Biddows

The fact that Scott has not made many GP finals speaks more for his mental strength and confidence than ability, since he is virtually always present in the semis, and not always on just 8 or 9 points, and seems to bottle it at the crucial stage - he even did in Prague last season when he was the best rider in the meeting with 14pts. But with a little more confidence, he could make more finals. The important thing to bear in mind is that his constant presence in the semi-finals (all bar one last year if I'm not mistaken, though I'm sure I'll be put right if I am) not only demonstrates consistency, but also the fact that he is among the top eight riders in every GP. And if you think that this one Aussie championship result makes an iota of difference then you are as deluded as you claim I am. I would contest that Johnno rode well above what we would consider to be his capabilities - and all credit to him - but this demonstrates very little, except that Johnno had a long overdue good result. Johnno also finished above Schlein and Stead - does this make them inferior riders as well?

Yes, but valid ones.

Yes, perhaps Scott's attitude is not as professional as Crump's - then again, I suppose Crump can afford to spend the whole winter testing and getting his equipment to the highest possible standard. I daresay Scott is not quite as well off as Jason, but that's just speculation. I was referring more to the spate of injuries Scott has suffered in the last few years that have hampered his chances: the collarbone injuries, having his foot run over by TR's mechanical, burning up the back of his left knee. All of these have caused him to miss GPs where he could have scored enough points to qualify. The difference is, a lot of the top boys have been lucky enough to stay clear of such injuries.

Johnno is riding far better than anybody could have predicted, so that's hardly fair. It's not like Johnno is better than Nicholls on a day-to-day basis, and you know that. Besides, Nicholls has had all manner of mechanical gremlins that have cost him a few points. (Oh wait, let me guess: your response to this would be that I'm just making excuses for Prince Nicholls. Just once you're going to have to acknowledge that bad luck plays a large part in Nicholls' under-achievement. And yes, I know, all riders get bad luck from time to time, but Scott seems to get more than his fair share.)

Fine, how about his inclusion in 2006, when he received a nominated place?

That, my friend, is a fear that you shall just have to come to terms with in your own time. I would personally place Nicholls in the top fifteen in the world, whether you agree or not, so that in that point I feel my logic is sound. As far as Harris is concerned, I'll concede that he is not amongst the top fifteen in the world. (What I must clarify here is that I am admitting fallibility in one of my arguments - something that you do well to consider with your own misguided notions. But then, you're never wrong, are you? ) Nonetheless, something I'm sure we can both agree on is that the GPs are being largely driven by politics and not the facts - I assure you that even <i>I</i> am not so deluded that I would think otherwise. So Harris' inclusion can be explained away with political reasons. However, I strongly believe that he will contribute a lot to the series, as he is a very entertaining rider and will not be as far out of his depth as you might suggest. He may not - and probably won't - finish in the top eight in his first season, but he won't disgrace himself either: something you might do well to acknowledge. The fact is, since only eight riders qualify by right, seven riders will miss out. Do you honestly believe that all seven should be dropped the following season? If you do, then maybe you should be directing your complaints not to me, but to the BSI. I'm sure someone of your vast intelligence would be able to locate their address.

I don't believe I ever mentioned Harris. But then you seem to read what you want to read. And I take issue with the suggestion that I am deluded. It is typical of your outright arrogance to believe that you alone are right, and everyone else is living in some kind of daydream. I have acknowledged your opposition to Nicholls' selection, and can even see the process of logic behind your objections. I now implore you to show me the same kind of courtesy, as I assure you, my reasoning is just as thorough as yours. Oh and, for the record, I think that Harris has a lot to offer the GP series. I put his inclusion on a par with that of Lindback in 2005.

Three words you use so often that they've lost all meaning. It's almost become your fall-back response. I acknowledge that you are unimpressed with Nicholls' displays in the GPs, and moreover his constant re-nomination, but to suggest that he repeatedly appeals to BSI and the FIM for re-entry is a long way wide of the mark, since no rider has any say in the matter. Nicholls has the misfortune of being the best British candidate in a matter dominated largely by politics and television ratings. As such, maybe your passion should be fuelled in the direction of the selectors and the politics of the sport, rather than at a person who has little say in the matter. Yes, perhaps Scott is not at a standard to compete for top honours, but no more is he the worst in the field. He may not have qualified by right for the upcoming series, but there is definitely a strong argument for him being retained, as he missed one Grand Prix in which he could have scored sufficient points. He was, after all, not far away from the top eight by the end of the season, and was as high as sixth at the time of his injury. Yes, OK, these are all ifs, buts and maybes, but I would consider it to be a valid argument nonetheless. Oh, and before you suggest that Hans Andersen managed to finish in the top eight with half the number of GPs, I recognise that Hans is a better rider than Scott, and could easily compete for a top two position next season, but that in no way detracts from the fact that Scott is capable of competing for the 6-10th place bracket. After all, this is a competition for the top 15 riders in the world, not just the top eight, and I would certainly include Nicholls in that number.

I'm not really sure why BSI and the FIM insist in introducing systems that are, at best, just going to confuse new and existing fans. What's wrong with having a fixed points system, with maybe A-D finals, and points awarded respectively? I hope that one day the authorities realise that quite often, simple is better. As for the Nicholls debate, yes Sub, we all know your opinions. You've made very sure that we do. But last time I checked, this thread was about the points scoring system that will affect all riders, not just one. So perhaps you, and that sizeable chip on your shoulder, should find another thread to litter with your anti-Nicholls diatribes.

As a rider, I think Scott is fantastic value. Whether or not he is among the world elite is irrelevant. So is whether or not his behaviour in the whole Andersen saga can be classed as mature. I enjoy watching him race and as far as I'm concerned that is all that matters. Off track issues don't really worry me, unless of course it is the close season and we have nothing else to talk about. As to whether he should be in the GPs, he may or may not be good enough, but I enjoy watching him race so I hope he stays in. Plus I don't think I would watch it as eagerly if there wasn't a British representative (hardly a justification for keeping him in I know )

The difference is, Trick started dabbling in car racing, so wasn't really that interested in speedway any more. I think speedway is Crump's primary focus.

But it's being marketed to a completely different audience now. BSI don't really care about people who are already supporters. They want to appeal to a new crop of 'armchair supporters' who have seen speedway for the first time on TV and want to be able to cheer on some home riders. They've turned a legitimate competition into a marketing tool.

I'm sure, deep down, Nicki misses them too. It probably hurts him not to be Public Enemy No. 1 any more.

Jason Crump was born in Bristol?? I had no idea... You'd have thought Millard would have mentioned that at some point. Realistically, there will probably be two British entrants for the event next year, since Cardiff is the flagship GP and BSI will want a good turnout. If it were an event between the top 16 riders in the world, there would definitely be only one Brit, but I think we've all agreed that BSI and the FIM are more interested in creating a sellable product than a pure competition.

The guys in the studio and the commentators spent most of the evening talking about Sullivan's new tyres, but does anyone actually know how they were any different? Surely all tyres have to conform to the same regulations, so a tyre is a tyre is a tyre. Right?

Or perhaps he wouldn't have had the motivation to raise his game and prove he was good enough to be included. It's all very well saying he should have been in from the start, but the fact is, he wasn't. End of story.

*Refuses to dignify with answer*

Up my what? He's a talented rider - I don't think anyone's denying that. I still reckon his morning ritual involves knocking one out while gazing lovingly at his reflection. Er... not that I think about that sort of thing... *goes to hide in corner*

Well we're guaranteed to get one next year with both of them in the series. And who knows, maybe a few other riders will have bridged the gap by then.

He's been head and shoulders above everyone this year, and it was only a matter of time until he won it. He could have won a lot more by now if he hadn't been riding in the same era as Tony Rickardsson. You have to hand it to Crumpy, he's probably the most consistent rider in recent memory. I can't remember the last time he finished outside the top two in the World Championships. And an 11+ average in the Elite League to boot - this year has been all about him.

It'll go ahead whatever the weather. I'd put good money on them running a GP in a force four gale one day in the future. Not so good for the spectators, seeing four riders skate round a track, so covered in mud that you can't tell who they are anyway.

I think that's how we all see it, but unfortunately it's not our decision. And as for those who do have to decide, I just hope they can see it the same way - although, if truth be told, I hugely doubt that they will. Youth is the way forward, after all...

Yes, but Hancock has been an ever-present and Adams and Gollob continue to qualify via the top eight. The difference is, Loram had a particularly poor GP series last time out, and was deemed not good enough to warrant a nominated spot. I'm not suggesting he is not good enough at present, but he did have a marked dip in form that led to his expulsion from the series. I'll be interested to see how easy it is to get back in once you've been left out in the cold - really depends what line BSI want to take on this one.

Tongue firmly in cheek my friend.

Yeah and if a rider wins the first GP and then gets an injury that puts them out for the rest of the season then they should be awarded maximum points and given the title by default. Within reason, me thinks...