What must 2019 bring (speak now or forever hold your peace)

[dontforgetthefueltapsbruv]

14 minutes ago, Godzilla said:

OK I dunno if this is a dumb idea or been considered before (I'm newly back into speedway after living abroad)

I'll take the championship as an example.

Currently the team limit is 42.5

I would suggest that any team from 2018 is allowed to keep their same team regardless of how their riders averages have improved.

If they replace a rider:

• if the current team average is above 42.5, then the new rider must be lower than the leaving rider. (so team average could possibly still be above 42.5)
• if the current teams average is below 42.5 then they can replace however they like, as long as the new average is at/below 42.5

The idea behind this is that it would be better if we don't have to break up successful teams and should be able to get some consistency in teams instead of the merry-go-round of riderrs to teams and teams have motivation to improve and keep riders without having to then ditch a rider if they improve too much due to team average.

Like the idea of allowing continuity but surely if a team is averaging 45 and can replace a 7 point rider with a 7 point rider it would be unfair to only allow a team averaging 40 to build back to 42.5

Perhaps allow all teams to build to the total of the highest averaging team instead

[Godzilla]

9 minutes ago, dontforgetthefueltapsbruv said:

Like the idea of allowing continuity but surely if a team is averaging 45 and can replace a 7 point rider with a 7 point rider it would be unfair to only allow a team averaging 40 to build back to 42.5

Perhaps allow all teams to build to the total of the highest averaging team instead

Problem with that to me is it ends up with ever inflated team averages and no incentive to bring in lower scoring riders and build them up.
E.g. for comets there would be no reason to keep Kyle Bickley (apart from we love him) if we suddenly could bring in someone with a 5 point average.

Maybe I'm wrong though, maybe it would plateau out in the mid-40s.

Edited October 30, 2018 by Godzilla

[Tsunami]

On 10/22/2018 at 7:09 AM, waytogo28 said:

Please do keep to your word and let us have "no more from you" unless of course it's sensible comment about real things happening at speedway matches or about how speedway is organised. Show us that you have learnt from the past two seasons and your ups and downs at speedway during them. As you claim to enjoy speedway so much, why not relax and enjoy it.

Could argue that you and mikebv should also follow suit.

Edited October 30, 2018 by Tsunami

[jenga]

24 minutes ago, Godzilla said:

Problem with that to me is it ends up with ever inflated team averages and no incentive to bring in lower scoring riders and build them up.
E.g. for comets there would be no reason to keep Kyle Bickley (apart from we love him) if we suddenly could bring in someone with a 5 point average.

Maybe I'm wrong though, maybe it would plateau out in the mid-40s.

no reason to keep bickers , you are jokin . (no g ) still only 16 and was an honour to watch him develop . lets see if the goonies muck it up again . how many last chances do they (bspa/scb) need  ?

[dontforgetthefueltapsbruv]

27 minutes ago, Godzilla said:

Problem with that to me is it ends up with ever inflated team averages and no incentive to bring in lower scoring riders and build them up.
E.g. for comets there would be no reason to keep Kyle Bickley (apart from we love him) if we suddenly could bring in someone with a 5 point average.

Maybe I'm wrong though, maybe it would plateau out in the mid-40s.

It would plateau out

Even if you had 11 teams starting out at 45 at the end if the year the average team total woukd be around 42.5

The overall quality would rise with the same riders seeing their average fall marginally for the equivalent performance

[Godzilla]

28 minutes ago, jenga said:

no reason to keep bickers , you are jokin . (no g ) still only 16 and was an honour to watch him develop . lets see if the goonies muck it up again . how many last chances do they (bspa/scb) need  ?

You're missing my point. I could have picked any comet - the point being that if we suddenly were able to increase our average by 3 points then we are being incentivised to break up a team instead of improving the riders.

Edited October 30, 2018 by Godzilla

[moxey63]

If you're still attending regularly, surely it shouldn't be you the promoters want ideas from. It's new or lost fans.

 

[Carlislecomet2]

1 hour ago, dontforgetthefueltapsbruv said:

Perhaps allow all teams to build to the total of the highest averaging team instead

I quite like this idea, because as you say the limit would probably even itself out rather than keep on escalating.

One of my pet hates is the thought that some riders (hard to believe I know) deliberately try to lower their averages to make themselves more attractive to other teams. Would this help prevent that from happening or not, I'm not sure.

On the other hand the fact that the top team(s) have to rejig their line ups each year helps prevent the same teams dominating and keeps things fresh. The annual merry go round of riders is also one of the most exciting times for the supporters too.

Having said that how many teams would want to retain their entire 1-7 (apart from us of course).

I think I have contradicted myself at least 4 times, I'll get my coat.

 

 

[waytogo28]

14 hours ago, Tsunami said:

about how speedway is organised.

 

14 hours ago, Tsunami said:

Could argue that you and mikebv should also follow suit.

Yes, you could but I think what you mean is that my ( and others ) views about "how speedway is organised" are merely different to yours. I have no intention of arguing about it and I realise that you have a much more intimate knowledge of how it has been organised in the past. However it is clear that much of how that was done has turned out badly for speedway in the UK,

[Bryce]

As an idea for encouraging team continuity; how about allowing a discount on rider averages for team building purposes if a rider stays at the same club for the new season. For example a rider finishes with an average of 7.49. If he stays with same club then a discount of half a point is given for team building purposes. His average becomes 6.99 if he stays put, but remains 7.49 if he changes teams. Even if the entire team is retained the total benefit is just 3.5 points. Not enough to unbalance the league, but enough to encourage retaining riders.  

[Gazc]

18 hours ago, Godzilla said:

OK I dunno if this is a dumb idea or been considered before (I'm newly back into speedway after living abroad)

I'll take the championship as an example.

Currently the team limit is 42.5

I would suggest that any team from 2018 is allowed to keep their same team regardless of how their riders averages have improved.

If they replace a rider:

• if the current team average is above 42.5, then the new rider must be lower than the leaving rider. (so team average could possibly still be above 42.5)
• if the current teams average is below 42.5 then they can replace however they like, as long as the new average is at/below 42.5

The idea behind this is that it would be better if we don't have to break up successful teams and should be able to get some consistency in teams instead of the merry-go-round of riderrs to teams and teams have motivation to improve and keep riders without having to then ditch a rider if they improve too much due to team average.

Successful teams have been decimated season after season , price to pay unfortunately for being successful.

[IronScorpion]

2 hours ago, Bryce said:

As an idea for encouraging team continuity; how about allowing a discount on rider averages for team building purposes if a rider stays at the same club for the new season. For example a rider finishes with an average of 7.49. If he stays with same club then a discount of half a point is given for team building purposes. His average becomes 6.99 if he stays put, but remains 7.49 if he changes teams. Even if the entire team is retained the total benefit is just 3.5 points. Not enough to unbalance the league, but enough to encourage retaining riders.  

I have said a similar thing probably this last 3 years but used a % reduction for riders. Fans would then be used to familiarity year on year.

[Bluenose]

To add to all that has been written....

Is there not a rule that ALL teams must ride all there fixtures

Champs   Workington and Eastbourne did not ride their quota! (are they going to be disciplined??)

Workington home to Lakeside, Lakeside could of finished 2nd if they had won away,(records are records!!)

Eastbourne home to Mildenhall result would not change league positions.

It is unfair to away teams because of lack of planning.

Surely this should be sorted first !!!!

Imagine Man city playing 1 game less and Man utd winning the league by 2 points.

Fixtures set at start of season must have set open dates to run the fixture if postponed!!

[jenga]

6 minutes ago, Bluenose said:

To add to all that has been written....

Is there not a rule that ALL teams must ride all there fixtures

Champs   Workington and Eastbourne did not ride their quota! (are they going to be disciplined??)

Workington home to Lakeside, Lakeside could of finished 2nd if they had won away,(records are records!!)

Eastbourne home to Mildenhall result would not change league positions.

It is unfair to away teams because of lack of planning.

Surely this should be sorted first !!!!

Imagine Man city playing 1 game less and Man utd winning the league by 2 points.

Fixtures set at start of season must have set open dates to run the fixture if postponed!!

would or did you attend the last meeting v lakeside ?

workington could also have finished second if they had completed all their league fixtures . lets make it equal second and call it a day , eh . 

workington,lakeside, eastbourne and mildenhall may get slapped on the where ever . but to fine them all shed loads of cash is not on . fine the two just men that caused it, not the teams ..

[topaz325]

5 hours ago, Bluenose said:

To add to all that has been written....

Is there not a rule that ALL teams must ride all there fixtures

Champs   Workington and Eastbourne did not ride their quota! (are they going to be disciplined??)

Workington home to Lakeside, Lakeside could of finished 2nd if they had won away,(records are records!!)

Eastbourne home to Mildenhall result would not change league positions.

It is unfair to away teams because of lack of planning.

Surely this should be sorted first !!!!

Imagine Man city playing 1 game less and Man utd winning the league by 2 points.

Fixtures set at start of season must have set open dates to run the fixture if postponed!!

• I agree about the fixture list should be completed but if the fixture list was not compiled properly or fixtures changed then changed back again then one can hardly blame the clubs involved.
• also this was about the third attempt to run the fixture!

Edited October 31, 2018 by topaz325
More info added

[comet49]

On 10/31/2018 at 1:47 PM, Bluenose said:

To add to all that has been written....

Is there not a rule that ALL teams must ride all there fixtures

Champs   Workington and Eastbourne did not ride their quota! (are they going to be disciplined??)

Workington home to Lakeside, Lakeside could of finished 2nd if they had won away,(records are records!!)

Eastbourne home to Mildenhall result would not change league positions.

It is unfair to away teams because of lack of planning.

Surely this should be sorted first !!!!

Imagine Man city playing 1 game less and Man utd winning the league by 2 points.

Fixtures set at start of season must have set open dates to run the fixture if postponed!!

Don’t forget that the original Lakeside league match was cancelled after Dan Bewley got injured and the first double header of Shield and League rerun was cancelled cos of rain. Nothing to do with lack of planning. Why compare to football where there’s no play off, neither Comets or Lakeside would have finished above 2nd. There’s no way speedway can be compared to football, guests etc..

Edited November 4, 2018 by comet49

[racers and royals]

56 minutes ago, comet49 said:

Don’t forget that the original Lakeside league match was cancelled after Dan Bewley got injured and the first double header of Shield and League rerun was cancelled cos of rain. Nothing to do with lack of planning. Why compare to football where there’s no play off, neither Comets or Lakeside would have finished above 2nd. There’s no way speedway can be compared to football, guests etc..

Nothing to do with lack of planning !!! I hope you are joking( i am not blaming Workington solely but the other championship clubs and the BSPA equally) Between the beginning of the season(March 15th) and season end there were 33 weeks- i would be interested to know how many home fixtures did Workington have and how many rain offs ??

Edited November 4, 2018 by racers and royals

[comet49]

13 minutes ago, racers and royals said:

Nothing to do with lack of planning !!! I hope you are joking( i am not blaming workington solely but the other championship clubs and the BSPA equally) Between the beginning of the season(March 15th) and season end there were 33 weeks- i would be interested to know how many home fixtures did Workington have and how many rain offs ??

Yeh ok, I was talking about that meeting, we did have free weeks when teams wouldn’t come. it’s pretty rare for a fixture to be cancelled after an early injury. Hope Dan can make a good recovery. The final league fixture had/has no bearing on who won trophies and I don’t believe higher positions in the league table are rewarded. At least we had dry (yeah COLD) weather and were able to run the other meetings. 

Edited November 4, 2018 by comet49

[Hunters]

On ‎10‎/‎13‎/‎2018 at 3:41 PM, 4thbender said:

Now THERE's a coincidence!... With regard to "root and branch investigations," I've just come across this on a lesser visited forum on this site: THE PATHFINDER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 2018". I don't know who's written this but it has the appearance of something that could have been commissioned by the sport's authorities. It identifies all the major challenges facing the sport in the UK, contains a detailed analysis of speedway's current assets, and makes recommendations as to the way forward in 2019 (which all look eminently do-able.)

In short, it seems to recommend two leagues: a National League and an 18/20-team unified Premier/championship league, which it calls the British Speedway Champions League. Each of the teams in this league will sign a core of five premiership/championship riders plus a "reserve" team of 3 riders made up mainly from National League doublers-up. At the start of each match the 3 "reserve" riders from each team will compete in a 'B' team match over three heats, from which managers can then select two riders to make up the nos. 6 and 7 in the team proper. The League match will then follow over 13 heats. If I'm reading it correctly, guests and R/R will be completely outlawed!

The report then goes on to make some astute observations about where UK speedway is letting itself down as a marketable product and gives some really practical signposts as to how it might improve its marketing potential.

Overall it contains some radical and controversial suggestions but my view is that it reads like a breath of fresh air. If promoters have really started to think along these lines then our sport may yet even manage to drag itself into the 21st century.

THERE COULD BE HOPE EVEN YET! 

And destroy the National League  in the process !!

Their top riders constantly missing, taking part in a cobbled up reserve qualification set up.

If this is the sort of thinking then the NL clubs must withdraw from the BSPA and register the league independently with the SCB.   No doubling up and any rider signing for a NL club who then wants to move to a PL/CL club during the year  is excluded from participating in the NL for two years and if coming back gets a high 'experience' assessed average.

The NL are developing a really good all British set up despite the best efforts of the BSPA to use it for their own ends.  The NL must go independent to get out of the BSPA clutches.

[4thbender]

On ‎10‎/‎31‎/‎2018 at 1:47 PM, Bluenose said:

To add to all that has been written....

Is there not a rule that ALL teams must ride all there fixtures

Champs   Workington and Eastbourne did not ride their quota! (are they going to be disciplined??)

Workington home to Lakeside, Lakeside could of finished 2nd if they had won away,(records are records!!)

Eastbourne home to Mildenhall result would not change league positions.

It is unfair to away teams because of lack of planning.

Surely this should be sorted first !!!!

Imagine Man city playing 1 game less and Man utd winning the league by 2 points.

Fixtures set at start of season must have set open dates to run the fixture if postponed!!

Considering the vastly reduced number of fixtures this year, (and the fact that Worky went through almost the whole of May without a home meeting)  it's nothing short of scandalous that they should have failed to complete their fixtures. The fault lies entirely with the SCB and the promoters for the totally dysfunctional league programme which was unfit for purpose from day1 of the season.