Siggytastic Posted July 10, 2017 Report Share Posted July 10, 2017 King getting 3pts is hardly positive. Sedgmen riding at 5 is complete madness, Louis and Hawkins clearly are not too bright.I wasn't clear. Only losing by 2 points with our number 1 only scoring 3 is surely a positive. Perhaps the reasoning for Sedgmen at 5 will be explained. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BluPanther Posted July 10, 2017 Report Share Posted July 10, 2017 I wasn't clear. Only losing by 2 points with our number 1 only scoring 3 is surely a positive. Perhaps the reasoning for Sedgmen at 5 will be explained. Looking forward to that one. I'm struggling to think of many reasons why he should even be in the team... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baldyman Posted July 10, 2017 Report Share Posted July 10, 2017 (edited) It doesn't really matter where he is in the team, it will always be the same problem. Like said above, can't even think why he is still in the team. Edited July 10, 2017 by baldyman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheScotsman Posted July 10, 2017 Report Share Posted July 10, 2017 So you don't like Sedgy - fair enough. But putting him at 5 is crazy - and doing it twice at tracks that are not his favourites is total insanity. Should be looking for a new team manager. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arch Stanton Posted July 10, 2017 Report Share Posted July 10, 2017 Seems to have an awful lot of tracks that he dislikes. He's been a disaster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baldyman Posted July 10, 2017 Report Share Posted July 10, 2017 Apart from Edinburgh.. What tracks does he like??? Maybe we haven't been to any of them yet 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruffdiamond Posted July 10, 2017 Report Share Posted July 10, 2017 (edited) Perhaps the reasoning for Sedgmen at 5 will be explained.it is something that isn't seen often and, it would be interesting to hear the reasoning, if it ever was/is revealed.but I could think of a couple of reasons to it, (if I was a manager) Edited July 10, 2017 by ruffdiamond Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CookieIpswich Posted July 10, 2017 Report Share Posted July 10, 2017 Hawkins said he wanted to try new pairings over the weekend Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2ndbendbeerhut Posted July 10, 2017 Report Share Posted July 10, 2017 Nothing wrong with a nice pair now and again..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bri1966 Posted July 10, 2017 Report Share Posted July 10, 2017 Could Ipswich not use Rory in heat 13 instead of mountain? I.r rule like Newcastle used against Workington Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruffdiamond Posted July 10, 2017 Report Share Posted July 10, 2017 Could Ipswich not use Rory in heat 13 instead of mountain? I.r rule like Newcastle used against Workington don't think it can be used if the rider has taken 3 rides, (as King had),,, there was some debate about it regarding Lewis Kerr, I think on another thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diamond@heart Posted July 10, 2017 Report Share Posted July 10, 2017 Could Ipswich not use Rory in heat 13 instead of mountain? I.r rule like Newcastle used against Workington 18.11 An INJURED RIDER REPLACEMENT (IRR) Is a Facility that allows one certified injured rider’s (#1-#5) remaining programmed rides (including a ride in which he was unable to re-start but was not disqualified - FN) to be taken by other Team Members (including any Guest riders), providing the Team is not already using ARR and subject to: 18.11.1 The injured Rider not having completed 3 rides 18.11.2 Only one position per Team may be declared as IRR. 18.11.3 All riders with an MA below the Injured rider may take one IRR ride each. 18.11.4 IRR is not permitted in Heat 15. 18.11.5 A Nomination once made cannot be changed. 18.11.6 A rider taking an IRR ride may be nominated to take a TR ride (Art. 18.14) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulco Posted July 10, 2017 Report Share Posted July 10, 2017 If sedgeman is not at Edinburgh next season i will stand tapping.... best team lost tonight. The suspicion is that it looks like he's doing a Wolbert 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dontforgetthefueltapsbruv Posted July 10, 2017 Report Share Posted July 10, 2017 Could Ipswich not use Rory in heat 13 instead of mountain? I.r rule like Newcastle used against Workingtonmost of us initially presumed that but the reg doesnt allow it. Quite why is a different matter - why distinguish between having had 3 rides already or not? Surely the idea of IRR is to allow replacement of a fair standard. Seems strange that if Danny had missed 2 rides then Rory and Kyle could have taken 1 each yet had to use Connor because Danny had completed 3. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arson fire Posted July 10, 2017 Report Share Posted July 10, 2017 most of us initially presumed that but the reg doesnt allow it. Quite why is a different matter - why distinguish between having had 3 rides already or not? Surely the idea of IRR is to allow replacement of a fair standard. Seems strange that if Danny had missed 2 rides then Rory and Kyle could have taken 1 each yet had to use Connor because Danny had completed 3. I thought i read somewhere it couldnt be for an existing/old injury?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheScotsman Posted July 10, 2017 Report Share Posted July 10, 2017 If sedgeman is not at Edinburgh next season i will stand tapping.... best team lost tonight. You are also assuming Edinburgh will be running next season. There's a planning application to build houses on it. Turned down once but maybe not on appeal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dontforgetthefueltapsbruv Posted July 10, 2017 Report Share Posted July 10, 2017 I thought i read somewhere it couldnt be for an existing/old injury??Would make some sense although difficult to prove one way or other. If a rider for example has a history of shoulder dislocation and therefore an ongoing weakness would another one always be classed as existing/old injury. It was the 3 ride part of the reg for Danny though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MD Posted July 10, 2017 Report Share Posted July 10, 2017 You are also assuming Edinburgh will be running next season. There's a planning application to build houses on it. Turned down once but maybe not on appeal. Im sure the planning permission had been in place for 5 years and having now expired the owners have re-applied for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheScotsman Posted July 10, 2017 Report Share Posted July 10, 2017 Might be that way round. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arson fire Posted July 10, 2017 Report Share Posted July 10, 2017 Would make some sense although difficult to prove one way or other. If a rider for example has a history of shoulder dislocation and therefore an ongoing weakness would another one always be classed as existing/old injury. It was the 3 ride part of the reg for Danny though. probably rubbish, just thought i'd seen it somewhere. 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.