Skidder1 Posted August 8, 2014 Report Share Posted August 8, 2014 I am not so sure about that last statement - ask Gerald Ratner! I thought the jewellers were still going strong!!? A mainstay of the high street!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemini Posted August 8, 2014 Report Share Posted August 8, 2014 Oh I don't know - why not suddenly change to have 6 teams in the play-offs?? I'm sure at least a couple of clubs would be delighted!? Didn't something similar happen a few years ago.......? Can't remember a massive outcry at the time....... Oh yes remember that and it was done after Poole were caught cheating.....again. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TesarRacing Posted August 8, 2014 Report Share Posted August 8, 2014 I thought the jewellers were still going strong!!? A mainstay of the high street!! The value of the shares plummeted 500 million, the company nearly collapsed and Ratner resigned so I ask the question again.............ask Gerald Ratner!!! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted August 8, 2014 Report Share Posted August 8, 2014 Oh I don't know - why not suddenly change to have 6 teams in the play-offs?? I'm sure at least a couple of clubs would be delighted!? Didn't something similar happen a few years ago.......? Can't remember a massive outcry at the time....... And it was wrong - I said so at the time. Rules should NOT be changed after the AGM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bees_Man Posted August 8, 2014 Report Share Posted August 8, 2014 Neil Watson normally has plenty to say on this forum - interestingly he's pretty quiet on this subject! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leicester Hunter Posted August 8, 2014 Report Share Posted August 8, 2014 I am not so sure about that last statement - ask Gerald Ratner! The value of the shares plummeted 500 million, the company nearly collapsed and Ratner resigned so I ask the question again.............ask Gerald Ratner!!! Fair point, but the world has moved on considerably since December 1990.... the internet's here, and it's all about getting noticed. Using lateral thinking, you could even say it's good promotion! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Blachshadow Posted August 8, 2014 Report Share Posted August 8, 2014 or simply a decision to accept the proposed changes made by the MC, which effectively means CVS and Jon Cook![/i] I'd go with that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWitcher Posted August 8, 2014 Report Share Posted August 8, 2014 Of course there are others, he's no longer on the MC so has to have a buddy or two. You don't get away with some of the strokes he's pulled without support from somewhere. Which of course opens up the question.. why do they support him, what's in it for them? Things get a lot murkier then... Oh I don't know - why not suddenly change to have 6 teams in the play-offs?? I'm sure at least a couple of clubs would be delighted!? Didn't something similar happen a few years ago.......? Can't remember a massive outcry at the time....... There was an outcry... the outcry was that the BSPA had taken the cheap option, instead of confronting and punishing Poole for their cheating, they chose that option as a 'way' of punishing them but without punishing them. They almost grew some balls that year... Fair point, but the world has moved on considerably since December 1990.... the internet's here, and it's all about getting noticed. Using lateral thinking, you could even say it's good promotion! Far from it. These type of events only serve to alienate a few more fans each time. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foreverblue Posted August 8, 2014 Report Share Posted August 8, 2014 It would appear that the whole grading system is based on opinion, surely it should be based on NL averages or PL averages or both. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted August 8, 2014 Report Share Posted August 8, 2014 It would appear that the whole grading system is based on opinion, surely it should be based on NL averages or PL averages or both. Should be too hard to take every FTD riders EL, PL and NL average this season and find some conversion. Then list the riders in order from 1 to 30ish. Then allow guests and replacement to be up to say 4 grade places higher (so rider #20 can be replaced by rider #16) BUT you can only move up #4 once a season. So if you move up 2 places in April, you can move up 2 more in July. You can't replace #20 with #16 who you then replace with #12 and then a month later bring in #8. This way you have some flexibility and draft position are based on EL, PL and NL performances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daytripper Posted August 8, 2014 Report Share Posted August 8, 2014 If, as has been suggested, not all the EL promoters agreed with the FT changes, who were they? At the very worst there had to be at least a majority of 5-4 to agree to the proposals - or simply a decision to accept the proposed changes made by the MC, which effectively means CVS and Jon Cook! No it doesn't there are 5 members on. The MC and not all of the EL promoters agreed wit it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Blachshadow Posted August 8, 2014 Report Share Posted August 8, 2014 (edited) No it doesn't there are 5 members on. The MC and not all of the EL promoters agreed wit it. Ah, but you're assuming things are done properly over in Rugby or wherever they're operating from at the time. Edited August 8, 2014 by Vincent Blackshadow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Turner Posted August 8, 2014 Report Share Posted August 8, 2014 Should be too hard to take every FTD riders EL, PL and NL average this season and find some conversion. Then list the riders in order from 1 to 30ish. Then allow guests and replacement to be up to say 4 grade places higher (so rider #20 can be replaced by rider #16) BUT you can only move up #4 once a season. So if you move up 2 places in April, you can move up 2 more in July. You can't replace #20 with #16 who you then replace with #12 and then a month later bring in #8. This way you have some flexibility and draft position are based on EL, PL and NL performances. Why don't the just do fast track averages? Riders can only be replaced with another rider with a fast track average the same or below theirs. Seem's fair to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted August 8, 2014 Report Share Posted August 8, 2014 Why don't the just do fast track averages? Riders can only be replaced with another rider with a fast track average the same or below theirs. Seem's fair to me. Because Benji Compton doesnt have an average. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skidder1 Posted August 8, 2014 Report Share Posted August 8, 2014 Because Benji Compton doesnt have an average. I thought it was 3.00 - the same as all the others started with?!!!! Clearly many have moved up and above that figure?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemini Posted August 8, 2014 Report Share Posted August 8, 2014 Neil Watson normally has plenty to say on this forum - interestingly he's pretty quiet on this subject! I wouldn't think he'd be allowed to say anything, same with Wizzer. Keep quiet and in a few weeks those pesky speedway fans will have forgotten all about it and we all lurch on until the next crisis. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Star Lady Posted August 8, 2014 Report Share Posted August 8, 2014 I wouldn't think he'd be allowed to say anything, same with Wizzer. Keep quiet and in a few weeks those pesky speedway fans will have forgotten all about it and we all lurch on until the next crisis. Or even the next manipulation of the rules by Poole Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daytripper Posted August 8, 2014 Report Share Posted August 8, 2014 Ah, but you're assuming things are done properly over in Rugby or wherever they're operating from at the time. If they are not done properly then it falls to the SCB to ensure they are done properly and there you have the weakest link in the chain. This is just one thing that has come to light but there are plenty of other much more mundane things that get referred to the SCB who just roll over and don't back officials and others who are trying to do a job and enforce the rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skidder1 Posted August 8, 2014 Report Share Posted August 8, 2014 If they are not done properly then it falls to the SCB to ensure they are done properly and there you have the weakest link in the chain. This is just one thing that has come to light but there are plenty of other much more mundane things that get referred to the SCB who just roll over and don't back officials and others who are trying to do a job and enforce the rules. Its strange isn't it - you would have thought that the SCB official ie the referee would have stopped Poole from using Compton on Wednesday but he didn't because there was no protest!! There was no protest because the BSPA members were aware of the changes and the majority agreed, democratically it would seem! So what on earth its got to do with the SCB I just don't know? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BWitcher Posted August 8, 2014 Report Share Posted August 8, 2014 (edited) Its strange isn't it - you would have thought that the SCB official ie the referee would have stopped Poole from using Compton on Wednesday but he didn't because there was no protest!! There was no protest because the BSPA members were aware of the changes and the majority agreed, democratically it would seem! So what on earth its got to do with the SCB I just don't know? Majority? So some didn't is what you are saying. So there is at least one promotion with a spine then. So Ford basically only has to convince/loan/buy bricks/bribe/cut a deal .. (delete as applicable) 4 other promoters to get what he wants.. Pathetic. Edited August 8, 2014 by BWitcher 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.