Eastbourne 2016

[GASBLOKE]

 

Really ?

I will give him a chance before writing him off !

Grasstrack he is getting great reviews.

Poor old Len, Connor has got one over him and he don't like it. Reckons it was called off too early. It poured hard all day in Arlington Road West on Saturday and even with a lot of work it would have been a crap track for the guys to ride on. The fact that Adam Ellis was not available had nothing to do with the meeting being called off, I don't think !! Should mean some "who ha" this Saturday though. How do we line up ? 1. Ellis. 2. Harris. 3. Perks. 4. Wood. 5. Knight. 6. Powell. 7. Phillips. If it rains this Saturday, I reckon its off to the farmers fields, we have got a cracking grass track team !!

We can support Ellis on Thursday now in the U21 final. He should win the NL Riders Championship.

Well done Connor and keep grizzling Len.

[Alex2000]

Phillips isn't riding so riding order for both teams is

1 Ellis. 1 Bowen

2 R/R 2 Clifton

3 Perks. 3 Ayres

4 Wood. 4 Mason

5 Knight. 5 Shanes

6 Harris. 6 verge

7 Powell. 7 Thomas

Edited April 11, 2016 by Al3x200

[Little Nicki]

 

We can support Ellis on Thursday now in the U21 final. He should win the NL Riders Championship.

Well done Connor and keep grizzling Len.

 

Which Ellis will you be supporting on Thursday? Adam Ellis or Ellis Perks, as they are both riding in the U21 Final, or did you not know that? If one of them wins, will you claim them as 'one of our own'?

 

Which Ellis are you saying will win the NLRC? Do you think Adam Ellis will still be riding for Eastbourne by the time the NLRC is staged?

 

Uncle Len grizzling? It's called old school promoting and it's having the desired effect isn't it?

[teaboy279]

Phillips isn't riding so riding order for both teams is

1 Ellis. 1 Bowen

2 R/R 2 Clifton

3 Perks. 3 Ayres

4 Wood. 4 Mason

5 Knight. 5 Shanes

6 Harris. 6 verge

7 Powell. 7 Thomas

Didn't think you could have rr for reserve?

[Little Nicki]

Phillips isn't riding so riding order for both teams is

1 Ellis. 1 Bowen

2 R/R 2 Clifton

3 Perks. 3 Ayres

4 Wood. 4 Mason

5 Knight. 5 Shanes

6 Harris. 6 verge

7 Powell. 7 Thomas

 

 

Didn't think you could have rr for reserve?

 

Not sure where he has got his info from teaboy, but I thought that Eastbourne had declared Luke Harris in their 1 - 5, with Powell and Phillips at Reserve so, like you, I'm struggling to see how they'll be allowed to use RR at No. 2 and drop Harris to Reserve if Phillips is missing.

[teaboy279]

I thought the only flexibility is changing around your 2,3,4,and 5 positions.

That said they could get a Parkinson-Blackburn or smith as a 3 point guest or does it need to be a rider not declared in a teams 1-7?

[Alex2000]

 

 

 

Not sure where he has got his info from teaboy, but I thought that Eastbourne had declared Luke Harris in their 1 - 5, with Powell and Phillips at Reserve so, like you, I'm struggling to see how they'll be allowed to use RR at No. 2 and drop Harris to Reserve if Phillips is missing.

.

 

 

On Twitter Eastbourne said Nick Phillips is unavailable and surprisingly Harris is also a 3 pointer and as wood can't go in a reserves race they have said that they will put Harris at reserve and have rider replacement at 2. I'm sure other teams have done it before and as they have the same average it can't make much difference. They must have redeclared their team this was to be able to do it.

Edited April 12, 2016 by Al3x200

[TurnTwo]

You do not have to redeclare your team to shuffle round riders on the same average:

 

TEAM LINE-UPS

a) The Top rider (by MA) must ride at #1.

The 2nd to 5th riders (by MA) can ride in any position #2 #5.

c) The 6th and 7th riders (by MA) must ride at #6 or #7.

19.10.1 In case of a dispute regarding the Line-Up the matter may be referred to the NL Co-ordinator, and will have the same validity as it were taken under Art 3.8.1 d

[arnieg]

Didn't think you could have rr for reserve?

 

Here's the relevant rule:

 

16.3 TEAM DECLARATIONS

Teams must declare their Team prior to the start of the Season. Changes must be made at

least 72 hours before the start Time of the Meeting at which it is intended to be used.

16.3.1 In any declaration where 2 or more riders hold an identical MA (i.e. cannot be determined by

a 3rd or more decimal point) then the (re) Declaration must nominate the hierarchical order,

except that where riders have a previous MA, then the higher placed rider from the previous

issue shall retain the higher position.

 

Key phrase is 'must nominate the hierarchical order'

 

As Luke Harris is listed at no 5 in the hierarchical order of the declared Eastbourne line-up this is illegal under the current line-up but if Eastbourne redeclare before tomorrow it would be OK subject to 16.3.5

 

16.3.5 The BSPA MC monitors all proposed moves and has the sole responsibility to approve all

(re-)Declared Team Line-Ups having been satisfied they are in the best interests of the sport.

 

Otherwise I see nothing that stops Eastbourne redeclaring Harris at reserve and Phillips in the team. (Harris once had an MA greater than 3.00 but that was way before 'the previous issue')

 

 

 

[gazzac]

Didn't think you could have rr for reserve?

Didn't think you could have rr for reserve?

 

Didn't think you could have rr for reserve?

Didn't think you could have rr for reserve?

Sorry about the above, phone/Internet had a funny five minutes! Didn't show the last few posts either so the question was answered! Edited April 12, 2016 by gazzac

[catinthehat]

All a bit of a mess for me so i have read the post and seems that ok from what Eastbourne have done again seems to be with in the rules, someone has eaten the rule book lol and it was not me.

Edited April 12, 2016 by catinthehat

[Little Nicki]

I thought the only flexibility is changing around your 2,3,4,and 5 positions.

That said they could get a Parkinson-Blackburn or smith as a 3 point guest or does it need to be a rider not declared in a teams 1-7?

 

Agreed teaboy and as regards the Reserve Facility I believe in the NDL it is: - any rider not in a NL Declaration and whose MA does not exceed 3.00, or the No. 8 if applicable.

 

You do not have to redeclare your team to shuffle round riders on the same average:

 

 

 

I believe you do, as arnieg points out below, as it is down to how Eastbourne decided the hierarchical order:

 

 

Here's the relevant rule:

 

16.3 TEAM DECLARATIONS

Teams must declare their Team prior to the start of the Season. Changes must be made at

least 72 hours before the start Time of the Meeting at which it is intended to be used.

16.3.1 In any declaration where 2 or more riders hold an identical MA (i.e. cannot be determined by

a 3rd or more decimal point) then the (re) Declaration must nominate the hierarchical order,

except that where riders have a previous MA, then the higher placed rider from the previous

issue shall retain the higher position.

 

Key phrase is 'must nominate the hierarchical order'

 

As Luke Harris is listed at no 5 in the hierarchical order of the declared Eastbourne line-up this is illegal under the current line-up but if Eastbourne redeclare before tomorrow it would be OK subject to 16.3.5

 

16.3.5 The BSPA MC monitors all proposed moves and has the sole responsibility to approve all

(re-)Declared Team Line-Ups having been satisfied they are in the best interests of the sport.

 

Otherwise I see nothing that stops Eastbourne redeclaring Harris at reserve and Phillips in the team. (Harris once had an MA greater than 3.00 but that was way before 'the previous issue')

 

I see that Eastbourne specifically announced that Harris was to ride in the No. 2 position on 08 April:

 

http://eastbourneeagles.co/news.php?extend.918

 

And that he is Declared as being in the 1 - 5 on the latest Greensheets:

 

http://www.speedwaygb.co/files/downloads/nl16_issue_4.pdf

 

So, after announcing Harris was in the 1 - 5 and declaring him there with the BSPA, Eastbourne then realise Phillips is on holiday and will miss the re-arranged match against Kent and will have to re-declare their line-up. Will they re-declare again once Phillips is available again? It's all starting to whiff a bit down at Arlington, but no doubt will add extra spice to the Kings match - unless it is postponed again. Might be worth a 500 mile round trip to watch this.

[teaboy279]

 

Agreed teaboy and as regards the Reserve Facility I believe in the NDL it is: - any rider not in a NL Declaration and whose MA does not exceed 3.00, or the No. 8 if applicable.

 

 

 

I believe you do, as arnieg points out below, as it is down to how Eastbourne decided the hierarchical order:

 

 

I see that Eastbourne specifically announced that Harris was to ride in the No. 2 position on 08 April:

 

http://eastbourneeagles.co/news.php?extend.918

 

And that he is Declared as being in the 1 - 5 on the latest Greensheets:

 

http://www.speedwaygb.co/files/downloads/nl16_issue_4.pdf

 

So, after announcing Harris was in the 1 - 5 and declaring him there with the BSPA, Eastbourne then realise Phillips is on holiday and will miss the re-arranged match against Kent and will have to re-declare their line-up. Will they re-declare again once Phillips is available again? It's all starting to whiff a bit down at Arlington, but no doubt will add extra spice to the Kings match - unless it is postponed again. Might be worth a 500 mile round trip to watch this.

I can't see how it can be changed with sportsmanship in mind, otherwise teams can go top heavy in declarations then each week one of the sides bottom 3 can be missing for a meeting and a 2nd string gets one of his rides as rr.

[Sings4Speedway]

Doesn't really bother me if its Harris or Phillips at reserve and in fairness i doubt many Kent fans will be that bothered either. As rule manipulation goes its relatively small fry.

What does irk me is RR in the NL. Its abused by some, slows up the flow of the meeting and wastes an opportunity for a rider on the fringes to get some NL experience.

I know i sound like a stuck record but limit RR to twice at home and twice away to cover for genuine short notice instances. Then book and use an unattached 3 pointer / clubs number 8 for the remainder.

Fans complain of disjointed meetings, clubs complain about lack of track time/experience for progressing riders and yet the RR rule remains in place.

[catinthehat]

The only thing is that this was a not a fixture for Eastbourne knowing Phillips was missing but maybe Kent could not make any other date. Who knows just a guess but 3 pointer for a 3 pointer is a fair enough swap for me but hey looking at it in the bigger way depends how you want to win and the question is can you win.

 

Roll on the week end, i have just looked at the weather and looks like rain again but it might change

[Little Nicki]

I can't see how it can be changed with sportsmanship in mind, otherwise teams can go top heavy in declarations then each week one of the sides bottom 3 can be missing for a meeting and a 2nd string gets one of his rides as rr.

 

Agreed again, but I suppose it is down to the MC's definition of 'in the best interests of the sport'. To have tweeted the line-up for Saturday with RR at 2 and Harris at Reserve, you would assume that Eastbourne's management have already cleared this with the BSPA. No doubt Len Silver will be keeping a close eye on this. As Eastbourne re-arranged the fixture, the situation that has arisen is totally down to them. I can't believe that a club like Eastbourne do not have a rider available to cover for Philips absence rather than having to re-declare and using RR.

[catinthehat]

Doesn't really bother me if its Harris or Phillips at reserve and in fairness i doubt many Kent fans will be that bothered either. As rule manipulation goes its relatively small fry.

What does irk me is RR in the NL. Its abused by some, slows up the flow of the meeting and wastes an opportunity for a rider on the fringes to get some NL experience.

I know i sound like a stuck record but limit RR to twice at home and twice away to cover for genuine short notice instances. Then book and use an unattached 3 pointer / clubs number 8 for the remainder.

Fans complain of disjointed meetings, clubs complain about lack of track time/experience for progressing riders and yet the RR rule remains in place.

But as its proved again RR is pants but there are no unattached 3 pointers left and as for number 8 let them have a go or Draft in the kids from the British Youth for a meeting like Breannan and Bickley and Whitmore, Dicken, Even at this age no reason why you cant use them as they are all racing loud and proud at the moment, they are on the same bikes same engines, and they want to progress. Dont kill them with an age limit as it will stop them going forward, Look at Robert Lambert.

[TurnTwo]

In all fairness, I don't see why everyone is against the dugards win at all costs theory... Would you all still turn up if they were bottom of the league and took a pounding each week like in the old days is the elite? I certainly wouldn't

Agree with cat and that doesn't happen often

[Sings4Speedway]

The MDL is chock full of riders who are unattached and champing at the bit to get a ride. They may or may not score the first time out but if they continue getting bookings they can only learn and improve. Lets not forget next year teams will be looking for these 3 pointers again so why not develop an association early?

As for rider availability i agree that this is a rearranged fixture but Phillips knew he was signed up over the winter and therefore should have avoided booking holidays within the season. You will find most others don't (with the exception of Aaron Baseby obviously).

[catinthehat]

Think your find Dave Mason did it last year and turned up at Arlington with a tan a week later? it was also a real tan as he didnt look orange and he was telling the people around him how nice it was in spain. So i guess everyone has a Holiday at some stage even riders lol good or Bad.

 

But have to remember that this is a development league and a lot of the riders well 99% of them work as well.