Mad Max Posted May 10, 2017 Report Share Posted May 10, 2017 Seems the Ipswich fans etc have quietened down since they have done the same thing (Signed Nathan Greaves who has a 2.27 Premiership average for a rider who has a 2.00 average in the Championship). They have 3 riders who's average has changed and is not a like for like signing (fitted in because Cameron Heeps average hasn't been adjusted even though he is 2 points higher than his green sheet average). I agree - Ipswich change should also be vetoed along with Berwick's Heeps' average needs to be reviewed, just the same as Gapp mans Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronScorpion Posted May 10, 2017 Report Share Posted May 10, 2017 No just a few sensible individuals who can see beyond the bottom of their own team list and have an intelligent debate about what they beleive would be best for the long term integrity of the sport. Good luck for the rest of the year. Hoping the Witches can come back and collect another 4 points anyway so far off the mark its laughable. Youre right its not like for like - its a 2.27 rider in place of a 4.57 rider. The complete opposite. 1 meeting, 4 meetings, 7 meetings to use an average. That is why they set a point of 8 meetings(4H 4A) to get a more accurate average. From what people are saying, you should be allowed a replacement up to 4.57 because that is his current average. What would happen to the Scorpions if Nielsen was to get injured guesting for someone. Would we then be allowed to use a guest up to his current 8.00 average. People need to look at the bigger picture & not SELF, SELF, SELF. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gazc Posted May 10, 2017 Report Share Posted May 10, 2017 1 meeting, 4 meetings, 7 meetings to use an average. That is why they set a point of 8 meetings(4H 4A) to get a more accurate average. From what people are saying, you should be allowed a replacement up to 4.57 because that is his current average. What would happen to the Scorpions if Nielsen was to get injured guesting for someone. Would we then be allowed to use a guest up to his current 8.00 average. People need to look at the bigger picture & not SELF, SELF, SELF. Totally agree but the thing is what people think doesn't really matter. The BSPA will make there decision and if they decide to assess his average then a real can of worms shall be opened , and for that reason they will ratify the Howe move and rightfully so. Bottom line Berwick are only trying to make it more competitive and give there fans some hope that things will improve , to carry on the way they were was detrimental to there business in regards to turnover , a vicious circle then develops were crowds drop etc etc they have to look at the bigger picture not just for Berwick but for everyone. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dontforgetthefueltapsbruv Posted May 10, 2017 Report Share Posted May 10, 2017 1 meeting, 4 meetings, 7 meetings to use an average. That is why they set a point of 8 meetings(4H 4A) to get a more accurate average. From what people are saying, you should be allowed a replacement up to 4.57 because that is his current average. What would happen to the Scorpions if Nielsen was to get injured guesting for someone. Would we then be allowed to use a guest up to his current 8.00 average. People need to look at the bigger picture & not SELF, SELF, SELF. This is not about self self self. All through I have stated a generic position for my view. And yes that would include if it went against Ipswich. Possibly 4 as a min (2h2a). There could also be a distinction between changes due to performance as opposed to injury. This would avoid changes being made which manipulate increases/decreases. Whatever the criteria the most important part IMO is that the regulation is the regulation. At present it states an ave MAY be changed. It should be it will or it wont be - no grey area. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balderdash&piffle Posted May 10, 2017 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2017 This is not about self self self. All through I have stated a generic position for my view. And yes that would include if it went against Ipswich. Possibly 4 as a min (2h2a). There could also be a distinction between changes due to performance as opposed to injury. This would avoid changes being made which manipulate increases/decreases. Whatever the criteria the most important part IMO is that the regulation is the regulation. At present it states an ave MAY be changed. It should be it will or it wont be - no grey area. MAY, this is an important word, sounds that it is a discretionary decision, and that they have used their discretion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dontforgetthefueltapsbruv Posted May 10, 2017 Report Share Posted May 10, 2017 MAY, this is an important word, sounds that it is a discretionary decision, and that they have used their discretion. Absolutely - and I have said the decision this time is correct in line with others already made this year in terms of being consistent. Ive had the same stance prior to this year and been consistent in my opinion. That hasnt changed to suit an agenda for or against any club including my own. SCB has pointed out a few occaisions where it has been applied and I have stated it should be applied more often. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arson fire Posted May 10, 2017 Report Share Posted May 10, 2017 All we need now is a pi55ed paramedic, a rock hard scotch pie,last and a very dodgy rain off in the sun and my Berwick season bingo card is complete. Fingers crossed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balderdash&piffle Posted May 10, 2017 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2017 All we need now is a pi55ed paramedic, a rock hard scotch pie,last and a very dodgy rain off in the sun and my Berwick season bingo card is complete. Fingers crossed I will be happy if they don't cock the track up like the last meeting Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
screm Posted May 10, 2017 Report Share Posted May 10, 2017 I agree - Ipswich change should also be vetoed along with Berwick's Heeps' average needs to be reviewed, just the same as Gapp mans As far as Berwick`s concerned, vetoed on what grounds, as I said yesterday Berwick`s team change is within the rules set out by the BSPA in that Gappmaier has yet to complete 4h 4a, the integrity of the sport such as it is remains intact. Believe if Berwick were in the wrong I would say so, have they fortunate with one rained off meeting to keep Gappmaier on a 4pt average, yes, but that`s about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damosuzuki Posted May 10, 2017 Report Share Posted May 10, 2017 Yes - they are the rules. Berwicks faith in Gappameir is being repaid at the moment but that makes no difference. Why anyone think otherwise is beyond me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dontforgetthefueltapsbruv Posted May 10, 2017 Report Share Posted May 10, 2017 Just been forwarded a pic from the recent Berwick meeting of some supporters discussing the club - Reproduced below 🙈🙉🙊 😜☺ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alang Posted May 10, 2017 Report Share Posted May 10, 2017 Apart from all the experts on here,has there been any official word on whether this change has been ratified or not.Either from club or BSPA..Presumably if Workington not happy withe change they could object and that would force a decision before the meeting on Saturday night.In the meantime the silence from club and authorities presumably means everything is fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dontforgetthefueltapsbruv Posted May 10, 2017 Report Share Posted May 10, 2017 Of course everything is fine. Not one post on here has claimed it wouldnt be rubber stamped. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fromafar Posted May 10, 2017 Report Share Posted May 10, 2017 As far as Berwick`s concerned, vetoed on what grounds, as I said yesterday Berwick`s team change is within the rules set out by the BSPA in that Gappmaier has yet to complete 4h 4a, the integrity of the sport such as it is remains intact. Believe if Berwick were in the wrong I would say so, have they fortunate with one rained off meeting to keep Gappmaier on a 4pt average, yes, but that`s about it.I couldn't care a monkeys what happens with this,but what you don't seem to understand is the BSPA have the power to change this rule in the "best interests of the sport" and that is all most people are saying.The rules are a joke .Even the rule regarding Liam to Birmingham can be question and interpretated differently but obviously it has been sanctioned.Most fans are not getting at the Club but the way the BSPA can open up a can of worms.Berwick simply applied the rule as they saw it,which we think has been ratified as the Promotion announced it . 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penchev Posted May 10, 2017 Report Share Posted May 10, 2017 I'm really struggling to see why pages and pages of bitterness has been created over a riders average that is true as required meetings have not yet been met , Unbelievable but so believable Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bandit59 Posted May 10, 2017 Report Share Posted May 10, 2017 Apart from all the experts on here,has there been any official word on whether this change has been ratified or not.Either from club or BSPA..Presumably if Workington not happy withe change they could object and that would force a decision before the meeting on Saturday night.In the meantime the silence from club and authorities presumably means everything is fine. Silence is Golden Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronScorpion Posted May 10, 2017 Report Share Posted May 10, 2017 I'm really struggling to see why pages and pages of bitterness has been created over a riders average that is true as required meetings have not yet been met , Unbelievable but so believable Berwick have acted within the rules, same as Scunthorpe & Ipswich in that team changes were made where new averages were applied(4H 4A) coupled with riders team building averages were applied where the 4H 4A was not reached or like for like swaps within the riders averages. What has got most people posting is the fact that with Gappmaier , a re-declaration is based on Gappmaier still being a 4.00. Others are posting that if like for like, his 4.57 should be used. You cannot have it both ways. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topsoil Posted May 10, 2017 Report Share Posted May 10, 2017 Well done to Liam on a maximum for Birmingham tonight. Hopefully a few meetings in the NL will see him get his confidence back. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penchev Posted May 10, 2017 Report Share Posted May 10, 2017 Gappmaier signed for Swindon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allthegearbutnaeidea Posted May 10, 2017 Report Share Posted May 10, 2017 Morris 7+2 from 3 rides finished at Poole tonight after getting Ex in heat 13, Payne 10 from 4 for Belle Vue Colts as well, good news all round 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.