Steve Shovlar Posted December 27, 2010 Report Share Posted December 27, 2010 (edited) answer my question then. About where I got the info about Coventry signing Hans and Harris? Simple deduction. Mick Brately said on the radio that he tried to sign Hans but Hans had already signed a deal with a Midlands club. Doesn't take much from there. Plus I have also heard it from other sources. How would Coventry fans feel if Sandhu forced the BSPA to change the rule under threat of legal action, and were the only club to use two riders above 8, whilst the rest stuck by the agreed rules and had one whilst a club or two had no number one? Would they be happy or embarrassed? I can guess the answer. Edited December 27, 2010 by Steve Shovlar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ImpartialOne Posted December 27, 2010 Report Share Posted December 27, 2010 About where I got the info about Coventry signing Hans and Harris? Simple deduction. Mick Brately said on the radio that he tried to sign Hans but Hans had already signed a deal with a Midlands club. Doesn't take much from there. Plus I have also heard it from other sources. How would Coventry fans feel if Sandhu forced the BSPA to change the rule under threat of legal action, and were the only club to use two riders above 8, whilst the rest stuck by the agreed rules and had one whilst a club or two had no number one? Would they be happy or embarrassed? I can guess the answer. If what you speculate is true, then i don't think it would be fair to clubs working to a one 8+ rider rule if Coventry tracked 2. But we are yet to see any evidence of this and i really find it hard to believe it would happen. But if it did, it would be unfair. But my other point was that you stated it unfair that Belle Vue can't get a number one. My response was this: You say it's unfair that Belle Vue can't get a number one, well this highlights the problem with this rider sharing scheme; when all the other clubs have taken their chosen 8.01 riders, this leaves a very limited choice to those left. Supposing HA was the only rider over 8.00 left and Belle Vue were the only team left without an 8.00+ rider, it then becomes something of an arranged marriage whereby Hans is told he has to ride for Belle Vue or miss out completely, and Belle Vue are told you must have Hans in your team or be understrength. What if Hans can get a better deal somewhere else and can't afford the terms Belle Vue are offering? What if Belle Vue don't want Hans? Basically the system is flawed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aces51 Posted December 27, 2010 Report Share Posted December 27, 2010 Hans wouldn't get a better deal elsewhere if BV were the only club without an over 8 rider. It is of course all hypothetical but as Hans apparently wants to ride in the UK and BV agreed terms with him this year they probably could for 2011. If they couldn't then I think they would have to go without a No.1. as there would be no other option. (I am conveniently forgetting Zagar). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colincooke Posted December 27, 2010 Report Share Posted December 27, 2010 It makes sense to share the number 1's around and the idea of Coventry having 2 while BV go without is madness. However, I don't like the idea that Wolves can have a top 2 that come to 17, while Coventry can only come to nearer 15. Maybe the limit should be on the top 2 or 3 raher than just the number 1? It makes no difference The Aces would have a more balanced team whereas a team with 2 top riders would have to make up for that lower in the riding order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beesknees Posted December 27, 2010 Report Share Posted December 27, 2010 About where I got the info about Coventry signing Hans and Harris? Simple deduction. Mick Brately said on the radio that he tried to sign Hans but Hans had already signed a deal with a Midlands club. Doesn't take much from there. Plus I have also heard it from other sources. How would Coventry fans feel if Sandhu forced the BSPA to change the rule under threat of legal action, and were the only club to use two riders above 8, whilst the rest stuck by the agreed rules and had one whilst a club or two had no number one? Would they be happy or embarrassed? I can guess the answer. Who's to say Hans didn't sign instead of Harris though ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pirates Of Poole Posted December 27, 2010 Report Share Posted December 27, 2010 I wouldn't care if Cov had 4 riders with plus 8 point averages they would have an extremelly weak bottom end. What gets me is if there is a team out there struggling to get an out and out number 1 and can't because 1 team is hogging 2 that's simply out of order. If BV do find one then great. Cov will definately have a couple of 3 pointers at reserve if they go with Hans, Harris and Kennett. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Posted December 27, 2010 Report Share Posted December 27, 2010 It makes no difference The Aces would have a more balanced team whereas a team with 2 top riders would have to make up for that lower in the riding order. Spot on. Why not use the rule another way, say all teams must track a 4+ pt reserve? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alan_boon Posted December 27, 2010 Report Share Posted December 27, 2010 The 8+ rule is a stupid one to make without knowing first how many 8+ riders you're going to have in the league. It only works when there's a large surplus of 8+ riders. You can never be sure who's going to sign for 2011 until they've actually signed. What if there don't turn out to be enough? Are Kings Lynn going to be asked to give N-K Iversen to the club without one? Ludicrous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aces51 Posted December 27, 2010 Report Share Posted December 27, 2010 It does make a difference not having a No.1 with the 15 heat formula and the double points rule. You are always at a disavantage in heats 13 and 15 and not only can the double points be used effectively against you but you also have little chance of using it successfully yourself. You may have an advantage in other heats but I do not think it balances out. The No.1 is alo a drawcard and the lack of one affects attendances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Shovlar Posted December 27, 2010 Report Share Posted December 27, 2010 It makes no difference The Aces would have a more balanced team whereas a team with 2 top riders would have to make up for that lower in the riding order. Anyone with a knowledge of the sport would know it makes a hell of a lot of difference. Coventry V BV. Heats 13 and 15 would be easy nailed on 5-1's to Coventry against a balanced team with a 7 pointer the best rider against Harris and Hans. Totally unfair to a club without a number one and totally unfair to the rest of the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aces51 Posted December 27, 2010 Report Share Posted December 27, 2010 Who's to say Hans didn't sign instead of Harris though ... I think that is quite likely, it makes sense with Harris's GP commitments and I think he will be BV bound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted December 27, 2010 Report Share Posted December 27, 2010 It makes no difference The Aces would have a more balanced team whereas a team with 2 top riders would have to make up for that lower in the riding order.Thats not true. With a teams top 2 having 2 extra rides, a weakness in your top 2 is magnified. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alan_boon Posted December 27, 2010 Report Share Posted December 27, 2010 (edited) Anyone with a knowledge of the sport would know it makes a hell of a lot of difference. Coventry V BV. Heats 13 and 15 would be easy nailed on 5-1's to Coventry against a balanced team with a 7 pointer the best rider against Harris and Hans. Totally unfair to a club without a number one and totally unfair to the rest of the league. Steve, with all due respect, that's rubbish and you know it is. You have to take heat 15 out of the equation - it's always going to favour the team with the two best riders. As for heat 13, heat 14 could easily balance it - a team with a strong second string and strong reserve is always going to get a 5-1. And if you have two strong reserves (maybe by "bending" the rules to use foreign 4-pointers), you're always going to get a 5-1 in heat 2. Except you don't. Because speedway is a weird sport sometimes... EDIT: A great example of when heats 13 and 15 don't always go to plan... 04/10/10 Heat 13: Kasprzak, Harris, Holder, Watt 1-5 Heat 15: Kasprzak, Harris, Pedersen, Holder 1-5 Edited December 27, 2010 by alan_boon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starboy118 Posted December 27, 2010 Report Share Posted December 27, 2010 (edited) Is there going to be a prize for the person who starts page 100? Or do we have to have a vote on it first? Edited December 27, 2010 by Starboy118 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Shovlar Posted December 27, 2010 Report Share Posted December 27, 2010 Steve, with all due respect, that's rubbish and you know it is. You have to take heat 15 out of the equation - it's always going to favour the team with the two best riders. As for heat 13, heat 14 could easily balance it - a team with a strong second string and strong reserve is always going to get a 5-1. And if you have two strong reserves (maybe by "bending" the rules to use foreign 4-pointers), you're always going to get a 5-1 in heat 2. Except you don't. Because speedway is a weird sport sometimes... EDIT: A great example of when heats 13 and 15 don't always go to plan... 04/10/10 Heat 13: Kasprzak, Harris, Holder, Watt 1-5 Heat 15: Kasprzak, Harris, Pedersen, Holder 1-5 Read the top post on this page and SCBs post on this page. Both agree with me. And Aces51 also points out the very valid fact that no number one also means fans will not be happy. If Coventry force the rules to change so they can use Harris and Hans, it will be a total disgrace, simple as that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alan_boon Posted December 27, 2010 Report Share Posted December 27, 2010 Read the top post on this page and SCBs post on this page. Both agree with me. And Aces51 also points out the very valid fact that no number one also means fans will not be happy. If Coventry force the rules to change so they can use Harris and Hans, it will be a total disgrace, simple as that. The top post is from an (albeit fair-minded) Aces fan. And SCB's actually points out that you shouldn't have a strong top 2. And as for whether the fans will be happy... well, that's down to the promoter to make them happy. Coventry have played the game in the last few seasons, loaning Nicholls & Jonsson to clubs that wanted them. However, it's time those clubs started looking at themselves. And, while we're at it, you still haven't addressed the point that you took the "quote" about Hans and assumed it meant that Coventry were looking at using Hans and Harris, when you know no such thing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ImpartialOne Posted December 27, 2010 Report Share Posted December 27, 2010 It makes no difference The Aces would have a more balanced team whereas a team with 2 top riders would have to make up for that lower in the riding order. Exactly, which has been my point all along. Either have a points limit or a limit on No.1s, not both. If a team wants to track 2 10 point riders under a 40 point limit they will pay the penalty by having a weaker tail. A team of middle order riders would probably increase their averages and be a stronger team anyway. We are living in a dictatorship! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted December 27, 2010 Report Share Posted December 27, 2010 The top post is from an (albeit fair-minded) Aces fan. And SCB's actually points out that you shouldn't have a strong top 2. And as for whether the fans will be happy... well, that's down to the promoter to make them happy. No it doesnt. A weak top 2 is a bigger issue than a weakness anywhere else in a team. A good team needs a good 1,2 and 6 as they all have 5 rides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Shovlar Posted December 27, 2010 Report Share Posted December 27, 2010 And, while we're at it, you still haven't addressed the point that you took the "quote" about Hans and assumed it meant that Coventry were looking at using Hans and Harris, when you know no such thing... Guess we will see on that one when it all comes out. But I am 99.9% sure this is part of the problem with the storm out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aces51 Posted December 27, 2010 Report Share Posted December 27, 2010 If a strength in depth team is the way to go it's a bit odd that 6 of the 8 EL teams have currently signed a rider of 8 or above and no doubt Wolves will make it 7 of 8. Obviously they don't know what they are doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts