Star Lady Posted October 30, 2003 Report Share Posted October 30, 2003 I'm firmly in the "if it ain't broke don't fix it" camp. The 45 point limit has served the PL well (and the EL to be truthful) so why change it? The only reason I can see is to save costs but as Kevin M has pointed out it's unlikely to do so altho it may well distribute the money round a bit more. Lioness your post above makes absolutely perfect sense to me and should be compulsory reading for any promoter who is even only thinking about changing the points limit. Even if the EL decides to change rider numbers per team and/or the points limit, why the heck does the PL have to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Meynell Posted October 30, 2003 Report Share Posted October 30, 2003 Prehaps we should make the limit 55 then only the good kids can move up and tripe like Matt Cambridge cannot be inflicted on us!! IMO, the points limit should be at least 48 points, and possibly as high as 50. It should not be about penalising moderately successful teams, but about preventing a handful of teams from dominating. IMO, the only bad point about taking the limit too low is riders(young, old, middle-ish) will be left out of the job. Is that not a good reason not to do it then? The only thing a sub-46 point limit does, is force a number of middle-order riders out in favour of 3.00-pointer. Even if by luck or good judgement they happen to do well, they will find themselves out the following season, to be replaced by more 3.00-point numpties. It's not a constructive policy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
super_carlos Posted October 30, 2003 Report Share Posted October 30, 2003 the only people who you read about wanting a lower points limit is Somerset( who should really have minimum say in the structure of pl any way)and Newport ( it is not our fault you cannot sign a decent 45.00 team ) . Personallay i would put the limit to 46.50 how many times have you written up a team for who you support and it has came in at 45.98.You need 46.00 to win a meeting.if they do change it to 40.00 all you wil be reading in mid summer from the higher powers of the pl will be "we put our hands up we made a mistake" as has happend with the gp rider restriction and the play offs. I would also scrap the rider below 4.00 rider rule it is unfair to teams like for instance hull this year who go for strength in depth. sorry that this is long and maybe not great sense but i had to have my say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trees Posted October 30, 2003 Report Share Posted October 30, 2003 The promotors know what income they have coming in and what on average they pay the riders, is this not in the main the reason they may lower the team average? We, as fans, have no idea what monies are involved so surely cannot say what points limit is best? If a rider has potential he'll be snapped up by some team whatever his average, it's those who are maybe struggling or have gone stagnant that find it hard to get a team surely? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted October 31, 2003 Author Report Share Posted October 31, 2003 Co-promoter Neil Machin attended a General Council meeting at the sport's headquarters in Rugby in midweek and, although no press statement has been made, it is looking more likely that the 45-point limit will be retained. http://www.sheffieldtoday.net/ViewArticle....rticleID=684838 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Meynell Posted October 31, 2003 Report Share Posted October 31, 2003 So you need 40.6 to win a meeting. But then you need to factor in the inflationary effect of bonus points, which history has shown adds around 5 points to the team total. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Meynell Posted October 31, 2003 Report Share Posted October 31, 2003 Trees, We, as fans, have no idea what monies are involved so surely cannot say what points limit is best? We don't need to know. The points limit has certain mathematical constants that will negate any changes within one season. In any case, a low points limit mostly affects the middle order riders who are generally not the expensive ones. It's the heat-leaders that usually cost the money, but with teams almost always being built top-down, they're never the ones for the chop. If costs are an issue, the promoters would be better off looking at how to implement and enforce a sensible pay policy. Using the points limit to do the job will not solve the underlying problem. Another problem with the BPL is that there is no longer any incentive for riders to move-up to a higher level. There are far too many 'star' riders making a comfortable living in the BPL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgl07 Posted October 31, 2003 Report Share Posted October 31, 2003 Another problem with the BPL is that there is no longer any incentive for riders to move-up to a higher level. There are far too many 'star' riders making a comfortable living in the BPL. How is that a problem for the BPL? It is a well run and competitive league which tracks have been queuing up to join in recent years. It is a problem for the BEL which has been mismanaged since its inception and tracks have been more noted for trying to escape than get in. The BPL is the future of British Speedway and should not be sacrificed to try and prop up the unsustainable monster that the BEL has become. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyclone Posted October 31, 2003 Report Share Posted October 31, 2003 Another problem with the BPL is that there is no longer any incentive for riders to move-up to a higher level. There are far too many 'star' riders making a comfortable living in the BPL. Think this problem relates to the EL structure and the way it runs it's business, which appears to be an unattractive financial proposition for most EL second strings and reserves. You might find that if doubling up was scrapped, this might encourage some PL guys, such as Shields and Bird to move up permanently. By the same token, doubling down should also cease and you wouldn't have those such as Colin White, who ended up unemployed in the PL in 2003 when his former team opted for doubling down. Glad to see that Neil Machin reckons the 45 points limit will remain - sanity prevailing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgl07 Posted October 31, 2003 Report Share Posted October 31, 2003 I have gained the impression that the Pl promotions are lining up on this issue something like this. In favour of 45 points: Glasgow, Edinburgh, Newcastle, Workington, Sheffield, Arena Essex(?), Reading, Swindon(?). In favour of a reduction: Exeter, Newport, Somerset. Have I got anyone wrong? Can anyone fill in the gaps? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Meynell Posted October 31, 2003 Report Share Posted October 31, 2003 John, How is that a problem for the BPL? It is a well run and competitive league which tracks have been queuing up to join in recent years. This has been discussed to death elsewhere. Yes, the BPL is reasonably well-run and some might even say thriving, but this would not be the case if the BEL ceased to exist. Even if you banned the SGP riders, it would still have to absorb a number of tracks and riders which would cause inflationary pressures. The BPL cannot exist in a vacuum and a strong BEL it's just as much in it's own interests, as it is in the interests of the BEL teams. My comment about 'star' riders exactly illustrates my point. If the BPL does not wish to encourage its top riders to move-up, then you will eventually get GP-standard riders who will expect to be paid GP points money (e.g. Stonehewer). I would fully agree that the BEL has not made itself sufficiently attractive for the likes of Shields and others to move-up permanently, but if there is no prospect of riders moving-up at all, then the BPL will cease to become the mid-level cost-effective competition that it aspires to be. Few would dispute that the BEL needs fixing, but that's another issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Racer X Posted November 2, 2003 Report Share Posted November 2, 2003 I have gained the impression that the Pl promotions are lining up on this issue something like this. In favour of 45 points: Glasgow, Edinburgh, Newcastle, Workington, Sheffield, Arena Essex(?), Reading, Swindon(?). In favour of a reduction: Exeter, Newport, Somerset. Have I got anyone wrong? Can anyone fill in the gaps? I believe IoW are in the 40 point camp. But the 45 camp (provided there isn't a whole lot of double dealing going on) look like winning the day and you can count another defeat for Newport Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lioness Posted November 2, 2003 Report Share Posted November 2, 2003 I must admit to being a bit disappointed to hear it but IoW were confirmed by one of the Glasgow promotion on friday night as being one of the main players behind the push for a 40 point limit. Bearing in mind the make up of the Isle of Wight (basically owned by the fans isn't it?) does that mean that the IoW fans are vastly in favour or are they even aware this is the way they are heading? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyclone Posted November 3, 2003 Report Share Posted November 3, 2003 If IoW are in the 40 point limit camp, I wonder if this is because Shields & Bird have requested transfers :?: . Under such a scenario it would be cheaper to replace with lower average riders. IoW would not be the first team to have placed self-interest ahead of the common good of the league, so I would not be surprised if this turn out to be their motive for supporting "Stone the Moan" and his stingey cohorts, such as Colin Hill. :evil: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fatface Posted November 3, 2003 Report Share Posted November 3, 2003 IoW would not be the first team to have placed self-interest ahead of the common good of the league, so I would not be surprised if this turn out to be their motive for supporting "Stone the Moan" and his stingey cohorts, such as Colin Hill. :evil: You are not wrong on Colin Hill. I'm sure he'd be even happier to drag it down to 35. Why build a decent team, when you can drag everybody down to your own level? :roll: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted November 3, 2003 Report Share Posted November 3, 2003 But the 45 camp (provided there isn't a whole lot of double dealing going on) look like winning the day and you can count another defeat for Newport Prehaps we should move the conference to Reading, then we might have a 40 point limit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgl07 Posted November 3, 2003 Report Share Posted November 3, 2003 Perhaps we should move the conference to Reading' date=' then we might have a 40 point limit [/quote'] Alternatively move Reading to the Conference! Only joking Racer X. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted November 3, 2003 Report Share Posted November 3, 2003 move Reading to the Conference! Well they had plenty of practice this year, using that CL regular, Rider Replacement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triple D Posted November 3, 2003 Report Share Posted November 3, 2003 Apparently only three PL teams want a 40 limit. Those being IOW, Newport and Exeter. Trouble is all the Elite promoters want a 40 limit in the PL to force riders into the EL which in effect would cut costs for the EL aswell as they would have extra riders to choose from meaning riders couldnt make such high demands as there would be others willing to take the team spot. Its also hoped that this will encourage PL teams to move up. Would appear that there is a good chance that the Elite promoters will get their own way which really annoys me as why should the PL be messed about with to make the EL stronger. Seems to me all decisions made at the annual conference every year is about making life better for the EL and trying to degrade the PL. If the 40 point limit is introduced next season i can see the first part of the PL season being a farce with teams getting riders to keep averages down so that when the new green sheets come in and they can make team changes to 45 points they will end up loads stronger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lioness Posted November 3, 2003 Report Share Posted November 3, 2003 Triple D, your team Somerset has also been widely reported as backing the 40 point limit. Is that just false rumour? It seems to have been mentioned in a number of different places but a number of different parties. Do you know if the promotion have actually come out and said anything? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.