Tactical Substitutes Question?

[Grand Central]

Because if they announced everything now we only be able to have one moan. By drip feeding up crap news we can moan all winter!

 

That would be tragically consistent with the way the BSPA PR tends to work.

 

 

Just had a good read of this weeks Star and everything written about reverting to tactical substitutes in 2018 - not many references- is written as plurals.ie not A TACTICAL SUBSTITUTE but TACTICAL SUBSTITUTES. Why do the BSPA muddy the waters by not saying in full what has been implemented.

 

That is true.

In addition the BSPA website refers to it as "... rolled back the years by bringing back the traditional tactical substitute when a team is six points or more"

And the Speedway Star says a "... return to tactical substitutes"

 

Are they just being disingenuous with the false inference that we are returning to past usage of tac subs.

And are just conning us again ?

Or do they really mean it ?

 

Tac Subs were ONLY EVER used in a system that alowed multiple use.

NEVER anything other.

 

Why the hell can't they just make stuff clear ?

Edited November 24, 2017 by Grand Central

[racers and royals]

 

That would be tragically consistent with the way the BSPA PR tends to work.

 

 

 

That is true.

In addition the BSPA website refers to it as "... rolled back the years by bringing back the traditional tactical substitute when a team is six points or more"

And the Speedway Star says a "... return to tactical substitutes"

 

Are they just being disingenuous with the false inference that we are returning to past usage of tac subs.

And are just conning us again ?

Or do they really mean it ?

 

Tac Subs were ONLY EVER used in a system that alowed multiple use.

NEVER anything other.

 

Why the hell can't they just make stuff clear ?

The vice-chairman "why we ditched double" "the proposal to drop the double points and bring back tactical substitutes was to general acclaim, there was no dissent at all "

[noggin]

So which year have they rolled back to, when only one t/s was allowed.

[SCB]

 

That is true.

In addition the BSPA website refers to it as "... rolled back the years by bringing back the traditional tactical substitute when a team is six points or more"

And the Speedway Star says a "... return to tactical substitutes"

 

Are they just being disingenuous with the false inference that we are returning to past usage of tac subs.

And are just conning us again ?

Or do they really mean it ?

 

Tac Subs were ONLY EVER used in a system that alowed multiple use.

NEVER anything other.

 

Why the hell can't they just make stuff clear ?

Don't forget this is the same bunch that about 3 years ago claimed to have, "listened to the fans views" in regards to the TR and increased how far behind you had to be an how many you could use. Despite the fact the Speedway Stars poll said circa-85% wanted the rule scrapped (not tweaked). So an outright lie.

[waytogo28]

Grand Central wrote " Why the hell can't they just make stuff clear ?"

 

I add why can't they understand that some of us feel it's all smoke and mirrors or that they at the BSPA want to hide things and bury them in confusion. Getting back the confidence of existing fans and making sure that new fans ( who we might attract ) don't feel as if they they are not sure of what's going on ( or how the hell are things run ) is vital, really vital. Please BSPA try harder to make things in UK speedway much more transparent and more easily understood by all - fans, sponsors, riders AND promoters.

[moxey63]

Moxey - just accept you lied and tried a bluff and got found out.

 

Err... ok.

 

Let's just move on then...

[ragdoll64]

Err... ok.

 

Let's just move on then...

 

Please God................please.

[crazyb]

I would expect they still will. Minimum rides being one less than scheduled rides seems right.

I thought the pretty much unanimous consensus was that it was a cost saving measure as opposed to the ts rule it replaced?

 

It was a cost saver and one of the instigators I believe was Len Silver: I don't think Gordon Pairman is right at all, TS will be available to all seven riders if team is six points behind. Should make team managers earn their money.

[Alan_Jones]

 

I don't think Gordon Pairman is right at all

 

If you mean about only 1 use per meeting, Chris Louis says the following in his AGM round up; "It has been replaced by an old fashioned tactical substitution where you can replace a rider with one that is in better form or whatever and you can do that once between heats five and 14 excluding heat eight."

[The White Knight]

 

It was a cost saver and one of the instigators I believe was Len Silver: I don't think Gordon Pairman is right at all, TS will be available to all seven riders if team is six points behind. Should make team managers earn their money.

Looks like you are wrong I'm pleased to say.

 

 

If you mean about only 1 use per meeting, Chris Louis says the following in his AGM round up; "It has been replaced by an old fashioned tactical substitution where you can replace a rider with one that is in better form or whatever and you can do that once between heats five and 14 excluding heat eight."

[crazyb]

Looks like you are wrong I'm pleased to say.

 

 

Well, if so, just forget it. Only one TS is as bad as the Joker, or Mickey Mouse TR. I thought next season I might just go more than a couple of times to see Panthers, but I'll now go less, even though they have a change of personnel, and not before time either

[The White Knight]

 

Well, if so, just forget it. Only one TS is as bad as the Joker, or Mickey Mouse TR. I thought next season I might just go more than a couple of times to see Panthers, but I'll now go less, even though they have a change of personnel, and not before time either

That is your decision - I respect that.

[Gemini]

Well, I'm glad it's only one as it's not fair for a team to build up a lead only to keep having it reduced. I'd prefer none at all but at least we've at last got rid of the double point thingy.

[Humphrey Appleby]

Even one tactical sub is better than the nonsense of double points. For one thing, a tactical sub can be used when it needs to be used, not having to wait until the 'right rider' is programmed which may be too late to be effective. And of course it doesn't muck up the scorecharts either.

 

I think it was pretty rare to use more than a couple of tactical subs in one meeting anyway, although it does restrict a team manager's replacement options if there's an injury during a meeting.

 

The one thing that should have been done, is only allow tactical subs when 8 or more points down (i.e. two 5-1s). I think 6 points gives too much of an advantage to a trailing side - tactical options should be allowed in more one-sided situations.

[Guest GiveusaB]

May be they should of sanctioned 2 T/S but had one from the starting gate and allowed another off a 10 Metre handicap ? Either that, or had 1 after 6 points behind and then another after 8 points down ?

[Humphrey Appleby]

May be they should of sanctioned 2 T/S but had one from the starting gate and allowed another off a 10 Metre handicap ? Either that, or had 1 after 6 points behind and then another after 8 points down ?

Why complicate things so much?

 

Just allow however many off scratch, if 6 or 8 points down. It worked perfectly well for years.

[moxey63]

Why complicate things so much?

 

Just allow however many off scratch, if 6 or 8 points down. It worked perfectly well for years.

It did indeed work well for years, but change for change sake took control.

 

To some, the tac sub is as unfair as the Double Bubble. But, at least it keeps with the long-established speedway scoring method of 3, 2 and a 1. A sport that wants to pride itself on a serious one should not rear into X-Factor territory.

Edited November 29, 2017 by moxey63

[brianbuck]

When I first began following speedway in the early 1950's, matches were over 14 heats with teams of 8 riders. Two of the riders were reserves, and the top six each took 4 rides and the reserves 2 each. The two reserves could each take an additional two rides as replacements for the top 6, but the crucial point was that a team manager could name any two of his riders who had scored less than 50% of possible points over the previous six matches, as his reserves.

 

This gave a Team Manager genuine scope to select his team tactically without being hidebound by averages or being forced to name his team in a particular sequence like they do today. Restricting the reserves to having no more than four rides (the same as their "upper" colleagues) meant that there was no way that an in-form reserve could unfairly influence a meeting like sometimes happens these days, and no nominated heat meant that top-heavy teams would get the advantage of a "free" 5-1 in the last race.

 

Time perhaps to look at bringing back something similar?

[Midland Red]

Too many meetings seem to have been decided by a 7 ride reserve score

[Guest GiveusaB]

I'm in big favour of any rule that gives us the chance to see the 'best' riders in as many heats as possible....or, put another way, keeping the racing as competitive as possible.

 

Without complicating things perhaps the away team should be allowed a T/S when 6 points down and the home team when 8 points down ?

Allow each team 2 throws of the dice.....give the team manager some responsibility!

Gives the 'know it all's' a chance, or more reason to claim that they can do better ? : )