Rule Changes For 2014

[uk_martin]

a loophole that needs changing ie rider quitting ,ahem cough cough ,,,, so the team can then recieve an r/r facility in theory making them stronger,,,

would like to think a change of rule for next season ... if a rider quits he can only be replaced with a 3 point reserve , but he can be sacked and replaced with rider of same or less average , but must be replaced NO r/r ....

 

wonder if those promoters that want squads brought in would really like to see the end of r/r/ ......

 

Kind of got me thinking, and gave me an excuse to air one of my thoughts...

 

NO FACILITIES for teams where a rider is absent, due to justifiably withholding their services.

 

So what does that mean? Well, imagine a club not paying a rider, and that rider not riding for that team again until his debts are paid.

• Why should a club get to benefit from a guest or rider replacement for running up bad debts?
  
• Why shouldn't a rider be able to say, without getting suspended for it, "if you're not paying me, I'm not travelling across Europe to attend your meeting at my own cost"?
  

That's just one example of where a rider has a justifiable reason. There may be others too. Seems that the teams are in a no-lose situation and can treat their riders the way no other employers can treat their staff in any other line of business.

 

How to administer this rule will need to be thought out, as relying on the mutual back-scratching society isn't the answer. Perhaps some kind of notice with supporting evidence lodged with the FIM or parent governing body? Or something...???

[Tsunami]

Kind of got me thinking, and gave me an excuse to air one of my thoughts...

 

NO FACILITIES for teams where a rider is absent, due to justifiably withholding their services.

 

So what does that mean? Well, imagine a club not paying a rider, and that rider not riding for that team again until his debts are paid.

• Why should a club get to benefit from a guest or rider replacement for running up bad debts?
  
• Why shouldn't a rider be able to say, without getting suspended for it, "if you're not paying me, I'm not travelling across Europe to attend your meeting at my own cost"?
  

That's just one example of where a rider has a justifiable reason. There may be others too. Seems that the teams are in a no-lose situation and can treat their riders the way no other employers can treat their staff in any other line of business.

 

How to administer this rule will need to be thought out, as relying on the mutual back-scratching society isn't the answer. Perhaps some kind of notice with supporting evidence lodged with the FIM or parent governing body? Or something...???

 

But what is the criteria for 'not being paid'. I have known riders try to demand all their money on the night, when they must know the money has already been taken off the premises. Is a 'week lying on' the norm, and when do the riders get paid for away meetings. Home teams sometimes do not receive the exchange money for away meetings, so who then is in default of withholding wages.

I agree with your proposition in principle, but I can see it being used for the rider's own agenda.

Another point is what is wages. If his results earnings are paid, what about late payment of sponsors money, and also flights money like with the DMU, which clubs have to pay a certain amount for named meetings but the rider drives there as he is already on the continent. It might be say £350 but his actual expense is possibly say £30. Sometimes there is an agreement that flights can/will be paid staggered over the rest of the season.

[guitar_art]

But what is the criteria for 'not being paid'. I have known riders try to demand all their money on the night, when they must know the money has already been taken off the premises. Is a 'week lying on' the norm, and when do the riders get paid for away meetings. Home teams sometimes do not receive the exchange money for away meetings, so who then is in default of withholding wages.

I agree with your proposition in principle, but I can see it being used for the rider's own agenda.

Another point is what is wages. If his results earnings are paid, what about late payment of sponsors money, and also flights money like with the DMU, which clubs have to pay a certain amount for named meetings but the rider drives there as he is already on the continent. It might be say £350 but his actual expense is possibly say £30. Sometimes there is an agreement that flights can/will be paid staggered over the rest of the season.

 

I guess the simple answer is that a time frame for payment should be agreed in the rider's contract.

[Whisperer]

Kind of got me thinking, and gave me an excuse to air one of my thoughts...

 

NO FACILITIES for teams where a rider is absent, due to justifiably withholding their services.

 

So what does that mean? Well, imagine a club not paying a rider, and that rider not riding for that team again until his debts are paid.

• Why should a club get to benefit from a guest or rider replacement for running up bad debts?
  
• Why shouldn't a rider be able to say, without getting suspended for it, "if you're not paying me, I'm not travelling across Europe to attend your meeting at my own cost"?
  

That's just one example of where a rider has a justifiable reason. There may be others too. Seems that the teams are in a no-lose situation and can treat their riders the way no other employers can treat their staff in any other line of business.

 

How to administer this rule will need to be thought out, as relying on the mutual back-scratching society isn't the answer. Perhaps some kind of notice with supporting evidence lodged with the FIM or parent governing body? Or something...???

 

I take it you'll be running a NL rider at number 1 this week then

[pandorum]

If this was the least of speedway's worries then things would be looking quite upbeat if and when SKY dump the sport.

Sadly it's not and the sport is in a mess that perhaps it will not be able to drag itself out of.

2014 will be possibly a season of huge consequences for the sport in this country.

 

Luckily we have a body of promoters who are on the ball and together who will sort out the sport and drag it into the 20th century.

 

Oh wait a minute that's something I just dreamt. Actually they are a bunch of idiots who would sacrifice half the league to get one over on a rival they hate.

The sport is f###ed

[RichardGFAmott]

The most derisory rule is the tactical ride rule it can totally Change the course of a match. A side works hard to get a lead then has it blown away in one race. You can't explain it to anyone who is new to the sport.And it has turned many supporters of long standing away from the sport.

[rob tatum]

<masked swearing/unacceptable language removed> Let's just start again how did we get in this mess our sport is so simple really an yet every year we make up new complicated rules. Let's scrap everything and start again. 4 riders per race over 4 laps. There that's a start.

[SCB]

You think the promoters will bring in a rule that gives the rides more power than them? Nice try, it give me a giggle.

 

I agree it should be a rule but it never will be.

[PHILIPRISING]

The most derisory rule is the tactical ride rule it can totally Change the course of a match. A side works hard to get a lead then has it blown away in one race. You can't explain it to anyone who is new to the sport.And it has turned many supporters of long standing away from the sport.

 

I'M old school on this one and liked the old tactical sub rule ... six points behind and any rider could have a tac ride. Puts a little more onus on team managers as well. Peter Oakes was a past master when managing Exeter to the British League title light years ago. Pulled off a nifty little manoeuvre involving Ivan Mauger at Wimbledon that had the home fans in uproar but created great excitement.

[Grand Central]

I'M old school on this one and liked the old tactical sub rule ... six points behind and any rider could have a tac ride. Puts a little more onus on team managers as well. Peter Oakes was a past master when managing Exeter to the British League title light years ago. Pulled off a nifty little manoeuvre involving Ivan Mauger at Wimbledon that had the home fans in uproar but created great excitement.

 

And it was 39 years ago this very weekend (saddoes remember these things) when PO put Frank Shuter to Number One and Ivan at Number 2 in the Speedway Star Cup second leg Match at The Zoo. An unheard of move at the time.

Ivan then came into the very last race as a tac sub and beat PC and Soren for Exeter to win on aggregate.

 

Hyde Road was packed and there was uproar throughout.

 

Still one of my top 5 meetings of all time.

 

 

.

Edited July 7, 2013 by Grand Central

[ABS]

And it was 39 years ago this very weekend (saddoes remember these things) when PO put Frank Shuter to Number One and Ivan at Number 2 in the Speedway Star Cup second leg Match at The Zoo. An unheard of move at the time.

Ivan then came into the very last race as a tac sub and beat PC and Soren for Exeter to win on aggregate.

 

Hyde Road was packed and there was uproar throughout.

 

Still one of my top 5 meetings of all time.

 

 

.

 

Yep was there and The Falcons got it spot on tactically. But you metion a race between PC, Soren and Ivan - shows you how poor the standard of the so-called Elite League is today. Every team should have its equivalent of The Turbo Twins, but sadly not the case.

[PHILIPRISING]

TAKE a look back at some of the Cradley Heath teams in the 80s ....

[ABS]

TAKE a look back at some of the Cradley Heath teams in the 80s ....

I know - in reality seven heat leaders in today's terms.

 

What we've arrived at today has been caused by lowering the points limit over the years, resulting in a vastly diluted product at a premium price. And they wonder why they don't get the crowds.

[PHILIPRISING]

AMEN to that

[New Science]

I'M old school on this one and liked the old tactical sub rule ... six points behind and any rider could have a tac ride. Puts a little more onus on team managers as well. Peter Oakes was a past master when managing Exeter to the British League title light years ago. Pulled off a nifty little manoeuvre involving Ivan Mauger at Wimbledon that had the home fans in uproar but created great excitement.

Your team are winning by 10 points at home with 3 heats left.The top heavy opposition get a 5-1 in heat 13,then put the same double tactical in heat 14, another 5-1,low and behold they field the same pairing in heat 15 and achieve a 5-1 to win by 2.Saw Wolves do this to Belle Vue in the 90's,there was nothing more unfair in the sport.At least with the double point ride its a programmed ride against riders of equal ability,the old tactical substitute rule made a formality of weak heats 8 and 14.

[waiheke1]

 

I know - in reality seven heat leaders in today's terms.

 

 

not really true, the side of 83 is the only which comes close to that, id agree they had six to claim Jan o was a seventh is probably pushing it, yes he averaged over 7 but spent the whole black season at reserve. still arguably the best bl team of all time?

Apart from that the heathens sides were generally top heavy with very weak reserves (Reid, verner , barrett , s Collins etc) but this did allow them to have four genuine heat leaders (Andersen grahame Collins plus penhall/king/pedersen ).

don't disagree with the point u are making though, although there were some pretty awful bl sides too in that era ( swindon of 82/83, eastborne 83 Halifax when kc was injured, exeter of 84 spring to mind)

[SCB]

I know - in reality seven heat leaders in today's terms.

 

What we've arrived at today has been caused by lowering the points limit over the years, resulting in a vastly diluted product at a premium price. And they wonder why they don't get the crowds.

For every team with 7 heatleaders, there must have been two teams with 1. I bet them match ups were great!

[TwoMinuteWarning]

 

 

I'M old school on this one and liked the old tactical sub rule ... six points behind and any rider could have a tac ride. Puts a little more onus on team managers as well. Peter Oakes was a past master when managing Exeter to the British League title light years ago. Pulled off a nifty little manoeuvre involving Ivan Mauger at Wimbledon that had the home fans in uproar but created great excitement.

 

Worth remembering that both the Polish and Swedish leagues gave the double-point / joker / tactical ride a try and kicked it out after a season or two.

Only used now in some MINOR leagues - Germany, Czech Republic, Denmark, U.K ...

[waiheke1]

The most derisory rule is the tactical ride rule it can totally Change the course of a match. A side works hard to get a lead then has it blown away in one race. You can't explain it to anyone who is new to the sport.And it has turned many supporters of long standing away from the sport.

really? the tac sub rule was in effect back in the 70s, in a form which gave a much greater advantage to the trailing side. so u r saying long standing supporters stopped following 40 years ago? or that they have since left the sport because the "new" tac sub rule doesn't give enough advantage to the losing team?

 

For every team with 7 heatleaders, there must have been two teams with 1. I bet them match ups were great!

keep up scb , all the teams had at least three top class heat leaders, just look at how many riders averaged over 8 points per meeting...

[BWitcher]

 

 

And it was 39 years ago this very weekend (saddoes remember these things) when PO put Frank Shuter to Number One and Ivan at Number 2 in the Speedway Star Cup second leg Match at The Zoo. An unheard of move at the time.

Ivan then came into the very last race as a tac sub and beat PC and Soren for Exeter to win on aggregate.

 

Hyde Road was packed and there was uproar throughout.

 

Still one of my top 5 meetings of all time.

 

 

.

 

Got to love it.

 

It wasn't unfair back in the good old days was it, when the weaker team won due to tactical rules...

 

Your team are winning by 10 points at home with 3 heats left.The top heavy opposition get a 5-1 in heat 13,then put the same double tactical in heat 14, another 5-1,low and behold they field the same pairing in heat 15 and achieve a 5-1 to win by 2.Saw Wolves do this to Belle Vue in the 90's,there was nothing more unfair in the sport.At least with the double point ride its a programmed ride against riders of equal ability,the old tactical substitute rule made a formality of weak heats 8 and 14.

 

It happened regulary, especially with some of the Cradley teams too (Hancock/Hamill) etc.