Tactical Substitutes - Thinking 'out Of The Box'!

[Guest wolfhound]

Many a criticism has been aimed at the current tactical substitute rule involving double points, so 'thinking out of the box' maybe I have come up with an alternative?

 

When a team is x points in arrears (6, 10 or 12 ?), the team in arrears would bring in a 3rd rider!

 

The appropriate heat would then involve 5 riders, 2 from the team in the lead and 3 from the team in arrears.

 

* Once the points difference is less than 6, 10 or 12 (?), it is back to 4 riders per race and the normal rules would then apply .

 

The extra (5th) rider would start 10 metres back from the tapes and always from the outside gate.

 

The score would only be severely changed if a 6-0/0-6 was achieved otherwise the outcome would be much as it used to be before double points ie 5-1/1-5, 4-2/2-4 or 3-3.

 

The small, tight tracks may find it difficult to accommodate 5 riders but then with the 5th rider starting 10 metres back, all 5 coming together at the 1st turn would seem unlikely, so would it work?

 

Maybe or maybe not but what do you think?

 

An idea worth trying or yet another to be dumped in the stupid idea bin?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[AndyJ]

 

Many a criticism has been aimed at the current tactical substitute rule involving double points, so 'thinking out of the box' maybe I have come up with an alternative?

 

When a team is x points in arrears (6, 10 or 12 ?), the team in arrears would bring in a 3rd rider!

 

The appropriate heat would then involve 5 riders, 2 from the team in the lead and 3 from the team in arrears.

 

* Once the points difference is less than 6, 10 or 12 (?), it is back to 4 riders per race and the normal rules would then apply .

 

The extra (5th) rider would start 10 metres back from the tapes and always from the outside gate.

 

The score would only be severely changed if a 6-0/0-6 was achieved otherwise the outcome would be much as it used to be before double points ie 5-1/1-5, 4-2/2-4 or 3-3.

 

The small, tight tracks may find it difficult to accommodate 5 riders but then with the 5th rider starting 10 metres back, all 5 coming together at the 1st turn would seem unlikely, so would it work?

 

Maybe or maybe not but what do you think?

 

An idea worth trying or yet another to be dumped in the stupid idea bin?

 

 

Quoted in order to make the above post readable for any members who lack microscopes....

 

EDIT: my view is that adding an extra rider would incur additional cost/risk with regards the incoming rider and therefore additional cost to the promoters. Irrespective of whether or not it would yield an improvement from a points perspective I can't see it being something that would be eagerly embraced. The old TS rules would have been expensive based upon the likely pay rates of the incoming heatleader versus the outgoing reserve. The current ones are probably the most cost effective compromise and, in my opinion, likely to stay unless TS/TR is abolished.

Edited November 1, 2013 by Tkdandy

[Grachan]

I think it's far too silly an idea.

 

My idea. Scrap the TR completely. No need to a TS. Just stick with the league points scoring system for wins/draws etc.

[pandorum]

_{without any doubt 'the stupid idea bin' beckons......}

_{Why not just have a rule that when 6 behind the team can bring in a tactical substitute of anyone in the team to replace a rider in the relevant heat.}

_{The big leagues use it so it must be a decent idea.}

[macinter]

I agree with pandorum regarding tactical riders, but if double point rides are deemed necessary why not make it a double point heat, (as opposed to a double point ride), for both teams, but only the team behind can choose the heat. Then they have to take the chance that they might be successful if they choose wisely, but could be worse off if it backfires.

[Gemini]

 

 

........Tkdandy.......... Quoted in order to make the above post readable for any members who lack microscopes....

 

Many thanks. I wasn't even going to bother reading that post but you made it possible. Still think it's a daft idea though. Back to the drawing board.

[BangerBoy]

Why not just have a rule that when 6 behind the team can bring in a tactical substitute of anyone in the team to replace a rider in the relevant heat.

 

The big leagues use it so it must be a decent idea.

 

 

 

 

Blimey theres an idea from the past !!

 

Worked ok then why not now ?

[ghcooke]

First of all, let me state that I dislike the tactical rule, but it would seem that the powers that be like it and wish to retain it. I would much prefer a return to the bonus league point for an aggregate win (home and away). It is claimed that the tactical rule helps keep meetings going - the aggregate rule also used to keep them going! The home team in the first leg would go hell for leather to get as big an advantage as possible and then defend it, if they couldn't win, away from home.

 

But if we must have a tactical rule, why not make it a bit more interesting, or tactical?

 

How about, if a team is 10 points down at any time before heat 11, they can replace a rider with a rider wearing black and white who can score double points provided he finishes in front of an opponent. But if the manager of the losing team does nominate a tactical rider then he does so knowing that the other team manager can also nominate a double point rider in a subsequent race (if the first is in heat 11 then the other must be in heat 12 so no tacticals in the last 3 races). In this way a team manager will have to weigh up the pros and cons of using a "tactical" knowing that the other team could hit back straight away. In this way points scored on the race track count and successful teams aren't obviously penalised - the best team wins on the night.

 

But obviously, any system that needs to resort to such complications would alienate new fans, so let's just scrap the tactical rule completely, and if we can't, then for God's sake, let's drop it from straight home and away challenges like the play offs - those enlightened folk in the Premier League don't have the tactical rule in two legged play off matches, so why do we?

 

And while I'm on my soap box, how many of us are frustrated by "gardening" and other forms of time wasting at the tapes? Why not make it mandatory that the senior start marshall be in attendance alongside the referee and the clerk of the course at the riders' briefing before each meeting. In that way it could be pointed out that any delays will be penalised in the form of fines and we might find that riders take a bit more notice of the start marshall and sharpen up their work.

 

Rant over; darkened room beckons.

[The White Knight]

Quoted in order to make the above post readable for any members who lack microscopes....

 

EDIT: my view is that adding an extra rider would incur additional cost/risk with regards the incoming rider and therefore additional cost to the promoters. Irrespective of whether or not it would yield an improvement from a points perspective I can't see it being something that would be eagerly embraced. The old TS rules would have been expensive based upon the likely pay rates of the incoming heatleader versus the outgoing reserve. The current ones are probably the most cost effective compromise and, in my opinion, likely to stay unless TS/TR is abolished.

 

As they should be.

 

I think it's far too silly an idea.

 

My idea. Scrap the TR completely. No need to a TS. Just stick with the league points scoring system for wins/draws etc.

 

 

Well said Grachan.

 

First of all, let me state that I dislike the tactical rule, but it would seem that the powers that be like it and wish to retain it. I would much prefer a return to the bonus league point for an aggregate win (home and away). It is claimed that the tactical rule helps keep meetings going - the aggregate rule also used to keep them going! The home team in the first leg would go hell for leather to get as big an advantage as possible and then defend it, if they couldn't win, away from home.

 

But if we must have a tactical rule, why not make it a bit more interesting, or tactical?

 

How about, if a team is 10 points down at any time before heat 11, they can replace a rider with a rider wearing black and white who can score double points provided he finishes in front of an opponent. But if the manager of the losing team does nominate a tactical rider then he does so knowing that the other team manager can also nominate a double point rider in a subsequent race (if the first is in heat 11 then the other must be in heat 12 so no tacticals in the last 3 races). In this way a team manager will have to weigh up the pros and cons of using a "tactical" knowing that the other team could hit back straight away. In this way points scored on the race track count and successful teams aren't obviously penalised - the best team wins on the night.

 

But obviously, any system that needs to resort to such complications would alienate new fans, so let's just scrap the tactical rule completely, and if we can't, then for God's sake, let's drop it from straight home and away challenges like the play offs - those enlightened folk in the Premier League don't have the tactical rule in two legged play off matches, so why do we?

 

And while I'm on my soap box, how many of us are frustrated by "gardening" and other forms of time wasting at the tapes? Why not make it mandatory that the senior start marshall be in attendance alongside the referee and the clerk of the course at the riders' briefing before each meeting. In that way it could be pointed out that any delays will be penalised in the form of fines and we might find that riders take a bit more notice of the start marshall and sharpen up their work.

 

Rant over; darkened room beckons.

 

 

Great idea regarding the 'Gardening' it's about time something was done about that, also something should be done about Riders returning to the Pits after a false Start. It just wastes time and makes the Meeting drag on.

 

You suggestion regarding Tactical Rides seems a bit unnecessary as one would in all probability negate the second. The ONLY sensible way is to do away with Tactical Rides and Tactical Substitutes altogether.

[Mike.Butler]

it would be cheaper for a team 6 up to have a rider removed from a heat, and when 12 up remove both..

[The White Knight]

it would be cheaper for a team 6 up to have a rider removed from a heat, and when 12 up remove both..

 

 

I would like to watch Racing - not a procession.

 

IF you were being serious.

[ch958]

i think the original poster's idea isn't a good one with all due respect but i would encourage any blue sky thinking - I've read 2 such things on here in the last 3/4 months. 1) was Steve Shovlar's idea of online matches to purchase and 2) was from that Peterboro nutjob who suggested a super six competition with no points limit to run on nights when theres no gp or world cup or whatever

 

i say keep em coming even though most are non starters.

[Trees]

Why not just have a rule that when 6 behind the team can bring in a tactical substitute of anyone in the team to replace a rider in the relevant heat.

 

The big leagues use it so it must be a decent idea.

 

 

 

 

Blimey theres an idea from the past !!

 

Worked ok then why not now ?

Cheaper for promoters! They can't afford to pay all their top men for another 3 points! And the lower order riders get their full quota of rides with the TR . .

[E I Addio]

To put the t/r rule in its proper context and to give it the importance it deserves they should do away with the black and white helmet and the rider on the t/r should come out in a clowns outfit with a red nose and riding a unicycle. I f that doesnt' work just give up and abolish the rule completely.

[AndyJ]

i think the original poster's idea isn't a good one with all due respect but i would encourage any blue sky thinking - I've read 2 such things on here in the last 3/4 months. 1) was Steve Shovlar's idea of online matches to purchase and 2) was from that Peterboro nutjob who suggested a super six competition with no points limit to run on nights when theres no gp or world cup or whatever

 

i say keep em coming even though most are non starters.

Jumping away on a tangent from the original post but in response to the above...

 

Personally I'd like to see British Speedway run along the line of MLS soccer http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/24751629 -run as a single entity and decisions made for the whole rather than single clubs. Each club run by investors/shareholders to the whole. However I guess that, given the fact that most clubs regularly post losses, such an idea would be crazy and perhaps impossible to implement. Basically I suspect that too many decisions are tainted by individual concerns. Far easier to ensure adherence to a strict wage policy, etc, if the combined profits and losses were pooled and the sport operated as a proper business.

 

EDIT: to fix hyperlink

Edited November 1, 2013 by Tkdandy

[mikebv]

a bit similar to what happens in cycle speedway this idea, but could work....

 

when a team goes six behind then they can choose gate positions for as long as they remain six behind...

 

wont cost anymore for the promoters and is somewhat less contrived and mickey mouse than giving a team a 'bonus' of extra points for simply being rank..

 

and it doesn't massively put the team in front at the disadvantage which 'double points'/'bring in a tac No1' does...

Edited November 1, 2013 by mikebv

[Cockney Rebel]

I agree with pandorum regarding tactical riders, but if double point rides are deemed necessary why not make it a double point heat, (as opposed to a double point ride), for both teams, but only the team behind can choose the heat. Then they have to take the chance that they might be successful if they choose wisely, but could be worse off if it backfires.

I would like to see any tactical ride/substitute abolished but I quite like this idea, would any team manager be brave enough to gamble, a 10-2 or a 2-10. that would get the nerves jangling.

[Team Man]

I don't know what was wrong with the old, "if a team is 6 or more points behind they have choice of gate positions", as Team manager I used that many a time, it does give you an edge if you concentrate on how the gates are behaving and knowing how your rider gates and rides, but nothing is foolproof.

[The White Knight]

I don't know what was wrong with the old, "if a team is 6 or more points behind they have choice of gate positions", as Team manager I used that many a time, it does give you an edge if you concentrate on how the gates are behaving and knowing how your rider gates and rides, but nothing is foolproof.

 

 

BUT we are still giving the WORST side an advantage. I'm sorry but that is as wrong as the other Fiddles going on in Speedway to keep the Meeting exciting.

 

I would have thought the Sport was exciting enough to stand on it's own - Four Riders around One Track - it doesn't get any better than that. Why introduce unnecessary Fiddling?

[Team Man]

 

 

BUT we are still giving the WORST side an advantage. I'm sorry but that is as wrong as the other Fiddles going on in Speedway to keep the Meeting exciting.

 

I would have thought the Sport was exciting enough to stand on it's own - Four Riders around One Track - it doesn't get any better than that. Why introduce unnecessary Fiddling?

 

Thinking like that you might just as well stop riders making changes to their bike after their first ride, I agree of dropping the Double points ride that is a terrible rule But gate positions is surely a different matter, after all a team wins a toss to choose gate positions to start a meeting, should that be abandoned as a form of fiddling.