with Woffinden if they could? Absolutely.

It would make sense if they went back to the old heat format (although it leaves the second reserve unprotected), which means it probably won't happen.

An average of 6.5, which is easily achievable by a Draft rider in four meetings, would see them in the top three of every team except Swindon and Poole, if you take the final averages from 2015.

That is a good question. Presumably, a Draft rider can only be replaced by another Draft rider? This does pose a potential problem if a draft rider, who has an average and is riding in the main body of the tea, gets injured. Will they receive a guest up to their average or simply from the draft list?

I think we have to face facts that the top riders are never coming back. We simply don't have the crowd to pay them what they require to race in Britain and we don't have the co-operation among promoters to determine a structure which would allow something like two tiers.

I think the product, four blokes on bikes going round is circles, is fine (although the draft system has significantly diluted this in the EL), but you are right, the league structure and organisation in this country is an absolute shambles.

The top riders want one race night a week, so they can fit Britain in with their other commitments. That means around 20 meetings a season, so a league of around 10 teams, similar to what they have now in Poland and Sweden. You can either try to tempt top riders back with a scaled down league which races one night a week or you can have a larger, more meaningful league with riders committed to racing in Britain, but you can have both I'm afraid.

I have yet to see anyone show that condition in writing. It seems to be a piece of hearsay which had turned into a fact. The only clause which I have seen as part of the planning permission is that no more than 200 houses can be occupied until a contract is signed for the construction of the new stadium. This is a very ambiguously worded restriction, because presumably more houses can be built.

Outline planning permission was granted in 2007, so I don't think the detailed plans for the stadium need public consultation. However, I do think it is nieve in the extreme to think that these plans will simply be rubber stamped by the council, given the size and impact of the project.

But that is for a seat in the Premium Grandstand!

One big league based at a Premier League standard makes the most sense for a long term sustainable solution. The problem is, how do you get consensus from so many promoters with different ambitions and budgets? Something like this should have been planned out for a year or more and requires input from clubs, riders, fans and even landlords. It's not something you can cobble together over a weekend.

The new stadium is being built on land adjacent to the existing stadium so the claim is they can co-exist. Depending on what plans you look at, the new fourth bend overlaps with the existing first bend.