The White Knight Posted September 8, 2013 Report Share Posted September 8, 2013 I might be wrong, but I seriously doubt that the SGP series actually has much impact on who is racing in the leagues in the UK. I think that is more about the money on offer and the time/effort required to compete over here...As you yourself mentioned, the money on offer from the GP meetings isn't spectacular,,,The other leagues that pay well that weren't available or quite so lucrative in the past are more relevant to the lack of top talent in the UK. Back when the one day finals were around, the British league was King and the main pay day for riders, but now Poland, Sweden, Russia, Denmark, Germany, Czech Republic, etc, offer other options that can be more lucrative without the worry of having to get bikes across the Channel. I've never been a fan of this argument. Yes, the organisers of the series have some picks available to them, but in most years they work out better than those who qualified from outside the series, which suggests that they do a good job with the selections. Remember, there are only 4 out 15 places that are "given out/gifted". The other 11 qualify, and fairly often at least one of those "gifts" goes to a top star that has suffered an injury in the previous season. NO - I'm sorry it doesn't. Sport is about COMPETITION - NOT about working out better by fiddling someone in who shouldn't be there and excluding someone who should. To Niamh who said "what about Woffinden" - it makes no difference at all - if he didn't QUALIFY - then he shouldn't be in the Race for what is after all the WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP of our Sport. If you want to GIFT people places (choose the Cast) - then call it a SHOW - but - you CANNOT call it SPORT!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
severnsider Posted September 8, 2013 Report Share Posted September 8, 2013 The issue if wild cards is just in SGP. The Sec obviously was based on marketing ie 1 Pole, 1 Dane, 1 Russian, 1 Swede then 1 Brit. Riders in motogp & drivers in F1 etc all not always in on talent but the money they bring (null) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racers and royals Posted September 8, 2013 Report Share Posted September 8, 2013 With Tomasz back on the pace Darcy now looks less likely to make the top 8. This would mean Darcy & Holder would get 2 of the 4 spots so restricts the option for the Swedish riders (null) I should imagine Lindgren will get a wildcard-not so sure who would get the last one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LagutaRacingFan Posted September 8, 2013 Report Share Posted September 8, 2013 Don't forget my boy GRIGORY LAGUTA! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fullbore Posted September 8, 2013 Report Share Posted September 8, 2013 Expact another name change to Laguta racing fans any day now! Nimah 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salty Posted September 8, 2013 Report Share Posted September 8, 2013 Don't forget my boy GRIGORY LAGUTA! How many "boys" do you support/stalk? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The White Knight Posted September 8, 2013 Report Share Posted September 8, 2013 How many "boys" do you support/stalk? Now THAT is a leading question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldace Posted September 9, 2013 Report Share Posted September 9, 2013 (edited) NO - I'm sorry it doesn't. Sport is about COMPETITION - NOT about working out better by fiddling someone in who shouldn't be there and excluding someone who should. To Niamh who said "what about Woffinden" - it makes no difference at all - if he didn't QUALIFY - then he shouldn't be in the Race for what is after all the WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP of our Sport. If you want to GIFT people places (choose the Cast) - then call it a SHOW - but - you CANNOT call it SPORT!!! You keep banging this drum and the argument is as flawed now as it ever was. Tell me one sport where your eutopia of qualifying only exists for major events Golf/Tennis/Snooker etc all use a system of seeding where previous performance is the criteria. To your way of thinking no one "qualifies" for the UEFA Champions League, they are gifted places based on performance the previous season What about the main aspects of 4 and 2 wheel motorsport. Does anyone qualify for the Moto GP/Formula 1/ WRC etc. Are these sports not taken seriously because every single competitor is hand picked. Even going back to your beloved old World Final plenty of years had more hand picked riders than any GP system has had, All this has been gone over many times and you are entitled to your opinion as to how the riders end up in the GP but what is undeniable is the current process gives the sport the best possibility of the best rider of a given season being crowned its world champion and surely that is what everyone wants Edited September 9, 2013 by Oldace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The White Knight Posted September 9, 2013 Report Share Posted September 9, 2013 You keep banging this drum and the argument is as flawed now as it ever was. Tell me one sport where your eutopia of qualifying only exists for major events Golf/Tennis/Snooker etc all use a system of seeding where previous performance is the criteria. To your way of thinking no one "qualifies" for the UEFA Champions League, they are gifted places based on performance the previous season What about the main aspects of 4 and 2 wheel motorsport. Does anyone qualify for the Moto GP/Formula 1/ WRC etc. Are these sports not taken seriously because every single competitor is hand picked. Even going back to your beloved old World Final plenty of years had more hand picked riders than any GP system has had, All this has been gone over many times and you are entitled to your opinion as to how the riders end up in the GP but what is undeniable is the current process gives the sport the best possibility of the best rider of a given season being crowned its world champion and surely that is what everyone wants RUBBISH!! Even the mighty Ivan Mauger had to go through the Qualifying Rounds to get to the Final. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldace Posted September 9, 2013 Report Share Posted September 9, 2013 RUBBISH!! Even the mighty Ivan Mauger had to go through the Qualifying Rounds to get to the Final. Even the mighty Ronnie Moore/Barry Briggs/ Peter Craven/ Anders Michanek didnt There are plenty more if you want names and years Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The White Knight Posted September 9, 2013 Report Share Posted September 9, 2013 Even the mighty Ronnie Moore/Barry Briggs/ Peter Craven/ Anders Michanek didnt There are plenty more if you want names and years That's not necessary - I just don't agree with you. BUT - even if you are correct - it doesn't make it RIGHT does it? (Morally or otherwise). You and I will NEVER agree on this Oldace. I wouldn't like to fall out with you over this - I will continue to have my point of view as do you - and I respect that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldace Posted September 9, 2013 Report Share Posted September 9, 2013 That's not necessary - I just don't agree with you. BUT - even if you are correct - it doesn't make it RIGHT does it? (Morally or otherwise). You and I will NEVER agree on this Oldace. I wouldn't like to fall out with you over this - I will continue to have my point of view as do you - and I respect that. It isn't something to agree or disagree on, its fact all logged in the sports history Craven was seeded direct to the 1956 final Fundin was seeded direct to the 1957 final Briggs was seeded direct to the 1958 final (which he won) Briggs was seeded direct to the 1959 final Moore was seeded direct to the 1960 final That is before you get onto the Poles in the 70s, 6 seeds in 1970, 5 in 1973, 4 in 1976 and 1979. Then you move onto riders being seeded straight into the later stages like PC in 1977, or Countries give a number of seeded places to decide as the saw fit. You had situations like Wembley 1978 when the Brits were guaranteed 4 places, but only 4 meaning that a host of more than capable riders could not possibly be there You need to do some research before screaming "RUBBISH" 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob tatum Posted September 9, 2013 Report Share Posted September 9, 2013 Personally I would like the best 16 riders in the world competing injuries etc etc permitting. No disrespect to dryml he is a lovely bloke but its no fun watching a rider struggle so badly. So I am not against picks or seeded riders if it means we have the best available. Just my opinion 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JT Posted September 9, 2013 Report Share Posted September 9, 2013 Personally I would like the best 16 riders in the world competing injuries etc etc permitting. No disrespect to dryml he is a lovely bloke but its no fun watching a rider struggle so badly. So I am not against picks or seeded riders if it means we have the best available. Just my opinion You've hit the nail on the head. I also have no problem with seeded riders IF they fit your description above. I just find it utterly baffling that Chris Harris' name is being banded around for yet another wild card next season when he's not even among the top Elite League riders any more, doesn't ride in the Polish Ekstraliga, is probably about 20th in the Swedish Elite League averages, and prior to his gifted place in the Grand Prix challenge, was way out of contention for a Grand Prix place after a dismal qualifying performance in round 1. However I'm confident from Phil Rising's posts, that even BSI have given up on him now Woffinden is on the scene. Holder, Ward, Jonsson (token Swede, Swedish champion and probably the biggest name in Swedish speedway) and another younger rider (Janowski/MJJ), would make for another top GP line up next year. JT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The White Knight Posted September 9, 2013 Report Share Posted September 9, 2013 It isn't something to agree or disagree on, its fact all logged in the sports history Craven was seeded direct to the 1956 final Fundin was seeded direct to the 1957 final Briggs was seeded direct to the 1958 final (which he won) Briggs was seeded direct to the 1959 final Moore was seeded direct to the 1960 final That is before you get onto the Poles in the 70s, 6 seeds in 1970, 5 in 1973, 4 in 1976 and 1979. Then you move onto riders being seeded straight into the later stages like PC in 1977, or Countries give a number of seeded places to decide as the saw fit. You had situations like Wembley 1978 when the Brits were guaranteed 4 places, but only 4 meaning that a host of more than capable riders could not possibly be there You need to do some research before screaming "RUBBISH" OK then - saying I accept what you say as true. I only started watching Speedway in 1964 - NINE Matches only and was unaware of this. Yes, perhaps I SHOULD have done more Research - HOWEVER - it still doesn't make it RIGHT does it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldace Posted September 9, 2013 Report Share Posted September 9, 2013 OK then - saying I accept what you say as true. I only started watching Speedway in 1964 - NINE Matches only and was unaware of this. Yes, perhaps I SHOULD have done more Research - HOWEVER - it still doesn't make it RIGHT does it? It is neither right or wrong, just the way it is. A world championship should find the best contestant and be commercially viable. The system as it is now ticks all the boxes. The lack of seeding, albeit in a different competition, cost Britain dear in 1976/79/82 when potentially massive money spinning WTCs were staged in front of a deserted White City. It is why the Poles, Swedes, Americans and Dutch wouldn't stage a world final without the guarantee of home participation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The White Knight Posted September 9, 2013 Report Share Posted September 9, 2013 It is neither right or wrong, just the way it is. A world championship should find the best contestant and be commercially viable. The system as it is now ticks all the boxes. The lack of seeding, albeit in a different competition, cost Britain dear in 1976/79/82 when potentially massive money spinning WTCs were staged in front of a deserted White City. It is why the Poles, Swedes, Americans and Dutch wouldn't stage a world final without the guarantee of home participation I agree - but for the bit about commercially. 'Commercially' should have nothing to do with who gets through to the Final of ANY Competition. It is the Competition itself that should decide that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waiheke1 Posted September 10, 2013 Report Share Posted September 10, 2013 What a joke sport that football is, seeding the history to the finals for commercial reasons. ditto rugby. and tennis with its wild cards at major tournaments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Humphrey Appleby Posted September 10, 2013 Report Share Posted September 10, 2013 What a joke sport that football is, seeding the history to the finals for commercial reasons. ditto rugby. and tennis with its wild cards at major tournaments. Ah, but they don't seed them to the Final itself. It's less of an issue to seed one rider out of 16 for commercial reasons, but seeding one team out of four in the SWC makes a bit of farce of things, especially if that team isn't really competitive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waiheke1 Posted September 10, 2013 Report Share Posted September 10, 2013 Agreed ha - My point was really in regards to gps and world individual finals. The wc is a much tricker one balancing commercial viabillty with fairness and getting the best teams in the final. that said, seeding one weak host nation to the final is arguably less farcical than the system in late 70s and early 80s which saw TWO sub standard continental teams make the final, and one or more of the "big three" missing out. 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.