montie Posted June 25, 2014 Report Share Posted June 25, 2014 In answer to Montie - no I don't think that Buxton and Kent belong in the MDL. They are bringing the kids through in a far more sensible way by providing them with role models on the track who they can ride with and learn from. What did throwing seven 3 point riders into the meeting actually achieve in terms of their own development? Yes they have ridden a new track but in terms of racing and competition, apart from Arron, there was not a great deal. Trailing round half a lap behind is not going to do a great deal for their confidence I wouldn't have thought. I appreciate that last night was an extreme example but they have struggled consistently at this level. so,lets look at the scores you have racked up against teams with Role models in the 1-7,you have still thumbed them What is the Difference between us and Buxton,they came with there so called "role Model" and score 1 more point I dont buy this that the team needs a role model crap,look who is the the pits with them often,you have Parnaby,Moggo,Wayne Carter along with half the Scunny first team at times you think having Tony Atkin is a 1-7 is more productive than and rookie and decent folk in the pits???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vog Posted June 25, 2014 Report Share Posted June 25, 2014 disagree. this is a devlopment league. all riders should be 'improvers'... This argument continues to come up. Let me ask you two questions: Which riders do you believe, this season, are not developing? I would imagine there is, on average, no more than 1 per team, maybe 2 at a push. How do you believe a rider should be judged for development purposes, if there are no riders within the league to be judged against? Do I think the league should be filled with PL also rans, with no real way of allowing developing riders to force their way into a side? Not at all. Do I think that the odd top rider who can ride PL harms the league? Not at all. When Adam Roynon rode NL, do you not think that it gave all the other riders a benchmark? Same with Ben Wilson, Paul Starke and the like this season. How do you know you are able to cut it against the PL riders when you never get a chance to prove it? I'll answer the first question I posed myself. I would argue that the following riders are not in the NL to develop, and if they wanted to progress further, would need full time PL: Tony Atkin Paul Starke (Based on his 10 point NL average last season) Simon Lambert (Previous higher PL average) James Cockle (Been around a while, never really cut PL to a consistent level) Kyle Hughes (See James Cockle) Jon Armstrong Ben Wilson I honestly think that every other rider in the NL is developing. They may all be at different stages in their development, but isn't that what development is all about? In an ideal world, I would pick a team based around an experienced rider to offer them advice, a couple of riders who were higher second strings looking to push to a heat leader, a couple of previous reserves looking to push second string and two newcomers on 3 point averages at the bottom. No-one is saying that development is a bad thing, but surely you need to allow for riders developing at different speeds, and being at different points in the development process. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
montie Posted June 25, 2014 Report Share Posted June 25, 2014 (edited) In an ideal world, I would pick a team based around an experienced rider to offer them advice, a couple of riders who were higher second strings looking to push to a heat leader, a couple of previous reserves looking to push second string and two newcomers on 3 point averages at the bottom.s. But what is the point of having that "type" of rider in the team when you can have them in the pits,where they have time to help and advise A rider when in a meeting often doesnt have time to wipe his ass never mind look after/advise everyone else? And ass another point,take Paul Starke for example,im not convinced the NL actually help him over that last few years,what has helped him is getting out of the NL and going Prem league,thatt is where he has developed into a tidy rider over the last 18 months,id even go as far as saying the NL is a waste of time for him now,same with Steve Worrall Edited June 25, 2014 by montie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vog Posted June 25, 2014 Report Share Posted June 25, 2014 But what is the point of having that "type" of rider in the team when you can have them in the pits,where they have time to help and advise A rider when in a meeting often doesnt have time to wipe his ass never mind look after/advise everyone else? And ass another point,take Paul Starke for example,im not convinced the NL actually help him over that last few years,what has helped him is getting out of the NL and going Prem league,thatt is where he has developed into a tidy rider over the last 18 months,id even go as far as saying the NL is a waste of time for him now,same with Steve Worrall I think having that type of rider on track is a benefit because they notice things that people in the pits just don't. You can have all the experience in the world in the pits, but at times having someone who has just ridden the track and knows what needs to be done is a massive bonus. I will use Stoke as an example, because I honestly believe one of our best signings this off season was Jon Armstrong, because he has the experience to look after the younger riders and is someone for them to look up to. Paul Starke, I think the NL allowed him the opportunity to progress. 2 years ago he was averaging 6 after a poor season with the IoW. Signing with Dudley (As were at the time) gave him a chance to learn a new track type (As Dudley and the IoW are rather different!) and helped his confidence. I firmly believe that this will be both Starke's and Worrall's last season in the NL, but it has served the purpose for them. I think they, last season, were at the point that riders such as Clegg, Williamson, Oli Greenwood, Ben Morley, Lewis Rose etc are at now. Those riders are taking a big step up this season to the point where they are becoming the top NL riders, and may well choose to do a final year of consolidation before the "sink or swim" year of PL only. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebaron Posted June 25, 2014 Report Share Posted June 25, 2014 Surely the right way to run the Scunny team would be if Matt W, and Max Clegg had been included from the outset as Stags riders in the NL. A score like this is an absolute killer on the gate for the home side; how do sell this to the fans. Do not misread me I am 100% behind the Stags; but why did Cradley need to sign up riders that logically would ride for the Stags. Both riders are development level so would legitimately make the Stags that bit more competitive over the season. Really frustrating to see Matt ride PL for the Scorps and then don the Cradley jacket second half and 'ommer us' to bits! I think its taken to the extreme to have all bar one rider on a 3pt average for the Stags. Cradley and Scunthorpe are approaching this league at entirely different ends. Cradley to blow the opposition away before a wheels been turned and Scunny acting in the spirit of things by fielding novices. Something is not right here and like the Elite/Premier set up needs a rethink at the end of the season. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heathen1984 Posted June 25, 2014 Report Share Posted June 25, 2014 Max clegg is our asset now so y should he ride for the stags now. I agree thou, surely williamson would of been good to have. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike.Butler Posted June 25, 2014 Report Share Posted June 25, 2014 Success in the development league should not be measured in terms of pots won. I am quite comfortable that majority (if not all) of this years Heathens are indeed progressing, and I am not critical of the club employing 1, 2 or even a 3rd at this level; but problem is that they are all at the top end of the development phase. Irrespective of age Cradley have the money to attract the best willing/wanting to ride at this level. So Game over for the rest! As I've said before this approach is simply not sustainable (or desirable) at NL level. Similar (but not the same) as Man City/Chelsea buyng up the best young talent in Prem lge and then putting them in reserves partly to deny other less wealthy clubs the opportunity to play said players against them.. I still maintain the likes of Armstrong are not really what the league should be about. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ommer Mon Posted June 25, 2014 Author Report Share Posted June 25, 2014 (edited) so,lets look at the scores you have racked up against teams with Role models in the 1-7,you have still thumbed them What is the Difference between us and Buxton,they came with there so called "role Model" and score 1 more point I dont buy this that the team needs a role model crap,look who is the the pits with them often,you have Parnaby,Moggo,Wayne Carter along with half the Scunny first team at times you think having Tony Atkin is a 1-7 is more productive than and rookie and decent folk in the pits???? The difference between Buxton and Scunny was the distance we were beating them by - simple as that. The Hitmen also had the disadvantage that it was their first meeting of the season when some of our lads had ridden over a dozen matches. I still believe having someone out on track is more of a help than just standing and watching from the pits. Let's face it that approach hasn't achieved much this year. Vog's example of Armo is a very good one. He was brilliant with the likes of Ashley Morris and Tom Perry and they learnt a lot from hiim. Scunthorpe have a lot of experience in developing very good British youngsters and a number have been listed in this thread. They have done an excellent job in the past so why did they decide to try to do it this way this season? Was it the fact that they joined the League late and there were no experienced riders left? There has to be more to it than waking up one morning and deciding that having seven 3 point riders is the best way to develop them! Edited June 25, 2014 by Ommer Mon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruno Posted June 25, 2014 Report Share Posted June 25, 2014 Surely the right way to run the Scunny team would be if Matt W, and Max Clegg had been included from the outset as Stags riders in the NL. A score like this is an absolute killer on the gate for the home side; how do sell this to the fans. Do not misread me I am 100% behind the Stags; but why did Cradley need to sign up riders that logically would ride for the Stags. Both riders are development level so would legitimately make the Stags that bit more competitive over the season. Really frustrating to see Matt ride PL for the Scorps and then don the Cradley jacket second half and 'ommer us' to bits! I think its taken to the extreme to have all bar one rider on a 3pt average for the Stags. Cradley and Scunthorpe are approaching this league at entirely different ends. Cradley to blow the opposition away before a wheels been turned and Scunny acting in the spirit of things by fielding novices. Something is not right here and like the Elite/Premier set up needs a rethink at the end of the season. Rightly or wrong the reason I didn't bother going to this and went out on my bike instead I also went to monmore on Monday to watch better racing,unfortuneately this wasn't a great meeting either I hate to knock speedway but I'm becoming very disillusioned by it at the minute but I still enjoy the top riders in the gps.can't see how British speedway can get the top riders back.some say support it or lose it.but if what your supporting isn't worth it then why bother?trouble is today there's plenty of other stuff to do 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baldy Posted June 25, 2014 Report Share Posted June 25, 2014 Max clegg is our asset now so y should he ride for the stags now. I agree thou, surely williamson would of been good to have. Just a question. When Max Clegg becomes too good for the National league and moves on up the leagues; as I suspect Dudley will not move with him, does he stay a Dudley asset forever? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greyhoundp Posted June 25, 2014 Report Share Posted June 25, 2014 Just a question. When Max Clegg becomes too good for the National league and moves on up the leagues; as I suspect Dudley will not move with him, does he stay a Dudley asset forever? Dudley may not move up, but Im pretty sure in fact 95% sure Cradley will move up in 2015, to many hints been given out now, by various people. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baldy Posted June 26, 2014 Report Share Posted June 26, 2014 Dudley may not move up, but Im pretty sure in fact 95% sure Cradley will move up in 2015, to many hints been given out now, by various people. Move up to what?. Premier or Elite. Thought the Dudley reference would get a reaction. Hope they do as they belong in a higher standard on all counts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vog Posted June 26, 2014 Report Share Posted June 26, 2014 Just a question. When Max Clegg becomes too good for the National league and moves on up the leagues; as I suspect Dudley will not move with him, does he stay a Dudley asset forever? To answer this on a hypothetical level, Max would remain a Heathens asset, until such time as they sold him. They could get loan fees for him year on year, or they could outright sell him. 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.