stevebrum Posted April 7, 2014 Report Share Posted April 7, 2014 All these people running around like headless chickens because Poole can use a guest LOL! How fair would it boe if Poole had to use a 3 pointer because Herman the German poleaxed him down under? Resort to child like insults to make a point , that may be considered offensive to some. If Ward had got caught out by the rut and hit someone you would just have called it a `racing incident`. Perhaps Martin is anti Poole as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavan Posted April 7, 2014 Report Share Posted April 7, 2014 All these people running around like headless chickens because Poole can use a guest LOL! How fair would it boe if Poole had to use a 3 pointer because Herman the German poleaxed him down under? Jeses some people are so anti Poole it's unbelievable! And trying to hide behind some minor rule about this or that is none sense. Even if such a rule existed it would be over ruled by common sense on this occasion. Nothing to see here. Please move along. (Now expecting the usual anti Poole numpties to drag it on for god knows how many more pages) End of the day Wednesday doesn't matter too much anyway, because baring serious injury to the majority of the team Poole will be in the playoffs regardless. If Pirates had to run with a three pointer I would still fancy our chances. you really quite simply are clueless, blinkered call it what you want. ITS NOT ANTI POOLE - ITS THE EFFING RULES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If rules are made then why should Poole get dispensation because as you daftly put it 'commonsense'. Not sure how Darcy riding in a challenge counts otherwise Tai would be a Kings Lynn rider!!!!! Once again Poole bending the rules. I imagine the uproar if this was any other club Shovlar as you are quick to stab the knife into others. Resort to child like insults to make a point , that may be considered offensive to some. If Ward had got caught out by the rut and hit someone you would just have called it a `racing incident`. Perhaps Martin is anti Poole as well. Of course Smolinski is anti poole everybody is. You know what Shovlar is like. He accepts cheating as part and parcel of the sport. He even called Smolinski as out of control lol. He hit a rut total racing incident but then again he is leading the gp series so cant be much of a rider!! League season hasnt even started and the pirates dont change and nor do their moronic posters (4 or 5 excepted) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grachan Posted April 7, 2014 Report Share Posted April 7, 2014 It helps to have some knowledge on a subject before chastising others who have taken the time to obtain that knowledge. And you put that Poole's team is there in black and white and made it clear that you thought Chris Holder is in it. But he's not. So back atcha smarty pants. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Panda Posted April 7, 2014 Report Share Posted April 7, 2014 http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/sport/11131188.Poole_Pirates__Cook_to_feature_in_Eastbourne_clash/ Confirmed Cook as guest so guessing they are going to redeclare in time for Coventry next Monday.......... RP 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWitcher Posted April 7, 2014 Report Share Posted April 7, 2014 (edited) And you put that Poole's team is there in black and white and made it clear that you thought Chris Holder is in it. But he's not. So back atcha smarty pants. . I put 'was/is', so again, if you are going to chastise someone, actually read it. The 'was' signifies Holder was part of their declared team.. and was there in black and white. The 'is' refers to the, at that stage, possibility that Poole would have reverted back to their lineup containing Holder. Keep trying though. Edited April 7, 2014 by BWitcher Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Shovlar Posted April 7, 2014 Report Share Posted April 7, 2014 Craig "roller boy" Cook, think I would rather go with R/R to be honest. Everyone would have been available for a ride as well. Bet the budgies can't believe their luck. Still reckon we will win to get the season underway. Hopefully Darcy will be back by Good Friday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grachan Posted April 7, 2014 Report Share Posted April 7, 2014 I put 'was/is', so again, if you are going to chastise someone, actually read it. The 'was' signifies Holder was part of their declared team.. and was there in black and white. The 'is' refers to the, at that stage, possibility that Poole would have reverted back to their lineup containing Holder. Keep trying though. Yeah, but your post was edited 10 minites later, so for all we know, m'lud, you made the original post without having properly checked your facts first. Because your point in that post indicates you didn't realise Ward was in the team. Anyway, I don't really want to spend all day in a "nyah nyah di nyah nyah" anally retentive discussion on the rules with people who are probably convinced Poole cheat because they have got engines on their bikes. As far as I can see, Darcy Ward is in the Poole side so they are entitled to a guest. I'm sure the rule being quoted is there to prevent dubious signings being made by a team by taking on riders who are not going to ride for them and then using a facility. This is, quite obviously, not the case with Darcy Ward and Poole. So one would expect quite reasonably that they would be allowed to use a facility. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theknow 2 Posted April 7, 2014 Report Share Posted April 7, 2014 Season not even started properly and were winding people up Great hey and come the end of season we will be there as normal --it ahhhhhhhhhhhhh !!!!!!!!!!! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWitcher Posted April 7, 2014 Report Share Posted April 7, 2014 Yeah, but your post was edited 10 minites later, so for all we know, m'lud, you made the original post without having properly checked your facts first. Because your point in that post indicates you didn't realise Ward was in the team. Anyway, I don't really want to spend all day in a "nyah nyah di nyah nyah" anally retentive discussion on the rules with people who are probably convinced Poole cheat because they have got engines on their bikes. As far as I can see, Darcy Ward is in the Poole side so they are entitled to a guest. I'm sure the rule being quoted is there to prevent dubious signings being made by a team by taking on riders who are not going to ride for them and then using a facility. This is, quite obviously, not the case with Darcy Ward and Poole. So one would expect quite reasonably that they would be allowed to use a facility. Keep digging, it's not helping you. A re-declared team does not become official until the team actually races, so once again you are wrong in your claims. Your posts are growing increasingly childlike, unable to argue the point coherently, you're again resorting to cheap pops at folk who are correct.. You were wrong. You are wrong again in your assertions over Ward. As for your final paragraph, I do tend to agree with much of it as it happens and that a facility should be allowed... the rules don't agree though, that is the point folk are making. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E I Addio Posted April 7, 2014 Report Share Posted April 7, 2014 (edited) The rule appears in section 16 for 'Fixtures,Match Averages and General Rules' and applies to 'official' meetings, not specifically Elite League meetings for which Section 17 applies, so as Darcy rode against Lakeside then he must have been in Poole's 1-7 at that time, even if it took a few days to be updated on the BSPA website. The result does appear on the BSPA website so we can take it to be an "official" fixture. However, the team declarations have nothing to do with the date they appear on the website. It is the "issued" date that is relevant. The GSA's and team declarations/re-declarations are supposed to take place "immediately" which in plain language would mean on the date of issue, not before, not after. The Poole Lakeside Challenge match was on the 26th March. The BSPA team Declaration No2, issued that very same day had Holder as Poole's No 1, yet Darcy rode. What a mess ! Ultimately I suppose it comes down to the usual problem of ambiguity of what the rules really mean and/or how they are applied. So we can probably say that having given the topic a good airing three things come out of it:- 1 The intention of the rules is probably to allow for Poole to have a guest in this sort of situation and (not for the first time) the confusion arises from the whole way the GSA's and team declarations are issued and the general lack of clarity. reasonable enough then that Poole get a guest, I would say. 2. Yet again we have seen the usual suspects screaming "anti-Poole , anti- Poole, ya-boo, anti Poole" when members of a discussion forum try to discuss the application of the rules concerning an issue that happens to involve Poole. Last year there was a similar sort of discussion when there was talk of Adam Ellis being drafted in to Lakeside as a reserve. nobody started screaming anti-Lakeside. Speedway rules are the sort of thing reasonable speedway fans are entitled to discuss on a speedway discussion forum. One or two really need to question whether this sort of forum is the right place for them. 3. The one thing that is clear is that there never was a case for Holder to come in as a direct guest for Ward , without a re-declaration, and the fact that Muddlo went bleating off to the press about trying to get Holder in shows how that mans mind works. Does all that sound about right to everyone ? Craig "roller boy" Cook, think I would rather go with R/R to be honest. Don't blame you, but even with Cook in the side the Pirates should prevail over the Budgies. Edited April 7, 2014 by E I Addio 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavan Posted April 7, 2014 Report Share Posted April 7, 2014 The result does appear on the BSPA website so we can take it to be an "official" fixture. However, the team declarations have nothing to do with the date they appear on the website. It is the "issued" date that is relevant. The GSA's and team declarations/re-declarations are supposed to take place "immediately" which in plain language would mean on the date of issue, not before, not after. The Poole Lakeside Challenge match was on the 26th March. The BSPA team Declaration No2, issued that very same day had Holder as Poole's No 1, yet Darcy rode. What a mess ! Ultimately I suppose it comes down to the usual problem of ambiguity of what the rules really mean and/or how they are applied. So we can probably say that having given the topic a good airing three things come out of it:- 1 The intention of the rules is probably to allow for Poole to have a guest in this sort of situation and (not for the first time) the confusion arises from the whole way the GSA's and team declarations are issued and the general lack of clarity. reasonable enough then that Poole get a guest, I would say. 2. Yet again we have seen the usual suspects screaming "anti-Poole , anti- Poole, ya-boo, anti Poole" when members of a discussion forum try to discuss the application of the rules concerning an issue that happens to involve Poole. Last year there was a similar sort of discussion when there was talk of Adam Ellis being drafted in to Lakeside as a reserve. nobody started screaming anti-Lakeside. Speedway rules are the sort of thing reasonable speedway fans are entitled to discuss on a speedway discussion forum. One or two really need to question whether this sort of forum is the right place for them. 3. The one thing that is clear is that there never was a case for Holder to come in as a direct guest for Ward , without a re-declaration, and the fact that Muddlo went bleating off to the press about trying to get Holder in shows how that mans mind works. Does all that sound about right to everyone ? Don't blame you, but even with Cook in the side the Pirates should prevail over the Budgies. absolutly spot on!!!! It is the usual people ( not all poole fans) who are incapable of holding any sort of discussion. They just prefer not to discuss and use the same old anti poole crap as a reply. They dont get the rules or adhere to them one or the other, then moan about others who actually do know the way it works. Does always seem top be the Pirates name that crops up when there is any ambiguity in the sport. Coincedence? Nope jealousy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Shovlar Posted April 7, 2014 Report Share Posted April 7, 2014 absolutly spot on!!!! It is the usual people ( not all poole fans) who are incapable of holding any sort of discussion. They just prefer not to discuss and use the same old anti poole crap as a reply. They dont get the rules or adhere to them one or the other, then moan about others who actually do know the way it works. Does always seem top be the Pirates name that crops up when there is any ambiguity in the sport. Coincedence? Nope jealousy! LOL!!!!!!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grachan Posted April 7, 2014 Report Share Posted April 7, 2014 They dont get the rules or adhere to them one or the other, then moan about others who actually do know the way it works. It seems to me that you don't know the way it works. The rule is about re-declared riders is clearly there so a team can't announce, for example, that they are signing Greg Hancock when they have no intention of using him, then using a guest in his place. Hence there is the option for the rule to be over-ridden in genuine cases such as this. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavan Posted April 7, 2014 Report Share Posted April 7, 2014 It seems to me that you don't know the way it works. The rule is about re-declared riders is clearly there so a team can't announce, for example, that they are signing Greg Hancock when they have no intention of using him, then using a guest in his place. Hence there is the option for the rule to be over-ridden in genuine cases such as this. of course a rule can be overwritten its Poole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Shovlar Posted April 7, 2014 Report Share Posted April 7, 2014 I really really hope, we retain the title this season with LOADS of controversy. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theknow 2 Posted April 7, 2014 Report Share Posted April 7, 2014 I really really hope, we retain the title this season with LOADS of controversy. Of course we will Steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agrotron Posted April 7, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 7, 2014 The more controversy the better its so enjoyable, oh btw I actually think Cook is a good guest booking and we will overturn the budgies easily by 10-15 points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starman2006 Posted April 7, 2014 Report Share Posted April 7, 2014 I can just see the Anti Poole Brigade chewing there fingers to a stump as i type!! Don't you just love it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grachan Posted April 7, 2014 Report Share Posted April 7, 2014 (edited) Keep digging, You want me to keep digging? OK, give me a spade. I'll keep digging. Dig, dig, dig (sorry, childlike again and I do know how you hate that)... CLANG!! Oh! What's this? This is the original Poole team according to the Completed teams thread., Poole (completed) 1. Darcy Ward. 9.07 2. Maciej Janowski 6.95 3. Josh Grajczonek(d/u) 4.48 4. Vaclav milik. 4.00 5. Shamek Pawlicki. 7.15 6. Kyle Newman 7. Lee Smart And this is the rule on where a facility can be granted: 16.5.2 Where an absent Rider has either (a) an assessed MA, or ( b ) has been approved in a team’s declared line up at the start of the season then a 28 day Facility may be granted at MC’s discretion . Edited April 7, 2014 by grachan 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skidder1 Posted April 7, 2014 Report Share Posted April 7, 2014 Craig "roller boy" Cook, think I would rather go with R/R to be honest. Everyone would have been available for a ride as well. Bet the budgies can't believe their luck. Still reckon we will win to get the season underway. Hopefully Darcy will be back by Good Friday. Keep wishing Steve, from what I'm hearing he'll be lucky to make Good Friday!! Lots of meetings that day too so guests will be at a premium!!! 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.