PHILIPRISING Posted October 24, 2019 Report Share Posted October 24, 2019 48 minutes ago, Flappy said: 45 average for me. AVERAGES are just numbers on a piece of paper. This isn't a computer game. Riders are human beings, averages go up and down. And if a team like Peterborough are 10 points adrift of the limit trying to sign one rider to fit that void isn't sensible, practical or even necessary. Their team building options increase not decrease and can enable them to work within a budget. At the very least the notion of being able to keep a team from one season to another should be elementary. 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILIPRISING Posted October 24, 2019 Report Share Posted October 24, 2019 32 minutes ago, DC2 said: That bit doesn’t work for me. If Swindon re-sign the same seven riders their team limit, as the highest one, should be the new limit. If they do not re-sign the same seven then it goes down to the next highest averaged team to see if they want to sign the same seven and so on until we get to 42 in default. The main reason for the rule would be to encourage rider and fan loyalty. In the hope that fan numbers rise and the sport can survive. Equalisation would be possible if appropriate riders were available for the other clubs but it would be secondary to the principle of encouraging loyalty. NOT as I see it ... for 2020 the limit is the figure attained by Swindon this year. They can keep that team but, if they wish to change it, cannot exceed it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC2 Posted October 24, 2019 Report Share Posted October 24, 2019 48 minutes ago, Skidder1 said: The final averages of the 7 Premiership teams is approx 42.5. Also the average of the top and bottom clubs is around 42points+. If the average of the top team is taken ie 46+ then its not simply a question of rider availability for the other 6 (or 7) teams building to that level. Its also about cost!! They don’t have to build to that level. All but Boro were competitive this year and Swindon hardly won any away matches and didn’t run away with the league. So there’s no case for saying that every club would have to sign Vaculik, Zmarzlik or Dudek and risk bankruptcy to be competitive. One or two marginally better riders could overturn Swindon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC2 Posted October 24, 2019 Report Share Posted October 24, 2019 2 minutes ago, PHILIPRISING said: NOT as I see it ... for 2020 the limit is the figure attained by Swindon this year. They can keep that team but, if they wish to change it, cannot exceed it. I don’t agree. You’re making it about figures regardless of riders and consequently you’re not encouraging loyalty. What’s the point in allowing Swindon to sign seven new riders to 46.34 rather than to 42? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Method Posted October 24, 2019 Report Share Posted October 24, 2019 15 minutes ago, DC2 said: I don’t agree. You’re making it about figures regardless of riders and consequently you’re not encouraging loyalty. What’s the point in allowing Swindon to sign seven new riders to 46.34 rather than to 42? Interesting point. Kepping the same riders for continuity and loyalty relies on the clubs wanting to do so. If a team could continually sign 7 new riders up to their previous years average and continue to improve exponentially - you could end up with a 1-7 of GP only riders in theory. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dontforgetthefueltapsbruv Posted October 24, 2019 Report Share Posted October 24, 2019 1 hour ago, Reliant Robin said: Is this perhaps not the main point? Swindon's team that finished the 2019 season was built within a 42.5 point limit, so why could they not be allowed continuity, even if the points limit remains at 42.5? The Swindon team that finished 2019 wasnt built to the 42.50 limit It involved mid season changes bringing in perceived better riders at the right time to replace under performing riders before their averages dropped whilst the others were increasing their averages If EVERY declaration meant having to return to the 42.50 limit regardless of whether it was a single, double or more change switch then you point would ring true 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foamfence Posted October 24, 2019 Report Share Posted October 24, 2019 I think it's more important to sign the right riders, rather than whatever their average might be. If you sign seven riders who are on the up and they average 45, they'll beat seven riders who are on the way down or static and who can't be gelled with enthusiasm and unity but also average 45. The former generally costs more to assemble though. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevebrum Posted October 24, 2019 Report Share Posted October 24, 2019 I’d prefer a much higher limit at the start of the season and 42.5 should be a minimum. However the lack of riders wanting to come may mean some teams might not be able too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grachan Posted October 24, 2019 Author Report Share Posted October 24, 2019 28 minutes ago, dontforgetthefueltapsbruv said: The Swindon team that finished 2019 wasnt built to the 42.50 limit It involved mid season changes bringing in perceived better riders at the right time to replace under performing riders before their averages dropped whilst the others were increasing their averages If EVERY declaration meant having to return to the 42.50 limit regardless of whether it was a single, double or more change switch then you point would ring true Exactly. that is caused by having a low limit. The teams that are able to make their changes at the right time and use the averages to their advantages can rise to the top, whilst, at the same time, other sides can find themselves restricted by the same averages. Once Jensen came in for Swindon and put 3 points on his starting average and rise to the fourth best rider in the league, the other sides were helpless because they couldn't bring in someone to match that as the averages topped them. Ipswich, for example, brought Iversen in, but had to bring Sergeant in at the bottom to allow it. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reliant Robin Posted October 24, 2019 Report Share Posted October 24, 2019 31 minutes ago, dontforgetthefueltapsbruv said: The Swindon team that finished 2019 wasnt built to the 42.50 limit It involved mid season changes bringing in perceived better riders at the right time to replace under performing riders before their averages dropped whilst the others were increasing their averages If EVERY declaration meant having to return to the 42.50 limit regardless of whether it was a single, double or more change switch then you point would ring true It wasn't built within the points limit through 2019? I'm sure that would have been picked up somewhere along the line. Swindon averages effective 18th July - total of 42.39. Same team that finished the season 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robins les Posted October 24, 2019 Report Share Posted October 24, 2019 3 hours ago, MattK said: There are two problems I foresee with that. Firstly, are there riders available for team to strengthen up? Take Peterborough, they finished 8.51 points under Swindon. Who are these mythical 10+ point riders who didn't ride in Britain in 2019, but will next season? Secondly, even if these mythical riders existed, could teams afford them? There possibly be more GP riders available for 2020 as I have seen that quite a few saying that they are riding in Sweden next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foamfence Posted October 24, 2019 Report Share Posted October 24, 2019 Just now, robins les said: There possibly be more GP riders available for 2020 as I have seen that quite a few saying that they are riding in Sweden next year. Really? I understood a few said they aren't. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robins les Posted October 24, 2019 Report Share Posted October 24, 2019 1 minute ago, foamfence said: Really? I understood a few said they aren't. Around 4 or 5 I think. Apparently Sweden are struggling with the crowds now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILIPRISING Posted October 24, 2019 Report Share Posted October 24, 2019 Just now, robins les said: Around 4 or 5 I think. Apparently Sweden are struggling with the crowds now. SWEDEN are struggling but no matter what GP riders don't need to race here. Not everyone is like Jason Doyle who would probably race every night of the week if he could. There are plenty of other good riders who might be tempted to come to the UK . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foamfence Posted October 24, 2019 Report Share Posted October 24, 2019 4 minutes ago, robins les said: Around 4 or 5 I think. Apparently Sweden are struggling with the crowds now. Their biggest mistake has been trying to keep up with the Poles. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILIPRISING Posted October 24, 2019 Report Share Posted October 24, 2019 1 hour ago, DC2 said: They don’t have to build to that level. All but Boro were competitive this year and Swindon hardly won any away matches and didn’t run away with the league. So there’s no case for saying that every club would have to sign Vaculik, Zmarzlik or Dudek and risk bankruptcy to be competitive. One or two marginally better riders could overturn Swindon. GOOD point (no pun intended)... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bald Bloke Posted October 24, 2019 Report Share Posted October 24, 2019 3 hours ago, Bagpuss said: Luckily it seems we don’t have to worry about Ford and his rule bending in our league next year I'll believe it when I see it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kickitov Posted October 24, 2019 Report Share Posted October 24, 2019 The limit should be 45.00 points every year. That way you're not diluting the product and everyone has an equal and fair chance of competing. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grachan Posted October 24, 2019 Author Report Share Posted October 24, 2019 18 minutes ago, The Stag said: The limit should be 45.00 points every year. That way you're not diluting the product and everyone has an equal and fair chance of competing. Why 45? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Method Posted October 24, 2019 Report Share Posted October 24, 2019 3 minutes ago, Grachan said: Why 45? The number of race points required to draw? 1 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.