Jump to content
British Speedway Forum

Glasgow V Plymouth Pl Sun 28th July @3 P.m.


Recommended Posts

The lazyman thread i'm afraid . Been on hols to avoid the Edinburgh meetings , so a wee bit out of touch . Apparently we've got Dakota North in to try and stem the flow of defeats and Anders Thomsen should make his home debut . Whilst i canny remember who rides for Plymouth apart from Cory Gathercole and Mark Lemon .

Hopefully we'll get our first home win in ages , and the predicted overnight rain should have cleared up long before this starts .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's OFF :(

Phew, that's saved Richard Lawson a bit of a quandary, after the pretty moderate effort of last night riding "against" Plymouth he'd have got some stick if he'd then gone out and banged in a BIG score "for" them at Glasgow? :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone know if Mikkael Bech was going to ride if the meeting had gone ahead ?? he is riding for Zielona Gora in Bydgoszcz today.

 

he was never going to be riding for Plymouth on Sunday, he was always in Poland

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He seems to miss more meetings than he rides

 

But its hardly a surprise, is it? The Devils promotion signed him on the basis that he had certain other existing commitments and I would be surprised if anyone thought otherwise. To suggest anything else supposes that either the promotion are stupid or the rider is dishonest. I hardly think that either of these is likely, do you?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

But its hardly a surprise, is it? The Devils promotion signed him on the basis that he had certain other existing commitments and I would be surprised if anyone thought otherwise. To suggest anything else supposes that either the promotion are stupid or the rider is dishonest. I hardly think that either of these is likely, do you?

The statement i made is 100% factual, no need to be so patronising.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The statement i made is 100% factual, no need to be so patronising.

 

Please note that I have not challenged the accuracy of your original post. I have not counted but I take it you have otherwise you would not have made the statement above. I assumed that your original post was one of two things:

 

a. An observation intended to provoke replies from other contributors or

 

b. Utterly pointless

 

I replied on the assumption that it was the former, in the manner in which I saw fit. If you deem my response to be patronising then that is entirely your prerogative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy