Kevin Meynell Posted November 21, 2003 Report Share Posted November 21, 2003 (edited) No mention of the PL Fours, Pairs PLRC, ELRC in the statement. Phil, The format of those competitions are never decided until the season is underway, usually only a few weeks before the events are held! Personally, I'd like to see the return of the fours qualifiers as an inter-league competition for BEL and BPL teams. Edited November 21, 2003 by Kevin Meynell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Racer X Posted November 21, 2003 Report Share Posted November 21, 2003 (edited) Grading system = Rider Control. Didn't work in the past and caused problems without the threat of the EU. One challenge through EU courts and speedway in deep sh*t. Riders now are just scared to as they will be effectively blacklisted. Unless all the riders contracts are held centrally, ie all owned by the BSPA or SCB, then effectively the rider control system is a restraint of trade. If the clowns at the BSPA don't get their house in order soo, then the relevant authorities will have to force them. Not good for the sport at all. I can't quite follow the logic of rider control = gradings. As the grades all have powers and you have to build to 19 its patently clear to me that this is a points limit. If you are only allowed to pick one A or one B - I assume that means that Poole cannot track Tony Rick and Lukas D.... Lukas D if he was number one for someone could be replaced by Tony Rick if he got injured though!!! Riders in the unlimited C grade bracket of 7-8.32 are going to be highly sought after as I would imagine most sides would want two of them. Bit of a shame that there are only 11 riders in this bracket. If I was Mark Loram - I would be totting up the zeroes I was going to put on my pay packet. As for the other sides Mark Loram or Seb Ulamek??? Tough call. PS Just a thought come the end of the year when you are a rider on 8.35 - you are gooing to make darn sure that you get an average of below 8.32 for the following season aren't you? Under the old averages system that wouldn't have matterred too much, byut look out at the end of the season for widespread sudden drops in form of those riders on the cusp of grades.... Edited November 21, 2003 by Racer X Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ace_of_clubs Posted November 21, 2003 Report Share Posted November 21, 2003 Talk about complicated. Build a team to an average of 45 points I (and most others) can understand but now we have build a team to a max of 19 points but they are not real points they are grading points which are based on real points that occur in a match which you win if you score over 45 points. By Jove, I think she's got it! Rules so simple that a 7 year old child could understand them. Now, will someone go and get me a 7 year old child. ( © Groucho Marx...not Michael Jackson) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Posted November 21, 2003 Report Share Posted November 21, 2003 The internal labour market has nothing to do with the EU, which is only concerned with freedom of movement between member states. In this respect, speedway has been ahead of the game for years, with riders being allowed to compete in multiple countries. Enough EU riders in this country to make it EU business. Its ok to say they are competing in this country but this rider control system restricts them more than the points average system. I would have thought the threat of this action would be enough to make the BSPA carefully consider their actions but clearly they do not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dekker Posted November 21, 2003 Report Share Posted November 21, 2003 Under the old averages system that wouldn't have matterred too much, byut look out at the end of the season for widespread sudden drops in form of those riders on the cusp of grades.... Wanna bet this rule doesnt exist next year as it will have done its job to divvy the riders out this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Meynell Posted November 21, 2003 Report Share Posted November 21, 2003 Enough EU riders in this country to make it EU business. The number of EU nationals in the UK has nothing to do with the EU, provided they have the same opportunities as British riders to seek employment. That is certainly the case here, although it may not be the case in Poland if they put restrictions on foreign (including EU/EEA) riders as suggested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Posted November 21, 2003 Report Share Posted November 21, 2003 Wanna bet this rule doesnt exist next year as it will have done its job to divvy the riders out this year. Don't be silly Dekks, that would imply that the BSPA would have made up a rule for a single year just to suit themselves at the expense of the sport itself, and they have NEVER done such a thing in the past. Oh No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsunami Posted November 21, 2003 Report Share Posted November 21, 2003 Kevin Meynell I totally agree with you about minimising the number of rules changes each year. Obviously some rules need to change to close loopholes or to add something to the sport but it would be nice if the basic structure rules could be in place as foundation stones. I think we will always be regarded as a Mickey Mouse sport until we reach that fixed structure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dekker Posted November 21, 2003 Report Share Posted November 21, 2003 Don't be silly Dekks, that would imply that the BSPA would have made up a rule for a single year just to suit themselves at the expense of the sport itself, and they have NEVER done such a thing in the past. Oh No. The whole point as far as i can see, is that this rules divvys the riders up to spread them over all the teams including the 2 new ones. That prevents a repeat of the 95/96 1 league troubles. Bit of a convaluted way to get there though.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemini Posted November 21, 2003 Report Share Posted November 21, 2003 But it was rumoured Lee Richardson was leaving Coventry anyway, Mark Loram off to pastures new, also Leigh Adams to Swindon so surely the riders would have been spread around anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Meynell Posted November 21, 2003 Report Share Posted November 21, 2003 The whole point as far as i can see, is that this rules divvys the riders up to spread them over all the teams including the 2 new ones. With two new teams in the BEL, there undoubtedly needs to be a wholesale distribution of riders in some form. Whether a grading system is the way to do, only time will tell, although I've never managed to think of a way of making it better than the points limit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arnieg Posted November 21, 2003 Report Share Posted November 21, 2003 Kevin Meynell I totally agree with you about minimising the number of rules changes each year. Obviously some rules need to change to close loopholes or to add something to the sport but it would be nice if the basic structure rules could be in place as foundation stones. I think we will always be regarded as a Mickey Mouse sport until we reach that fixed structure. Absolutely As a general principle any rule change should be accompanied by a statement as to what defect it is designed to remove, how it is going to improve the sport... .. and a list of how many pages of supplementary regulations will be needed to counteract all the unintended consequences Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgl07 Posted November 22, 2003 Report Share Posted November 22, 2003 I totally agree with you about minimising the number of rules changes each year. Obviously some rules need to change to close loopholes or to add something to the sport but it would be nice if the basic structure rules could be in place as foundation stones. I think we will always be regarded as a Mickey Mouse sport until we reach that fixed structure. I am not against change. We have demanded change for many years. The problem is the incoherent way in which changes are made lurching in one direction and then another. Take the doubling up/doubling down fiasco. You could argue that these are steps on the way towards a Swedish style squad system. After a tentative start the doubling up doubling down policy was embrassed big time in 2003. As it happened they also chose to launch a major inter-League competition in the same year. That was a reciepe for disaster. Now the BLC has been scrapped the BSPA are clamping down on doubling up and knocked doubling down on the head completely. Another lurch was observed with averages. The so called rolling averages were introduced and then scrapped after a decent interval. Now they intend to change this again. What price they will move in a completely different direction next year? Guests seem to go into and out of fashion. Last year they were being allowed for practically every position including senior reserve and even PL second strings in the BLC. Now there is a clamp down. The BSPA continues to behave collectively like a headless chicken going off at various tangents without any apparent overall direction. It all appears to be the product of a beleaguered group with a siege mentality who are increasingly out of touch. Add in promoters pushing their own ill thought-out hobby horses while others will back any idea if they see their their track gaining a short-term advantage. I wonder if we know the half of it yet? Usually unpleasant decisions do not become appartent for weeks or even months after the Conference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lupus Posted November 22, 2003 Report Share Posted November 22, 2003 Very well put jgl07!!! Trouble is you've got two types of people involved...those who try to introduce things becasue it would help the SPORT and those who only try to help THEMSELVES!!! I wish that if they find a rule or system that WORKS they'd stick to it, instead of constantly changing. Personally I think the rolling avergages helped a lot in preventing 'manipulators' like The Master - Colin Pratt - from waiting six matches, then changing his team round, thanks to lots of 'machine problems'. However, because Ipswich couldn't put together the team they WANTED, and the Wicked Witch of the East stomped her foot a few times, this has now been scrapped again. A lot of the rule changes have to be brought in because, basically, a lot of 'cheating' goes on. Perhaps if the promoters were more honest individuals we wouldn't NEED to keep changing the rules every year!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Meynell Posted November 22, 2003 Report Share Posted November 22, 2003 Perhaps if the promoters were more honest individuals we wouldn't NEED to keep changing the rules every year!!! People in any sport will attempt to manipulate the rules as much as possible. They therefore have to be written in a watertight manner to prevent this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lupus Posted November 22, 2003 Report Share Posted November 22, 2003 Perhaps if the promoters were more honest individuals we wouldn't NEED to keep changing the rules every year!!! People in any sport will attempt to manipulate the rules as much as possible. They therefore have to be written in a watertight manner to prevent this. But then we're back to square one...Making the rules completely watertight appears to be impossible - God knows they've been trying for long enough! So every year SOMEONE finds a loophole, so it's removed for the next season and someone finds a way around the NEW rule.....and on, and on, and on!!! I still say lack of honesty and integrity is the main cause of 90% of the problems. It may be human nature to 'manipulate' as you put it, but that still doesn't make it RIGHT!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Meynell Posted November 22, 2003 Report Share Posted November 22, 2003 (edited) But then we're back to square one...Making the rules completely watertight appears to be impossible - God knows they've been trying for long enough! No, it would be fairly easy to make watertight rules in speedway since it deals known factors such as finishing positions and averages. Provided you don't allow special dispensation, and if you must have it, specify in the rules when it's allowed, you could reduce the manipulation to almost nothing. The reason speedway has been trying in vain for so long, is because the rulebook is always drafted by clueless committee. Get people who have a good understanding of the current rules, have a good idea of what works and what doesn't, and then someone with good writing skills to put it into text. It could be done if the will was there. Edited November 22, 2003 by Kevin Meynell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lioness Posted November 22, 2003 Report Share Posted November 22, 2003 The phrase 'a good understanding of the current rules' intrigues me a little Kevin......I am beginning to think half of the idea is to make sure no-one ever has that! I can see what they are trying to do by the grading system I think. I believe they are trying to spread the riders across as many of the EL teams as possible rather than have one team with three of the top ten riders as they have the money whilst newcomers like Swindon and Arena are disadvantaged. I don't dispute on paper it looks worth a try and it seems to me to be a variation of the American football way of doing things (though as usual I could be talking rubbish!). I have one major concern which is at the moment making me think grading will not turn out to be a good idea-perhaps one of those a bit more 'in the know' could help me out with it. Assuming only for simplicity (as I dont know obviously!) that the grades are as Philfromcov suggested (nothing personal, just handy to use!) 9.67 - 11.00 GRADE 1 8.33 - 9.66 GRADE 2 7.00 -8.32 GRADE 3 5.67 - 6.99 GRADE 4 4.33 - 5.66 GRADE 5 3.00 -4.32 GRADE 6 Say we have a youngish up and coming rider on 8.33 He has talent and is seen as a star of the future but would he not find it more difficult to get a team under the grading system? Surely the team manager would rather go for established rider on 9.66 thus making it more difficult for riders in the lower echelons of the grade to get a team place. It would seem to discourage improving as you are surely better to stay at the top of for example grade 4 rather than have your average increase by .01 and take you into grade 3? As I say I am just looking for clarification on this-not making a judgement one way or another (Yet!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted November 22, 2003 Report Share Posted November 22, 2003 For arguement's sake, say the grading system is: 9.67 - 11.00 GRADE 1 8.33 - 9.66 GRADE 2 7.00 -8.32 GRADE 3 5.67 - 6.99 GRADE 4 4.33 - 5.66 GRADE 5 3.00 -4.32 GRADE 6 and each club chose one from grades 1-5 and two from grade 6. You could have one team with a total average of around 50 and another, 41. Unfortunately, this will lead to more one-sided scorelines than if both teams totalled 45. Another thing you might find is that riders with an average of just above 4.33, 5.67 and 7.00 could be frozen out, as they are the lower-averaged riders in that grade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Meynell Posted November 23, 2003 Report Share Posted November 23, 2003 I can see what they are trying to do by the grading system I think. I believe they are trying to spread the riders across as many of the EL teams as possible rather than have one team with three of the top ten riders as they have the money whilst newcomers like Swindon and Arena are disadvantaged. I don't dispute on paper it looks worth a try and it seems to me to be a variation of the American football way of doing things (though as usual I could be talking rubbish!). Lioness, I think you spotted they're trying to disguise the fact that a low points limit has been set. Whilst a redistribution of riders is certainly necessary with two new teams, I don't know why they have to try and confuse everyone. Unfortunately, the grading system is nothing like American Football who don't force teams to redistribute players. They rely on the weaker teams to have the pick of the new players whom they hope will eventually come good (and it seems to work). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts