magnus

I heard at the Leicester meeting tonight Workington require a new air fence for next season??

Absolutely, read your post 😶

🤣🤣 Put your dummy back in. I only gave my opinion and I would have said the same regardless of which ever team it may have been.

No different to a league meeting, when one of your opposition heat leaders is unavailable for circumstances outside the rule book. Should they be allowed to replace him with a rider of a similar average? instead of having to use an unattached rider from the league below? that to weakens the field and becomes a lesser spectacle. (Just my opinion)

I have never disputed that's the rules. In your original post you eluded that the rules being ambiguous. All I am saying if they are, then they possibly need to be considered for change. Not an illogical suggestion, just my opinion on a public forum.

I merely said that in my opinion the rules should be looked at, so that the rider with the next highest rider is considered over a rider who has just been signed. If the unfortunate circumstances prevail that a second string or reserve is the only option available then yes. Do you think when one of your opposition heat leaders is unavailable for a league meeting, for circumstances outside the rule book that you should be allowed to replace him with a rider of a similar average? instead of having to use an unattached rider from the league below? that to weakens the field and becomes a lesser spectacle.

I have not disputed that's the rules, therefore Anders is allowed to ride. I have indicated in my opinion the rules should be looked at for future events and amended if the powers that be so see it. Just like I have neither stated Glasgow have strengthened the team by signing Ander's or pulled a fast one 🤷‍♂️

So be it if that's the rules. Its unfortunate that Leon Flint or any rider who's average descends in order is unavailable (Leon's unavailability is exceptional circumstances by the way) therefore, if Jack Smith is the next rider in line, then yes..

I didn't imply Glasgow have pulled a fast one or taking advantage of ambiguous rules. I'm just stating that any team regardless of replacing a rider through injury or illness, should be represented by a rider who has been established team member prior to a prestigious event.

I don't think its right that a team can sign a rider just weeks before a Championship event (or Premiership) and he gets preference over established team riders in a prestigious meeting. You would have thought they would have to ride in a minimum number of meetings (guest bookings do not count) as a signed on team member, (4/6 meetings home & away in total maybe??) before getting preference over riders who have turned out for their team week in, week out prior to the event. I know averages dictate who rides, but establish a minimum number of meetings to be considered for future events.. (Glasgow by the way and my opinion)

Yet another strong unelaborated statement from you. You never explained your last one regarding what financial help Workington received from the speedway authorities and how the chairman helped put the team together

Could you please expand upon what financial help you believe Workington received from the speedway authority's and how the speedway chairman helped putting the team together? Very interesting comment..

Cookie only gave his own honest opinion which he is entitled to do. The difference is he's not hiding behind a keyboard like many others on here do..

I suspect if the SCB are carrying out dope testing this early, they will have more presence at other tracks early on too. Only time will tell!!

I would agree with them scores. If he went and scored a maximum, I'm sure the keyboard warriors would still be on here stating that it won't last etc. Dammed if you do and dammed if you don't