Wolfsbane Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 So he rode well on the 11th, was not capable of riding on the 16th, then rode again well on the 19th. The case rests, m'lud. If you were up before the beak mate you'd be fined for wasting police time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T.N.T. Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 An interesting column from Matt Ford in last nights Poole program. All I know is I have had 5 fellow Elite Legue promoters contact me voicing their concerns over his inclusion at reserve. I'll leave you all to form your own opinions about how we feel over the whole matter."[/i] END. I have heard about this a few weeks ago and have heard a few views on what is likely to be proposed at the AGM. One option is that the rule regarding riders averaging 6.00 or over in the Swedish or Polish top league gets a 5.00 average, this may well be changed to 5.00 in those leagues or even 4.00 as riders of the standard of Lindgren, Iversen, Harris, Batchelor and many more havent even averaged six points a match in Poland. Another is that a rider that rides in 11 matches will be given three pointless rides on their average as a way of replacing the missing match, meaning Pawlicki will go from 82 pts from 53 rides at 11 meetings = 4.00* too a new average of 82 points from 56 rides from 12 meetings, giving him a new average of 5.86 (would have been 6.19) There definatley seems to be plans in place that will stop teams using riders for a second season still on assessed averages .... which way they do it remains to be seen ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barney Rabbit Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 So he rode well on the 11th, was not capable of riding on the 16th, then rode again well on the 19th. The case rests, m'lud. Not really much different to Mroczka riding 4/10, ringing in sick 11/10, riding 13/10 - in fact, Pawlicki had one extra day to get fit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sprog1 Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 So he rode well on the 11th, was not capable of riding on the 16th, then rode again well on the 19th. The case rests, m'lud. Once again, its no different to Joe Screen being unfit to ride for Poole last year with a shoulder injury one day then scoring a maximum in Denmark the next day. Checkmate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grachan Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 Another is that a rider that rides in 11 matches will be given three pointless rides on their average as a way of replacing the missing match, meaning Pawlicki will go from 82 pts from 53 rides at 11 meetings = 4.00* too a new average of 82 points from 56 rides from 12 meetings, giving him a new average of 5.86 (would have been 6.19) Who's proposing this? What a wonderfully stupid idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritPete Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 I wonder if the sour grapes will go on throughout the closed season? I think they may! never mind, Coventry are still the league champions, and no amount of hot air is going to change that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 From the Bees website, "The two sides were missing their Polish riders involved in the Golden Helmet and in addition both Swindon and Coventry gave their No.8s an outing in place of their regular No.7s, in accordance with the rulebook, with Morten Risager left out of the Robins' line-up and Bees not risking the ongoing arm injury of Przemyslaw Pawlicki." From the local paper, "Rossiter added: “He’s still struggling with that arm, we’ll see how he feels this week but if he’s not right then I might rest him on Thursday." Neither of them quotes say Pawlicki is injured and we'll use a facility, they say he's not fit so he may be "rested". I don't know where you got it form it was claimed he was injured. Are you saying that the management lied and Pawlicki had not had his crashes? The one that ripped the top of the arm on his kevlars to shreads. Shamek had a crash in Germany on Sept 10th and pulled out of the meeting. Yes, he did ride on the monday in the play-off final but then as he was not 100% (and of course because it meant he would get an average otherwise) Shamek was reste don the Thursday. Theres nothing in the rulebook to say that you can't rest a rider from his 12th meeting. It's just not something you're allowed a facility for. Would you be complaining if we'd use Summers for Harris? Or KK? Or Barker? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superguest Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 Do you think Poole have realised how bad this rant looks given their previous form on riders missing meetings etc yet? Whichever way you look at it, and as nice as it to see Poole 'out conned' Coventry have been just as bad. We need to stop this win at all costs stuff, It's ruining the sport IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 Do you think Poole have realised how bad this rant looks given their previous form on riders missing meetings etc yet? Whichever way you look at it, and as nice as it to see Poole 'out conned' Coventry have been just as bad. We need to stop this win at all costs stuff, It's ruining the sport IMO. It's not win at all costs. It's being a good manager. The fact your manager says he'd never do it proves he's lacking something when it comes to being a team manager. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superguest Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 Because It's WRONG. The rider had plenty of chances to complete 12 fixtures but he was always mysteriously missing. Pawlicki shouldn't have been at reserve and should not be on a 4.00 next . Coventry lowered themselves to Poole's standards.. You can deny that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 Because It's WRONG. The rider had plenty of chances to complete 12 fixtures but he was always mysteriously missing. Pawlicki shouldn't have been at reserve and should not be on a 4.00 next . Coventry lowered themselves to Poole's standards.. You can deny that. I say it's good management and it's exactly what I'd do. That doesn't make me wrong, it just means I understand the rules. People will chime in with playing fair, what is fair then? Surely fair is doing as the rules say and Coventry have done that. Or is fair letting Poole win the play-offs because they were top of the league? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T.N.T. Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 (edited) Another possible proposal .... no guest or r/r facility for riders with assessed averages ! Would a team want a rider averaging six points a match to go missing if there is no cover allowed. Edited October 14, 2010 by T.N.T. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LisaColette Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 Whatever rule you have someone's always going to be able to manipulate it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNikeAguero Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 Yes and Leon Madsen on a 4.00 is fair............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tony159 Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 Yes and Leon Madsen on a 4.00 is fair............. At least he managed to ride enough meetings to get a proper average. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 Another possible proposal .... no guest or r/r facility for riders with assessed averages ! Would a team want a rider averaging six points a match to go missing if there is no cover allowed. Erm, we had no facility for Shamek Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigcatdiary Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 Coventry used the rules to there advantage. the problem here isn't what coventry did it's the rules themselves and if i'm not mistaken isn't Matt Ford a member of the committee that sets out the rules and regs for the season Everyone uses the rules to there advantage, some do better than others Ford gets the proper arse when other teams get it better than he does. He is one sore loser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colincooke Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 Queston for Steve Shovlar 'Are you allowed within the rules to replace any member of your team with your No8' ? well, he hasn't bothered to answer this. Hmmmm, wonder why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfsbane Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 It's not win at all costs. It's being a good manager. The fact your manager says he'd never do it proves he's lacking something when it comes to being a team manager. Now there's a surprise Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Cheetah Snr Posted October 14, 2010 Report Share Posted October 14, 2010 Now there's a surprise Not such a surprise. Joe Haines average from 11 meetings 6.21. Hope they don't change the rules if Wolves want to use him next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts