Elite League 2014

[stevebrum]

The one thing that does need to be addressed next year is the play off's are run on their merits. ie if you are 10 points up from the first leg the team who holds the second leg pulls back the 10 points + then they win the tie. None of this tactical lark. It should be a straight shoot out.

 

Well said.

Let the top 4 fight it out without all the usual tactical rules.

[Starman2006]

Well said.

Let the top 4 fight it out without all the usual tactical rules.

 

Well, im not defending Poole Swindon or anybody else. You get that far and there should be no ties. Straight shoot out over two legs. THEN, if the teams are level on points after the two legs, you have three golden heats, if its not resolved after them you have a golden heat untill somebody cracks. ie 3-3, 3-3, 4-2. Same in the final.

Edited September 29, 2013 by Starman2006

[stevebrum]

Well, im not defending Poole Swindon or anybody else. You get that far and there should be no ties. Straight shoot out over two legs. THEN, if the teams are level on points after the two legs, you have three golden heats, if its not resolved after them you have a golden heat untill somebody cracks. ie 3-3, 3-3, 4-2. Same in the final.

 

Who would have thought, someone from Poole making decent sense.

[Daniel Smith]

 

 

Well, im not defending Poole Swindon or anybody else. You get that far and there should be no ties. Straight shoot out over two legs. THEN, if the teams are level on points after the two legs, you have three golden heats, if its not resolved after them you have a golden heat untill somebody cracks. ie 3-3, 3-3, 4-2. Same in the final.

 

I don't like run offs as the home team have clear advantage, even more so if you went with the 3 golden heats format you suggest.

[Starman2006]

I don't like run offs as the home team have clear advantage, even more so if you went with the 3 golden heats format you suggest.

 

Whether you like it or not, its the way forward. Its up to the away team to make sure that don't happen.

[Trees]

The one thing that does need to be addressed next year is the play off's are run on their merits. ie if you are 10 points up from the first leg the team who holds the second leg pulls back the 10 points + then they win the tie. None of this tactical lark. It should be a straight shoot out.

Totally agree with that!

[SCB]

The one thing that does need to be addressed next year is the play off's are run on their merits. ie if you are 10 points up from the first leg the team who holds the second leg pulls back the 10 points + then they win the tie. None of this tactical lark. It should be a straight shoot out.

Well, im not defending Poole Swindon or anybody else. You get that far and there should be no ties. Straight shoot out over two legs. THEN, if the teams are level on points after the two legs, you have three golden heats, if its not resolved after them you have a golden heat untill somebody cracks. ie 3-3, 3-3, 4-2. Same in the final.

Starman in good idea shocker I wholeheartedly agree.

 

I don't like run offs as the home team have clear advantage, even more so if you went with the 3 golden heats format you suggest.

Perk of having the home leg second, so the team finishing top of the league get a possible benefit if theres a tie. Imagine having some sudden death run-offs, they'd be brilliant even if they were from the gate.

[E I Addio]

I don't like run offs as the home team have clear advantage, even more so if you went with the 3 golden heats format you suggest.

 

I would say the team that win the toss and get choice of gate positions in the first heat get the advantage. Whichever sort of tie-break you go for, someone will get the advantage. Whatever you do it can't be any worse than the second best team winning on tacticals.

[bigcatdiary]

The one thing that does need to be addressed next year is the play off's are run on their merits. ie if you are 10 points up from the first leg the team who holds the second leg pulls back the 10 points + then they win the tie. None of this tactical lark. It should be a straight shoot out.

 

Let's go one better and scrap the tactical ride completely.

Edited September 30, 2013 by bigcatdiary

[arthur cross]

I don't like run offs as the home team have clear advantage, even more so if you went with the 3 golden heats format you suggest.

 

To reflect the likelihood of "home track advantage", how about just 2 golden heats (each rider can take part in only one of them & that also means each team has one heat of "odd" and one heat of "even" gates) but include a rule that the away team wins if those two heats finish 6-6 ... in other words. the home team must get themselves ahead over those 2 heats to claim the victory.

[Brummie Kev]

Anyone know when all the bone heads who run the sport are off for their jollies..?? (sorry I mean AGM)

 

Rosco said it starts on 14th November for 3 days in this weeks Speedway Star

[Bees_Man]

Why so bloody late ???

[T.N.T.]

It may not be what we would wish for, but British Speedway has to start smelling the coffee and start looking after the finances better. The sport has many many rules that only apply in speedway and other sports would find it crazy to operate in such a way. Is there any other sport that pays the visiting team ? ..... If Man Utd were playing at Aston Villa, would Villa have to pay Rooney, RVP, Evra etc part of their wages !!!

 

Why can't tracks simply pay their own riders what they score ? The more they score the more you pay, but at least you are not paying £65 a point to the visiting team (roughly £2,600) each home meeting.

 

 

 

AVAILABILITY

 

Is there any other sport where you have to pay for members of your team to fly in from foreign parts to compete. Maybe Man City missed a trick in losing Tevez as they should have just flew him in from Argentina each week instead !! ...... We have to be looking at riders that are mainly based in Britain like the Brits, Aussies, Americans etc and even riders that don't need to look abroad to make a living. Riders like Nicolai Klindt for example would still ride in their native country, but as they are based over here, they can commit to a British track and hopefully a more filled fixture list.

 

One problem I do see however is some riders having been having too much cake and eating it and riders like Ben Barker, Jason Doyle etc have in the past few seasons been high scoring in both leagues and rightly so they have been looking at ways of making a living. However as the difference between the two leagues will get closer, you cant have the #1 at a PL track being #1 in the top flight too. Also if the fixture lists were more level then it would be hard for riders to compete in both leagues.

 

With an increase in meetings, hopefully back to twice at home and twice away for ALL tracks and two teams moving up to give 22 home and 22 away, it would see an increase of 16 meetings straight away. Fans have been lost or disgruntled with the way the fixture lists have been compiled in recent years and one home meeting in a month just cant be right. People get used to doing other things and when a race night finally comes around some think should they bother ?

 

It may mean we lose some big names in Britain, but it's better to swim in the pool than drown in the ocean. Fredrik Lindgren looks set to be missing next season as he competes in Sweden on Tuesday and Thursdays along with Poland on a Sunday and a few other meetings slotted in. Darcy Ward and Tai Woffinden have both expressed a wish to stay racing in Britain next season and hopefully they will. However any track employing them would not be able to track another top name due to hopefully a more reliable points limit and also it would be financial suicide. Maybe that would suggest Chris Holder would be looking to ride elsewhere ? ...... maybe he may want to give Britain a miss as he comes back from injury. Will Iversen, Bjerre, Zagar etc be back next season ? ...... KK linked to Leicester which would be good.

 

 

I have never been a fan of forcing British riders into the top tier as that was tried in the 80's and only one of the many up and coming riders of the day was still riding at the age of 30 as the others had retired either broke or lost confidence by facing top riders as they were learning. However I do feel averages should be more setlled. A rider should have ONE Official average and if a rider rides in both leagues, he has his average calculated using results from both leagues.

 

While my idea of foreign riders having to keep their assessed averages until they reach that figure is unlikely to be bought in as tracks have many of these on low averages ..... however I would advocate that British riders can be assessed as low as 2.00 in while foreign riders can't be lower than 3.00. Therefore Ashley Morris could double up for Wolves on something like 2.33 while James Sarjeant could be at Coventry on 2.00.

 

 

 

PLAY OFFS

 

I agree that a straight shoot off should be a better way of sorting things but it doesn't help the fact that not the best team during the season walks away with the prize. Have to congratulate Poole on yet another title, but they have not been the best team in 2013 just simply the team that got things moving at the right time with the right riders.

 

So I would suggest that the play offs are straight shooot outs and no tactical rides BUT ...... I would also adopt a bonus for the teams that have performed better during the season. The top four teams in the league were Birmingham 56pts, Swindon 54, Wolves 51 and Poole 46. Brummies would still get first pick and if they wanted to face Wolves they would start on 5 points. If they wanted to face Poole they would start on 10 and Swindon 2. This way the team that finishes top is rewarded for the seasons work and not punished in the final few meetings by a team that has struggled for months and months.

 

 

 

There are likely to be a lot of big changes for next season but I just hope they look at the loopholes that could appear before rushing into things.

[JonHWeiner]

I know this has been brought up before before but it doesn't make sense to decide the rules for next season in November of this year. Surely it would make more sense to decide the rules this November for 2015 so that the rules and team points limits for next year would have been known a year ago. That way team building plans for next year could already be well under way by now. As it is nobody at this moment seems to even know what league there will be next year or whether there will be league speedway on TV.

[speedwayfun]

It is pretty obvious that the tv sponsorship will influence what happens for the new season!!! Until we know that we won't be getting very far!!! (stating the obvious)

[dontforgetthefueltapsbruv]

Knowing the rules 2 years ahead sounds good in principle but is too open to abuse and manipulation.

[bigcatdiary]

It may not be what we would wish for, but British Speedway has to start smelling the coffee and start looking after the finances better. The sport has many many rules that only apply in speedway and other sports would find it crazy to operate in such a way. Is there any other sport that pays the visiting team ? ..... If Man Utd were playing at Aston Villa, would Villa have to pay Rooney, RVP, Evra etc part of their wages !!!

 

Why can't tracks simply pay their own riders what they score ? The more they score the more you pay, but at least you are not paying £65 a point to the visiting team (roughly £2,600) each home meeting.

 

 

 

AVAILABILITY

 

Is there any other sport where you have to pay for members of your team to fly in from foreign parts to compete. Maybe Man City missed a trick in losing Tevez as they should have just flew him in from Argentina each week instead !! ...... We have to be looking at riders that are mainly based in Britain like the Brits, Aussies, Americans etc and even riders that don't need to look abroad to make a living. Riders like Nicolai Klindt for example would still ride in their native country, but as they are based over here, they can commit to a British track and hopefully a more filled fixture list.

 

One problem I do see however is some riders having been having too much cake and eating it and riders like Ben Barker, Jason Doyle etc have in the past few seasons been high scoring in both leagues and rightly so they have been looking at ways of making a living. However as the difference between the two leagues will get closer, you cant have the #1 at a PL track being #1 in the top flight too. Also if the fixture lists were more level then it would be hard for riders to compete in both leagues.

 

With an increase in meetings, hopefully back to twice at home and twice away for ALL tracks and two teams moving up to give 22 home and 22 away, it would see an increase of 16 meetings straight away. Fans have been lost or disgruntled with the way the fixture lists have been compiled in recent years and one home meeting in a month just cant be right. People get used to doing other things and when a race night finally comes around some think should they bother ?

 

It may mean we lose some big names in Britain, but it's better to swim in the pool than drown in the ocean. Fredrik Lindgren looks set to be missing next season as he competes in Sweden on Tuesday and Thursdays along with Poland on a Sunday and a few other meetings slotted in. Darcy Ward and Tai Woffinden have both expressed a wish to stay racing in Britain next season and hopefully they will. However any track employing them would not be able to track another top name due to hopefully a more reliable points limit and also it would be financial suicide. Maybe that would suggest Chris Holder would be looking to ride elsewhere ? ...... maybe he may want to give Britain a miss as he comes back from injury. Will Iversen, Bjerre, Zagar etc be back next season ? ...... KK linked to Leicester which would be good.

 

 

I have never been a fan of forcing British riders into the top tier as that was tried in the 80's and only one of the many up and coming riders of the day was still riding at the age of 30 as the others had retired either broke or lost confidence by facing top riders as they were learning. However I do feel averages should be more setlled. A rider should have ONE Official average and if a rider rides in both leagues, he has his average calculated using results from both leagues.

 

While my idea of foreign riders having to keep their assessed averages until they reach that figure is unlikely to be bought in as tracks have many of these on low averages ..... however I would advocate that British riders can be assessed as low as 2.00 in while foreign riders can't be lower than 3.00. Therefore Ashley Morris could double up for Wolves on something like 2.33 while James Sarjeant could be at Coventry on 2.00.

 

 

 

PLAY OFFS

 

I agree that a straight shoot off should be a better way of sorting things but it doesn't help the fact that not the best team during the season walks away with the prize. Have to congratulate Poole on yet another title, but they have not been the best team in 2013 just simply the team that got things moving at the right time with the right riders.

 

So I would suggest that the play offs are straight shooot outs and no tactical rides BUT ...... I would also adopt a bonus for the teams that have performed better during the season. The top four teams in the league were Birmingham 56pts, Swindon 54, Wolves 51 and Poole 46. Brummies would still get first pick and if they wanted to face Wolves they would start on 5 points. If they wanted to face Poole they would start on 10 and Swindon 2. This way the team that finishes top is rewarded for the seasons work and not punished in the final few meetings by a team that has struggled for months and months.

 

 

 

There are likely to be a lot of big changes for next season but I just hope they look at the loopholes that could appear before rushing into things.

 

Riders just being payed by their own clubs has been proposed and voted down already.

 

Keep it simple I don't think changing the rules for the play offs is a good idea, scrap the tactical full stop.

 

I don't think their is enough riders to go around so doubling up will likely stay, it might make it a bit easier if the EL had set nights just for them.

 

 

Edited October 21, 2013 by bigcatdiary

[john birch]

The one thing that does need to be addressed next year is the play off's are run on their merits. ie if you are 10 points up from the first leg the team who holds the second leg pulls back the 10 points + then they win the tie. None of this tactical lark. It should be a straight shoot out.

Alright I hate the tactical ride anyway. But having them in two legged matches is lunacy. The 2006 final wasn't the best thing since sliced bread, it was a joke. And it didn't exactly benefit the two promotions involved either.

[Starman2006]

Alright I hate the tactical ride anyway. But having them in two legged matches is lunacy. The 2006 final wasn't the best thing since sliced bread, it was a joke. And it didn't exactly benefit the two promotions involved either.

[john birch]

Got an idea for next year's elite league fixture wise. Most people think it should be 2*home and 2*away. That's 40 matches if Leicester step up. Can they be fit in, especially if it's a wet summer? My idea is this: if the 'A' fixture is called off, then stage 2*12 heat matches on the date of the 'B' fixture. Charge a fiver extra (hopefully if costs are reduced regular adm. should be £15 quid next yr making 20 quid max.) and actively market it as a mega match. Advantage you wouldn't need to check if johnny foreigner was riding in the Slovenian super league on any given date and cost savings by not having hts 13 + 15 in particular. Wouldn't need to go off-night either.Season tickets would need to take this into account and their could be issues if the second match was abandoned. But it's an idea. What does anyone else think?