Jump to content
British Speedway Forum

Peterborough Panthers 2017


Flappy

Recommended Posts

so 42.53 against a limit of 40 without having ridden since redclaration without a like for like change.....

So then you will be more than 3 points over the limit?? How is that allowed.

If you don't win the league now, there is something very wrong

This particular aspect of averages and team-building has always been part of the sport, and choosing the right timing of team-changes to take advantage of changes in average is a sign of shrewd management.

 

There's really nothing to see here......

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But we all know it's a stupid rule that can be overruled by the mc and changes should be made on either all current averages or all old, not a mixture of both. Wouldn't that then stop the likes of me moaning about it and make the so called sport more credible? A team at the bottom of the league can hardly improve their team cos they just under the 40 limit but you can make a change like that and are now way over the limit, but it's allowed. Total joke rules and joke sport. And whilst those involved think it's okay, it's never going to be anything more than a joke. Good luck to the panthers though. Hopefully it's one rule that will one day change.

Edited by baldyman
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good luck to the panthers though. Hopefully it's one rule that will one day change.

 

if Peterborough win anything this year, you can bet it will change

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

This particular aspect of averages and team-building has always been part of the sport, and choosing the right timing of team-changes to take advantage of changes in average is a sign of shrewd management.

 

There's really nothing to see here......

This year is somewhat different IMO due to the rolling averages being reset.

 

Rolling averages were introduced to counter this exact type of situation.

 

Therefore there should have been more thought as to ensuring it couldnt happen this year.

 

Allowing teams to use a mix of original and revised averages is what the mistake is.

 

Allowing a team to benefit from the reductions in half the riders figures whilst ignoring improvements in the others is just ridiculous.

 

Should have been all 7 using original averages or all 7 with newly achieved avearges and not a mix.

 

To simply state 'there is nothing to see here' is very blinkered and insular and fails to acknowledge the potential continuing damage matters such as this does to the sport

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very over rated. Gotta get rid of 2 of them to have a chance of winning anything. Maybe one is lowering his average for his next seasons team🤔🤔

It's entertainment remember lol we still won't win anything carrying 2 riders so I wouldn't worry

How did Flappy hack your account Baldy? 😂

Learning from the best lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This year is somewhat different IMO due to the rolling averages being reset.

Rolling averages were introduced to counter this exact type of situation.

Therefore there should have been more thought as to ensuring it couldnt happen this year.

Allowing teams to use a mix of original and revised averages is what the mistake is.

Allowing a team to benefit from the reductions in half the riders figures whilst ignoring improvements in the others is just ridiculous.

Should have been all 7 using original averages or all 7 with newly achieved avearges and not a mix.

To simply state 'there is nothing to see here' is very blinkered and insular and fails to acknowledge the potential continuing damage matters such as this does to the sport

Good points, and I agree that this season is unusual, as it has been in a number of ways as we move back from the fast-track system to pure averages as we know them from the 2018 season.

 

This isn't only a Championship issue, Kings Lynn have also been able to make a team change based on 'mixed averages' that wouldn't have been possible otherwise.

 

'Nothing to see here' referred to the veiled(or not so veiled) accusations here that Peterborough had in some way cheated, when in fact they have simply used the rules as written to their best effect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good points, and I agree that this season is unusual, as it has been in a number of ways as we move back from the fast-track system to pure averages as we know them from the 2018 season.

 

This isn't only a Championship issue, Kings Lynn have also been able to make a team change based on 'mixed averages' that wouldn't have been possible otherwise.

 

'Nothing to see here' referred to the veiled(or not so veiled) accusations here that Peterborough had in some way cheated, when in fact they have simply used the rules as written to their best effect.

This isnt about Peterborough. I made the same points re Gappmaier when Berwick made changes.

 

I actually specifically stated in a previous post that I didnt think it was cheating.

 

The regulations do allow it so long as the sensible line of awarding revised averages despite not reaching 4h 4a is ignored.

 

Doing that is a MC decsion so any fault lies there and not with any club requesting the change.

 

The Premiership changes are another point altogether (partly due to the revision in declaration limit and the time it has taken to get anywhere near 4h 4a for a number of teams) and shouldnt cloud any situation in the Championship - 2 wrongs dont make a right as the old saying goes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy