Jump to content
British Speedway Forum

Poole Pirates 2021


Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Skidder1 said:

Correct. It was quoted by Danny Ford in his public explanation of the Smetana situation after the initial 7-day facility was finished.

Is this actually a rule or have the management committee just permitted it citing special Covid circumstances?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/25/2021 at 3:15 PM, eric i said:

Its another new rule without telling the fans.

It's not a new rule. It's just never been used before.

I think the argument comes from the fact Poole have signed a ghost on an assessed average of 5.00 to replace the outgoing assessed 4.00 meaning a difference in 0.5 in obtaining a guest. If the 4.00 average was used Poole would only be allowed a 3.00 replacement under this regulation.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/25/2021 at 10:17 PM, Marshall07 said:

It's been in place since 2020 to stop teams having to field a NL rider if their no.1 is missing

 

 

Screenshot_2021-07-25-22-19-28-51_e2d5b3f32b79de1d45acd1fad96fbb0f.jpg

So we have a rule/reg that grants a facility for the no facility scenario :rofl:

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, dontforgetthefueltapsbruv said:

So we have a rule/reg that grants a facility for the no facility scenario :rofl:

There's always been a rule stating how a rider is to be replaced should none of the other facilities (and that list is long) be appropriate.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Technik said:

It's not a new rule. It's just never been used before.

I think the argument comes from the fact Poole have signed a ghost on an assessed average of 5.00 to replace the outgoing assessed 4.00 meaning a difference in 0.5 in obtaining a guest. If the 4.00 average was used Poole would only be allowed a 3.00 replacement under this regulation.

 

The no facility rule used to be NL rider only, this is a new rule. I just wish the BSPA would issue a statement when they change the rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Poole being allowed to use a guest rider in place of a rider whom they have sacked or for a rider they haven't yet signed, seems nonsensical to me, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who is wondering how Poole manage to get away with doing this?

The logic should surely have been for Poole to sign their Czech rider and be sure of landing him, BEFORE ditching the man he is supposed to have replaced?

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, brianbuck said:

Poole being allowed to use a guest rider in place of a rider whom they have sacked or for a rider they haven't yet signed, seems nonsensical to me, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who is wondering how Poole manage to get away with doing this?

The logic should surely have been for Poole to sign their Czech rider and be sure of landing him, BEFORE ditching the man he is supposed to have replaced?

Poole DID sign him and he was declared in their 1-7 which BSPL approved along with all the paperwork. It was the Czech Govt that changed their Covid travel restrictions the day after that put the cat amongst the pigeons.  The BSPL granted a 7-day facility which is now over but replaced with ruling referred to above.

Edited by Skidder1
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Marshall07 said:

I stand corrected although the rule is still not properly communicated to the fans as it says....... 

'A rider absent for an unauthorised reason can now be replaced by a rider with an average of 2.50 lower than the missing rider.'

and the rulebook says.......... A guest 25% lower that the absent rider.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, eric i said:

I stand corrected although the rule is still not properly communicated to the fans as it says....... 

'A rider absent for an unauthorised reason can now be replaced by a rider with an average of 2.50 lower than the missing rider.'

and the rulebook says.......... A guest 25% lower that the absent rider.

It may have been amended and announced afterwards, but that was the first bit I saw to show the rule was announced at least

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the ruling was brought in based on the fact, cough cough, Redcar had to use an NL 3 average guest for their no1 but this new amendment of 25% less is more appropriate & covers all riders.

  • Like 1
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