Bagpuss Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 I don't think you'll be too far out there screamer but I just wonder about Belle Vue, they always seem to flatter to deceive and Cook will be a big miss away from home when he is piddling about in the PL on the same night. As you say Porsing & Lambert are the key men for the super Stars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC2 Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 Swindon & Poole about the same, with top fives that could beat anyone on any track. Kings Lynn next, assuming Schlein is back to form & Morris isn't a disaster. Belle Vue solid middle 4 & less question marks than Leicester & Coventry with some aging riders & dodgy Poles - the Bees blew it with their last signing when they could have had Kylmakorpi - & Lakeside & Wolves lacking heat winners against the top three's better riders & away from home: Swindon Poole Kings Lynn Belle Vue Leicester Coventry Lakeside Wolves Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveLyric2 Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 No wonder SteveBrum has gone missing!! Hope he's ok. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acef Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 I don't think you'll be too far out there screamer but I just wonder about Belle Vue, they always seem to flatter to deceive and Cook will be a big miss away from home when he is piddling about in the PL on the same night. As you say Porsing & Lambert are the key men for the super Stars. I can't agree with this. I don't think BV have failed to deliver over recent history. I just think we have tracked some really poor teams. We have always made 1 or 2 mistakes in the past that have cost us. I thought the 2011 team was OK, best one they have put out until now, but it was only ever a mid table team at best. So for me I don't see it as flattering to deceive, I've just seen some really poor teams. This year, though, is different. I genuinely don't see a weakness. We may be suspect on the road in some cases, but as a general principle it is very solid with good reserves. I don't personally see us finishing 2nd as some have said, because I see stronger teams, but I'll be amazed if this team doesn't make the play offs. For me, now everyone is finished. Poole Swindon Leicester Belle Vue Kings Lynn Coventry Lakeside Wolves Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyderd Posted March 12, 2015 Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 Now that we know Poole will start without Ward, so I expect them to have changes after June 28th giving them a strong 2nd half to the season, so on that this is my prediction. 1 Poole 2 Coventry 3 K/Lynn 4 B Vue 5 Leicester 6 Swindon 7 Lakeside 8 Wolves I expect the final to be Poole V's Coventry, with the pesky Pirates claiming the title again With Coventry losing out on Lewis Bridger who has loads of E L experience, and replacing him with the young Pole Jamrog who regrettably has no EL experience, I will change my prediction. I still see Poole changing on the 28/06/15 then having a scorching second half to the season, so still tip them to top the league and win the Play Off's 1 Poole 2 K/Lynn 3 B Vue 4 Leicester 5 Swindon 6 Coventry 7 L/Side 8 Wolves On a sad note, one of B Vue's Fans and co-operator of the Belle Vue Army site, "Paul Kitchen", sadly passed away this week. He was young and very enthusiastic for B Vue, What a great thing it would be if B Vue was to win the league in honour of a great B Vue fan. R.I.P Paul (kitch87) 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waiheke1 Posted March 12, 2015 Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 Poole kl belle vue leicester coventry swindon lakeside wolves Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
therefused Posted March 12, 2015 Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 poole kings lynn belle vue swindon leicester lakeside coventry wolverhampton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T.N.T. Posted March 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 And Coventry fans are going to get excited as we'll do well initially as we're going to beat Wolves home and away which will mean any changes to improve the team won't happen as we'll look better than we are. You HOPE they will ....... Don't under estimate Wolves as they will have their days when they give a spanking and you could be suprised on how good Museliak is 1st & Play-Off winners - Poole - no surprise. Gomolski & North to be replaced asap when their averages rise plus the 2nd best reserve pairing. Untouchable from June onwards. It is going to be hard to replace Dakota North or Davey Watt really as you can only have TWO 7+ riders in your team using the starting averages. So even if Dakota North averages 8.08 early on, he can only be replaced with a rider that started the season on an average under seven unless they release Magic or Holder too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nellie Posted March 12, 2015 Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 It is going to be hard to replace Dakota North or Davey Watt really as you can only have TWO 7+ riders in your team using the starting averages. So even if Dakota North averages 8.08 early on, he can only be replaced with a rider that started the season on an average under seven unless they release Magic or Holder too Do you have any evidence of this rule at all? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Smith Posted March 12, 2015 Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 You HOPE they will ....... Don't under estimate Wolves as they will have their days when they give a spanking and you could be suprised on how good Museliak is It is going to be hard to replace Dakota North or Davey Watt really as you can only have TWO 7+ riders in your team using the starting averages. So even if Dakota North averages 8.08 early on, he can only be replaced with a rider that started the season on an average under seven unless they release Magic or Holder too Wrong, 2 over 7 is for the start of the season only. After the 1st set of averages, teams can do as they please. If every rider has a 10+ average they can be replaced like for like. I can only see the 2 over 7 rule being enforced for redeclaration. There's no way if Holder gets injured Poole would only be allowed a 6.99 replacement if North or Watt up their averages. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T.N.T. Posted March 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 12, 2015 (edited) Wrong, 2 over 7 is for the start of the season only. After the 1st set of averages, teams can do as they please. If every rider has a 10+ average they can be replaced like for like. I can only see the 2 over 7 rule being enforced for redeclaration. There's no way if Holder gets injured Poole would only be allowed a 6.99 replacement if North or Watt up their averages. You have misunderstood what I posted. Should Chris Holder be injured then Poole can sign whoever they want upto his average (or the 34 limit) and that is fine. However if North or Watt move their averages to say 7.67, they can not be replaced by a rider that has a 7+ average now like Tai Woffinden, Piotr Pawlicki or Peter Kildemand as their 1-7 will contain THREE riders that started the season on 7+ averages. If Poole or any other club wanted to sign Woffinden or Kildemand or Kasprzak for example it would have to be at the expense of a rider that started on a 7+ average UNLESS that team never started the season with two such riders like Wolves and Lakeside EDIT; I could just imagine if this was allowed, Poole releasing North 7.67 and Gomolski 7.05 mid season and bringing in Kildemand and Woffinden to give them a top five of Holder, Janowski, Kildemand, Woffinden and Watt Edited March 12, 2015 by T.N.T. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted March 13, 2015 Report Share Posted March 13, 2015 Like-for-like signing are allowed. So if North goes over 7 he CAN be replaced by a rider over 7 (but under Norths figure). BUT Poole couldn't redeclared back to 34 including Holder, Magic and North if they're all over 7. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T.N.T. Posted March 13, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 13, 2015 (edited) Like-for-like signing are allowed. So if North goes over 7 he CAN be replaced by a rider over 7 (but under Norths figure). BUT Poole couldn't redeclared back to 34 including Holder, Magic and North if they're all over 7. Any rider currently with an average over seven points a meeting CANT sign for Poole unless it;s in place of Holder or Janowski. The TWO 7+ riders will be in place all season with those figures at present. So if Dakota North is averaging 7.67 they cant sign Kildemand or Woffinden etc Edited March 13, 2015 by T.N.T. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nellie Posted March 13, 2015 Report Share Posted March 13, 2015 (edited) Any rider currently with an average over seven points a meeting CANT sign for Poole unless it;s in place of Holder or Janowski. The TWO 7+ riders will be in place all season with those figures at present. So if Dakota North is averaging 7.67 they cant sign Kildemand or Woffinden etc The rule is as follows TNT, with the relevant bit in bold: 17.4.2 A Teams combined MA for the top 5 positions must not exceed 34.00 points nor include more than 2 x Riders, whose MA exceeds 7.00 or 2 Doubling-Up Riders (satisfying the same conditions as for the initial Team Declaration) when re-declared, either permanently or temporarily, except where the MA of the introduced Rider is equal to, or lower than the Rider being replaced. i.e. the first bit is irrelevant when the rider being replaced is a like for like switch, as Screamer and SCB pointed out. Edited March 13, 2015 by Nellie 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g13webb Posted March 13, 2015 Report Share Posted March 13, 2015 Like-for-like signing are allowed. So if North goes over 7 he CAN be replaced by a rider over 7 (but under Norths figure). BUT Poole couldn't redeclared back to 34 including Holder, Magic and North if they're all over 7. I've always felt this scenario is worded wrong, and favours teams with riders who score above CMA. To illuminate this manipulation of team changing and make it more fair to all teams, any replacement of riders should be governed to the averages, the team was assembled with at the start of the season. What's the point of having a point limit to building a team, when at the first opportunity it can be abused. Surely that's not the intention of the rules ??? Teams, with riders who are finding it hard to score and their CMA is dropping, are the ones that need help and , to me it is wrong that teams are penalised by the rules, if it that means, any replacement have to be governed by a their diminishing scores instead of the ones he started with. Another loop hole filled in.......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Smith Posted March 13, 2015 Report Share Posted March 13, 2015 Any rider currently with an average over seven points a meeting CANT sign for Poole unless it;s in place of Holder or Janowski. The TWO 7+ riders will be in place all season with those figures at present. So if Dakota North is averaging 7.67 they cant sign Kildemand or Woffinden etc Of course they can sign Woffy or Killer if their averages fit. You're making it up. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveLyric2 Posted March 13, 2015 Report Share Posted March 13, 2015 Surely its been the case for many seasons that any team that shows the most improvement on their starting average is likely to at least be in the play-offs if not the eventual champions. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g13webb Posted March 13, 2015 Report Share Posted March 13, 2015 Surely its been the case for many seasons that any team that shows the most improvement on their starting average is likely to at least be in the play-offs if not the eventual champions. But that doesn't make it right. Surely the idea would be for the rules to help the struggling clubs, The teams that have good scoring riders don't need to be helped. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barrow boy Posted March 14, 2015 Report Share Posted March 14, 2015 (edited) Surely its been the case for many seasons that any team that shows the most improvement on their starting average is likely to at least be in the play-offs if not the eventual champions. Exactly what I said. Edited March 14, 2015 by barrow boy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveLyric2 Posted March 14, 2015 Report Share Posted March 14, 2015 Exactly what I said. Indeed you did! but some clearly don't see that skill in team-building?! 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.