Belle Vue 2022

[PhilTheAce]

53 minutes ago, BV66 said:

Yes it is odd that so far the BSPA have not said anything about BV signing Zagar, is there yet another glitch.

I do not think BV will win anything even with Zagar, who with a 7.5 ish average shows he was nothing special last time he was here. Don't think we will even make the play-offs.

Yeah. Can’t see us winning a match tbh. Changing a guy that was scoring nothing for a guy that will score at least 7 points a meeting won’t change things. 

[Greg]

http://www.speedwaystar.net/news.php?extend.2015.1

 

Seems like its happened 

[TTT]

3 hours ago, BV66 said:

Yes it is odd that so far the BSPA have not said anything about BV signing Zagar, is there yet another glitch.

I do not think BV will win anything even with Zagar, who with a 7.5 ish average shows he was nothing special last time he was here. Don't think we will even make the play-offs.

Belle Vue will win the league if everyone stays fit.

[Steve Irving]

5 hours ago, GregoryM said:

Genuine question - which rules have Belle Vue broken?

You say rules (plural) rather than rule (singular), so I'm assuming you're saying that two or more have been broken.

I'd be interested to know which rules, as the only rule I've seen mentioned that might have been broken is the '25%' rule.

I’ve not checked the exact wording of that rule, but has even this been broken?

As other posters have pointed out, signing a rider on a 28-day contract doesn’t really fit in with the ‘25%’ rule, but Belle Vue are not making a change to their declared 7.

After Jake Allen’s 28-day contract expires Belle Vue have a team vacancy, and so only have a declared 6 rider team.

Matej Zagar comes in to fill that vacancy.

In this scenario, Belle Vue are not ‘dropping’ a permanent rider to bring in another.

So, as such, the 'change' would not even be a 'change' as the '25% rule was intended to prevent I would have thought?

But, if Belle Vue are breaking the rule to fill a vacancy with a different rider to that rider whose temporary contract has expired, then is a team that replaces an injured rider (and, say, out for the season) before 25% of the league fixtures have been completed also breaking the 25% rule?

I suppose only the exact wording would give you the answer on both counts and, even then, is the rule written in such a way that it is open to an interpretation argument?

 

No, an injury replacement is permitted, as per the published rule. Quite obvious really because it would be pretty daft for a team not to be allowed to replace a rider that couldn’t ride through no fault of their own, wouldn’t it? A team that had nearly six months to put together a septet like everyone else, is a different kettle of fish entirely. 

[foreverblue]

3 hours ago, Col said:

But Man City are not the biggest football club.

I was kidding but The biggest football club in the world is probably Real Madrid currently. The biggest in UK is probably still Man Utd but if their trophy cabinet remains empty then they may drop down a bit soon. 

Edited April 26, 2022 by foreverblue

[GregoryM]

35 minutes ago, Steve Irving said:

No, an injury replacement is permitted, as per the published rule. Quite obvious really because it would be pretty daft for a team not to be allowed to replace a rider that couldn’t ride through no fault of their own, wouldn’t it? A team that had nearly six months to put together a septet like everyone else, is a different kettle of fish entirely. 

Thanks for the condescending clarification.

As I said, I hadn't read the rule's wording - and, I agree, it would be pretty daft!! But then, as Patryk Dudek says to begin virtually every interview, ....'this is speedway'. 

I know Mark Lemon attracts quite a lot of criticism - and I haven't agreed with his decision-making all the time - but has he broken any rules by taking so long to finalise his team?

Obviously not if the signing of Matej Zagar has now been ratified.

So, what exactly is the different kettle of fish entirely?

Whilst the lack of concrete information coming out of the NSS might well have been frustrating for the Aces' fans, Lemon obviously chose to bide his time as he wasn't under any 'deadline' pressure to complete the line-up.

We do know there were discussions to try and bring Dan Bewley back into the team (as Lemon himself discussed in full in the matchday programme) and also Tai Woffinden (as Tai himself went into great detail about more than once at the PCMT meeting). It must have then been decided to approach Matej Zagar, but his availability was subject to him obtaining the necessary visa - so Lemon signed another rider, Jake Allen, for a 28-day period to fill the team place whilst this was being processed. All within the rules it would appear.

The League Cup has seemingly been 'sacrificed' so that all this could happen, and the Aces slipped to two home last heat decider defeats. Jake obviously hasn't had the start to the season he would have wanted – but other riders in the team have struggled to find consistent scoring too so far. So, in fairness to him, the losses haven't all been down to Jake's scoring - or lack of.  

Anyway, we now wait to see if / when the other 5 teams start getting the same kind of criticism that has been levelled at Belle Vue, and Mark Lemon in particular.

If we find one or more teams making a change after 25% of their league matches, then maybe they'll attract criticism for signing up poor-performing riders so quickly, and some might say that they should have taken more time to assemble their team in much the same way as Belle Vue have??

[Steve Irving]

1 minute ago, GregoryM said:

Thanks for the condescending clarification.

No problem, you deserved it to be honest with your ridiculous post. 

[GregoryM]

11 minutes ago, Steve Irving said:

No problem, you deserved it to be honest with your ridiculous post. 

What a ridiculous reply!!

Just shown both your replies to a former poster, and he laughed. 'Reminds me why I don't post anymore, this Steve fella is another on this forum who can't debate without resorting to insults'.

[Bruiser]

11 hours ago, foreverblue said:

I thought Manchester City had a reasonably full trophy cabinet! 

I’m from Manchester and not a City or United fan but no doubt United are a way way bigger club than City  …..sits back and waits for the abuse !…true though

its obvious Belle Vue had signed Zagar before the season start and were waiting on visa confirmation so signed Jake Allen on a 28 day contract to cover the delay….I can’t see any rules broken and surely it’s better for all supporters to see a rider like Zagar visit their track …I know I’m really pleased to see riders like Jason Doyle back and riders like Musielak ride here and for me the more real top level elite riders ride here the better

Edited April 26, 2022 by Bruiser

[Col]

All this seems rubbish.

Aces signed Allen on a temporary basis, no league matches have even been ridden. So Allen was only in the team for the Northern League Cup fixtures.

What is the difference in what Belle Vue have done & Kings Lynn? Iversen isn't sticking around much longer is he?

[Spiderman1]

11 hours ago, GregoryM said:

Thanks for the condescending clarification.

As I said, I hadn't read the rule's wording - and, I agree, it would be pretty daft!! But then, as Patryk Dudek says to begin virtually every interview, ....'this is speedway'. 

I know Mark Lemon attracts quite a lot of criticism - and I haven't agreed with his decision-making all the time - but has he broken any rules by taking so long to finalise his team?

Obviously not if the signing of Matej Zagar has now been ratified.

So, what exactly is the different kettle of fish entirely?

Whilst the lack of concrete information coming out of the NSS might well have been frustrating for the Aces' fans, Lemon obviously chose to bide his time as he wasn't under any 'deadline' pressure to complete the line-up.

We do know there were discussions to try and bring Dan Bewley back into the team (as Lemon himself discussed in full in the matchday programme) and also Tai Woffinden (as Tai himself went into great detail about more than once at the PCMT meeting). It must have then been decided to approach Matej Zagar, but his availability was subject to him obtaining the necessary visa - so Lemon signed another rider, Jake Allen, for a 28-day period to fill the team place whilst this was being processed. All within the rules it would appear.

The League Cup has seemingly been 'sacrificed' so that all this could happen, and the Aces slipped to two home last heat decider defeats. Jake obviously hasn't had the start to the season he would have wanted – but other riders in the team have struggled to find consistent scoring too so far. So, in fairness to him, the losses haven't all been down to Jake's scoring - or lack of.  

Anyway, we now wait to see if / when the other 5 teams start getting the same kind of criticism that has been levelled at Belle Vue, and Mark Lemon in particular.

If we find one or more teams making a change after 25% of their league matches, then maybe they'll attract criticism for signing up poor-performing riders so quickly, and some might say that they should have taken more time to assemble their team in much the same way as Belle Vue have??

 

[Spiderman1]

As said before Allen before Etheridge any day of the week,he will sort him self / gear out sooner or later , bad move belle vue AGAIN

[Arch Stanton]

7 hours ago, Col said:

All this seems rubbish.

Aces signed Allen on a temporary basis, no league matches have even been ridden. So Allen was only in the team for the Northern League Cup fixtures.

What is the difference in what Belle Vue have done & Kings Lynn? Iversen isn't sticking around much longer is he?

There is a slight difference between the two. Lynn signed and declared a full 1-7, and then lost one of those declared riders (Kildermand) through injury so picked up an injury replacement short term to cover that rider. 
 

Belle Vue on the other hand signed 6 riders and then signed a rider on a short term deal from the get go while they continued to either play the waiting game and shop around, or wait for a particular target.  
 

Nobody seems to know the full ins and outs of this new 25% rule, and I doubt we’ll ever know. If the rules allow you to declare a full 1-7 by the time of your first league meeting then there isn’t an issue, but if it’s a case of no changes allowed until 25% of league fixtures have been completed once the season in general has started, then signing a rider on a short term deal seems a bit of a cop out. 
 

For example, I know for a fact Chris Louis contacted Klindt again during the winter to enquire about his plans, and he wasn’t available, so built a side without him. Now I know Belle Vue have signed Zagar, if they hadn’t and they’d quickly snapped up Klindt now he’s been dropped by his Polish club and is suddenly available, would that be fair?

Is it right that a club who signs a temporary rider to play the waiting game, suddenly has a bigger pool of riders to choose from than those who built their sides before the season started?

Again I’m not saying Belle Vue have done anything wrong here. The rules might permit any club to change their whole 1-7 if they so wish as long as it’s before the league campaign gets underway. 
 

It would just be nice to get some clarity on this rule, and rules in general! As ever, we all seem to be left in the dark. 

[mikebv]

If the "25% of meetings completed rule" had been clarified publicly then I am sure everyone would understand why things have happened the way they have..

Not like British Speedway to lack clarity in the rules it brings in is it? ..

First time for everything... 

[tocha]

47 minutes ago, Arch Stanton said:

There is a slight difference between the two. Lynn signed and declared a full 1-7, and then lost one of those declared riders (Kildermand) through injury so picked up an injury replacement short term to cover that rider. 
 

Belle Vue on the other hand signed 6 riders and then signed a rider on a short term deal from the get go while they continued to either play the waiting game and shop around, or wait for a particular target.  
 

Nobody seems to know the full ins and outs of this new 25% rule, and I doubt we’ll ever know. If the rules allow you to declare a full 1-7 by the time of your first league meeting then there isn’t an issue, but if it’s a case of no changes allowed until 25% of league fixtures have been completed once the season in general has started, then signing a rider on a short term deal seems a bit of a cop out. 
 

For example, I know for a fact Chris Louis contacted Klindt again during the winter to enquire about his plans, and he wasn’t available, so built a side without him. Now I know Belle Vue have signed Zagar, if they hadn’t and they’d quickly snapped up Klindt now he’s been dropped by his Polish club and is suddenly available, would that be fair?

Is it right that a club who signs a temporary rider to play the waiting game, suddenly has a bigger pool of riders to choose from than those who built their sides before the season started?

Again I’m not saying Belle Vue have done anything wrong here. The rules might permit any club to change their whole 1-7 if they so wish as long as it’s before the league campaign gets underway. 
 

It would just be nice to get some clarity on this rule, and rules in general! As ever, we all seem to be left in the dark. 

The rules just say this:

010.3 TEAM DECLARATIONS Teams must be declared prior to the start of the season.

012.2 A Premiership Transfer Window opens after 25% of the League fixtures are complete and closes when 75% of League fixtures are complete. This permits changes to the team on 2 occasions, except for proven long term injury.

It doesn't say anything about being able to change the initial declaration prior to the league campaign.

[dontforgetthefueltapsbruv]

2 minutes ago, tocha said:

The rules just say this:

010.3 TEAM DECLARATIONS Teams must be declared prior to the start of the season.

012.2 A Premiership Transfer Window opens after 25% of the League fixtures are complete and closes when 75% of League fixtures are complete. This permits changes to the team on 2 occasions, except for proven long term injury.

It doesn't say anything about being able to change the initial declaration prior to the league campaign.

Which by that means Allen can't be replaced as he is not injured......

He was in the declaration prior to the start of the season therefore the regulations should apply

[tocha]

18 minutes ago, dontforgetthefueltapsbruv said:

Which by that means Allen can't be replaced as he is not injured......

He was in the declaration prior to the start of the season therefore the regulations should apply

Well that's how I read it.

On a more general note it would be helpful to know why this rule has been introduced, for what purpose and why it is restricted to just the Premiership.

Edited April 27, 2022 by tocha

[tellboy]

8 minutes ago, dontforgetthefueltapsbruv said:

Which by that means Allen can't be replaced as he is not injured......

He was in the declaration prior to the start of the season therefore the regulations should apply

So as Kildemand is injured,Lynn can take Zagar from under Belle Vue's nose

Think Lynn are sorted anyway

[gazzac]

12 minutes ago, tocha said:

The rules just say this:

010.3 TEAM DECLARATIONS Teams must be declared prior to the start of the season.

012.2 A Premiership Transfer Window opens after 25% of the League fixtures are complete and closes when 75% of League fixtures are complete. This permits changes to the team on 2 occasions, except for proven long term injury.

It doesn't say anything about being able to change the initial declaration prior to the league campaign.

I'm not a reading the rules type of person, but if these are the only rules on the subject pretty much nailed on BV have adheared to the rules as written. I only watch Premiership on the TV,  but with the lack of top line riders over here, I'd still rather see Zagar here than not, even though with age past his best, but still something of a draw for both sets of fans.

[False dawn]

It's slightly strange that Belle Vue announced that Matej had been signed on Monday and there has been no news of this (including in the weekly round-up) or a new team declaration on the BSPL website.