Jump to content
British Speedway Forum

Wolverhampton 2020


R87

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, stevebrum said:

I’m still baffled at the reason given for building 2 points under the limit.

Lots were raving about Nicol last year and seemed destined for better things until he got injured so I can see why signing him was a good thing. However doing so at the expense of another potential 6 point rider (Nicholls a perfect example) seems beyond crazy still.

On paper it’s still a team with great potential and keeping 6 of the 7 riders from a previous season that made the play offs should be applauded as a success but we probably could have been even stronger so makes little sense.

I believe an argument put forward last nite from the management was that they weren’t sure if Nicol was going to be a 6 or 4 an odd one too. They seemed happy to include a rider really at a 4 point limit in the top flight (at a maximum right now) that could have even been a 6 and still would have taken the risk. It really appears that the Nicol signing has seen the management throw all their eggs in this basket that they would have still signed him even on a 6 which already is a huge risk.

It means the emphasis is on the remaining team members to up their game which again whilst highly expected is putting more pressure to support the newest signing.

Think there is great potential for improvement throughout but even still missing out the extra points seems a little crazy.

On a separate note does anyone know if Parrys are still sponsoring next season?

Apparently there is no mention of speedway in the new Parry’s brochure when there usually is??

Yes they are

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, BWitcher said:

Even by speedway fan's standards, that is an absolute ridiculous statement.

None of it has anything to do with last year. You don't take advantage of riders being on lower averages than they should be, by building a team 2pts under the limit. That immediately negates much of the expected increase.

Under no circumstances is it a 'pretty good position' to be in.

If you honestly believe that Nicol at reserve and Becker in the main body of the team is stronger than the likes of Andersen/Harris/Nicholls at 2 and Becker at reserve then you have a point... but you cannot possibly think that.

As regards changes... what changes are we going to make? Chances are as we have said there will be some improvement in the team... that would take us back to the limit, so who are you going to change? You won't want to drop those who have been improved..  so any opportunity to strengthen would likely be gone.

If this team fails miserably you will have a point, I don't believe it will. I'll leave it there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Call me wolfie said:

If this team fails miserably you will have a point, I don't believe it will. I'll leave it there.


It's not a debate, the team could have been SIGNIFICANTLY stronger. 

I don't think it will fail miserably.. but we've made very hard work of it when could have had an amazing team.

One must wonder if you're part of the promotion :)
 

Edited by BWitcher
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, stevebrum said:

....On a separate note does anyone know if Parrys are still sponsoring next season?

Yes they are. See Wolves website.

In fact "Parrys International" are getting more of my money than Speedway these days! Me and the better half did a Liverpool Concert trip with them last week. Well organised and great value for money. (BSPA take note!).

The drivers' have a good style over the coach microphones.  It would be good to hear Tom & Andy cover a speedway meeting :D

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Call me wolfie said:

Yes they are

Thanks. 

2 hours ago, Lefty said:

Yes they are. See Wolves website.

In fact "Parrys International" are getting more of my money than Speedway these days! Me and the better half did a Liverpool Concert trip with them last week. Well organised and great value for money. (BSPA take note!).

The drivers' have a good style over the coach microphones.  It would be good to hear Tom & Andy cover a speedway meeting :D

I only ask because my dads neighbour commented that there is no mention of Wolves speedway in the new brochure. That’s reassuring then! The neighbours always use Parry’s and say how good they are. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they're relying on riders (Thorsell, Morris and Masters) actually putting a great deal more effort into a lot more of there rides, particularly away from home, on many if not most occasions if not leading after the second bend the amount of effort was palpable trying to make it look like they were trying by twisting the neck of the throttle and lifting down the straights or looking down at the engine.

Edited by Eduds1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, DC2 said:

 

Oh, not the “can’t ride our track” argument!  Yawn.

I recall Peter Karlsson saying how fast Klindt was around Monmore and do you really think the others wouldn’t dial in after a handful of matches?

Klint, fast as a rocket when in front, as slow as a tortoise when behind a rider with not a scooby as to what to do.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, BWitcher said:

Totally missing the point. 

The idea of building for the future around two riders is a flawed one in speedway, now more than ever. Should they progress and become top riders, they very likely won't be riding in this country anyway.

You're happy with having a much weaker team than was possible, that's your prerogative.

You're happy yet more fans will stop attending, further weakening the club, that's your prerogative.

 

Up until the time they don't need the UK, any improvement they make will be beneficial to the team. Your argument is flawed as it implies you should never sign a rider with potenrial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Beowulf said:

Up until the time they don't need the UK, any improvement they make will be beneficial to the team. Your argument is flawed as it implies you should never sign a rider with potenrial.

 

No, it’s not flawed.

If you have 7 points to play with why not sign a 7 pointer with potential rather than a 5 pointer?

You’re 2 points up from the start!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whichever way you look at it fielding a team with a points total that is likely to be 2 points less than all the opposition is frankly ludicrous, if not stupid. Any improvement in riders averages takes you up to what the others are starting at !!!! If Nicol is so critical, surely they could signed him as an asset, and used him next year ( I have no idea who owns him).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DC2 said:

 

No, it’s not flawed.

If you have 7 points to play with why not sign a 7 pointer with potential rather than a 5 pointer?

You’re 2 points up from the start!

 

 

5 minutes ago, DC2 said:

 

No, it’s not flawed.

If you have 7 points to play with why not sign a 7 pointer with potential rather than a 5 pointer?

You’re 2 points up from the start!

 

You are going off on a tangent, your original point was about signing 2 riders with potential who will eventually leave the UK scene. My point is that there is still benefit to the team till you reach that situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Beowulf said:

 

You are going off on a tangent, your original point was about signing 2 riders with potential who will eventually leave the UK scene. My point is that there is still benefit to the team till you reach that situation.

 

Was that BWitcher’s point rather than mine?

I have no problem with signing Nicol as one for the future but falling 2 points short in team building is plain stupid.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, DC2 said:

 

Was that BWitcher’s point rather than mine?

I have no problem with signing Nicol as one for the future but falling 2 points short in team building is plain stupid.

Sorry wrong quote, but I agree building 2 points below the points limit is almost a criminal offence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Beowulf said:

 

You are going off on a tangent, your original point was about signing 2 riders with potential who will eventually leave the UK scene. My point is that there is still benefit to the team till you reach that situation.

Not at all, I have no problem with signing riders for the future, there is still a basis for that, but not to the extent of building 2pts short of the limit. 

i.e. it should not be used as a defence for doing that.. which I think we agree on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, BWitcher said:

Even by speedway fan's standards, that is an absolute ridiculous statement.

None of it has anything to do with last year. You don't take advantage of riders being on lower averages than they should be, by building a team 2pts under the limit. That immediately negates much of the expected increase.

Under no circumstances is it a 'pretty good position' to be in.

If you honestly believe that Nicol at reserve and Becker in the main body of the team is stronger than the likes of Andersen/Harris/Nicholls at 2 and Becker at reserve then you have a point... but you cannot possibly think that.

As regards changes... what changes are we going to make? Chances are as we have said there will be some improvement in the team... that would take us back to the limit, so who are you going to change? You won't want to drop those who have been improved..  so any opportunity to strengthen would likely be gone.

If we are up to the 42.5 limit by mid season, with rolling averages, it will mean we are doing very well and cruising into the playoffs, so no need to strengthen. If the team is under performing then there will be scope to strengthen. Who's to say the likes of Woffy, Lindgren etc wouldn't be tempted in for the run in and playoffs, it's happened before, remember.

I fully understand all of your points, they are valid, but it's not a weak team. If they do under perform, there will be room for strengthening.

I would much rather we built to 42.5, but with the riders we have, I am satisfied with the team, and we have 3 great prospects for the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Call me wolfie said:

If we are up to the 42.5 limit by mid season, with rolling averages, it will mean we are doing very well and cruising into the playoffs, so no need to strengthen. If the team is under performing then there will be scope to strengthen. Who's to say the likes of Woffy, Lindgren etc wouldn't be tempted in for the run in and playoffs, it's happened before, remember.

I fully understand all of your points, they are valid, but it's not a weak team. If they do under perform, there will be room for strengthening.

I would much rather we built to 42.5, but with the riders we have, I am satisfied with the team, and we have 3 great prospects for the future.

It doesn't matter how you try and twist it.

If we're up to 42.5 by mid season its a blown opportunity as we should have been around 44.5 and dominating.

There is no justification whatsoever for starting 2pts weaker than necessary... only cost.

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