Jump to content
British Speedway Forum
covlad459

Coventry 99 % Certain To Be In Elite Next Season Acording To Sandu

Recommended Posts

I have no idea if that is right or not, I wasn't following the BSF then but if people were saying that they were plainly wrong, none of the fans I meet thought that in fact there was much doom and gloom about not having a No.1 and in fact he finished top of the BV averages with a CMA below 7.

 

According to BSPA he started on 7.6 and remeber that at that time 9 was regarded as the minimum for a No.1.

Unfortunatly, I can't find 2006 figures but in 2007, only 9 riders achieved an 8 or more average, the same as in 2010. Without checking every season, I'd estimate it to be about the same every season. Go back and bit and it's higher just because bonus points were included.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a strong argument at the moment for not buying any assets at all because, as has been discussed on here, the whole system is probably illegal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunatly, I can't find 2006 figures but in 2007, only 9 riders achieved an 8 or more average, the same as in 2010. Without checking every season, I'd estimate it to be about the same every season. Go back and bit and it's higher just because bonus points were included.

There were 11 in 2006.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, it's totally arbitrary - in 2008 there were a zillion. Another reason, perhaps, to go League-owned assets with rider control...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There were 11 in 2006.

as speedway points are divided up mathematically it is likely that the amount of 9 point [or thereabouts] at the end of a season would be about the same as the number of teams, in the same way as the amount that finish on 4 or less would be about 2 per team. thats based on the 7 who actually finish for each team. look at the prem. without looking i would bet there are about the same 8.5+ riders as there were teams in the league

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

answer my question then.

 

About where I got the info about Coventry signing Hans and Harris?

 

Simple deduction. Mick Brately said on the radio that he tried to sign Hans but Hans had already signed a deal with a Midlands club. Doesn't take much from there.

 

Plus I have also heard it from other sources.

 

How would Coventry fans feel if Sandhu forced the BSPA to change the rule under threat of legal action, and were the only club to use two riders above 8, whilst the rest stuck by the agreed rules and had one whilst a club or two had no number one? Would they be happy or embarrassed?

 

I can guess the answer.

Edited by Steve Shovlar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About where I got the info about Coventry signing Hans and Harris?

 

Simple deduction. Mick Brately said on the radio that he tried to sign Hans but Hans had already signed a deal with a Midlands club. Doesn't take much from there.

 

Plus I have also heard it from other sources.

 

How would Coventry fans feel if Sandhu forced the BSPA to change the rule under threat of legal action, and were the only club to use two riders above 8, whilst the rest stuck by the agreed rules and had one whilst a club or two had no number one? Would they be happy or embarrassed?

 

I can guess the answer.

 

If what you speculate is true, then i don't think it would be fair to clubs working to a one 8+ rider rule if Coventry tracked 2. But we are yet to see any evidence of this and i really find it hard to believe it would happen. But if it did, it would be unfair.

 

But my other point was that you stated it unfair that Belle Vue can't get a number one. My response was this:

 

You say it's unfair that Belle Vue can't get a number one, well this highlights the problem with this rider sharing scheme; when all the other clubs have taken their chosen 8.01 riders, this leaves a very limited choice to those left. Supposing HA was the only rider over 8.00 left and Belle Vue were the only team left without an 8.00+ rider, it then becomes something of an arranged marriage whereby Hans is told he has to ride for Belle Vue or miss out completely, and Belle Vue are told you must have Hans in your team or be understrength. What if Hans can get a better deal somewhere else and can't afford the terms Belle Vue are offering? What if Belle Vue don't want Hans?

 

Basically the system is flawed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hans wouldn't get a better deal elsewhere if BV were the only club without an over 8 rider. It is of course all hypothetical but as Hans apparently wants to ride in the UK and BV agreed terms with him this year they probably could for 2011. If they couldn't then I think they would have to go without a No.1. as there would be no other option. (I am conveniently forgetting Zagar). :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It makes sense to share the number 1's around and the idea of Coventry having 2 while BV go without is madness. However, I don't like the idea that Wolves can have a top 2 that come to 17, while Coventry can only come to nearer 15. Maybe the limit should be on the top 2 or 3 raher than just the number 1?

 

 

 

 

 

 

It makes no difference The Aces would have a more balanced team whereas a team with 2 top riders would have to make up for that lower in the riding order.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About where I got the info about Coventry signing Hans and Harris?

 

Simple deduction. Mick Brately said on the radio that he tried to sign Hans but Hans had already signed a deal with a Midlands club. Doesn't take much from there.

 

Plus I have also heard it from other sources.

 

How would Coventry fans feel if Sandhu forced the BSPA to change the rule under threat of legal action, and were the only club to use two riders above 8, whilst the rest stuck by the agreed rules and had one whilst a club or two had no number one? Would they be happy or embarrassed?

 

I can guess the answer.

Who's to say Hans didn't sign instead of Harris though ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't care if Cov had 4 riders with plus 8 point averages they would have an extremelly weak bottom end. What gets me is if there is a team out there struggling to get an out and out number 1 and can't because 1 team is hogging 2 that's simply out of order. If BV do find one then great. Cov will definately have a couple of 3 pointers at reserve if they go with Hans, Harris and Kennett.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It makes no difference The Aces would have a more balanced team whereas a team with 2 top riders would have to make up for that lower in the riding order.

 

Spot on.

Why not use the rule another way, say all teams must track a 4+ pt reserve?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 8+ rule is a stupid one to make without knowing first how many 8+ riders you're going to have in the league. It only works when there's a large surplus of 8+ riders. You can never be sure who's going to sign for 2011 until they've actually signed. What if there don't turn out to be enough? Are Kings Lynn going to be asked to give N-K Iversen to the club without one? Ludicrous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It does make a difference not having a No.1 with the 15 heat formula and the double points rule. You are always at a disavantage in heats 13 and 15 and not only can the double points be used effectively against you but you also have little chance of using it successfully yourself. You may have an advantage in other heats but I do not think it balances out. The No.1 is alo a drawcard and the lack of one affects attendances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It makes no difference The Aces would have a more balanced team whereas a team with 2 top riders would have to make up for that lower in the riding order.

 

Anyone with a knowledge of the sport would know it makes a hell of a lot of difference. :rolleyes:

 

Coventry V BV.

Heats 13 and 15 would be easy nailed on 5-1's to Coventry against a balanced team with a 7 pointer the best rider against Harris and Hans.

 

Totally unfair to a club without a number one and totally unfair to the rest of the league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×

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