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

[ImpartialOne 160]

I disagree, as usual. I think it opens up the league so that the have don't "have it" all their own way. Teams with rich owners can just buy up the top riders and dominate the league for years. the one over 8 rule stops this happening and the sport is better for it, without any doubt at all.

 

Coventry are trying to have Harris and Hans in their lineup, which is against the rules voted in at the AGM. Do you think that is fair when Belle Vue can't get a number one?

 

Do you think it is fair that Coventry have two number ones yet every other club abides by the rules and only has one, or none?

 

First of all, where have you got the information that Coventry want both HA and Harris?

 

Secondly, 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?

Edited December 27, 2010 by ImpartialOne

[scribbler 213]

I disagree, as usual. I think it opens up the league so that the have don't "have it" all their own way. Teams with rich owners can just buy up the top riders and dominate the league for years. the one over 8 rule stops this happening and the sport is better for it, without any doubt at all.

 

Coventry are trying to have Harris and Hans in their lineup, which is against the rules voted in at the AGM. Do you think that is fair when Belle Vue can't get a number one?

 

Do you think it is fair that Coventry have two number ones yet every other club abides by the rules and only has one, or none?

 

But surely it's good managerial skills to have riders of good quality (8 points plus)who want to ride for your team...Making a competitve team requires skill as much as money.

 

Poole had two riders 8+ but chose (?) to offload/loan one - perhaps to be seen as not having two... - coincidence...

 

Perhaps the League is 'opened up' by 'sharing' assets around but I see it as weakening an already weak product. Speedway is supposed to be a competitive sport. Evening out teams lessens that competitivness and makes it more of a 'show sport.' Sport does not require fairness - but it does require competitivness to be a sport.

[ImpartialOne 160]

But surely it's good managerial skills to have riders of good quality (8 points plus)who want to ride for your team...Making a competitve team requires skill as much as money.

 

Poole had two riders 8+ but chose (?) to offload/loan one - perhaps to be seen as not having two... - coincidence...

 

Perhaps the League is 'opened up' by 'sharing' assets around but I see it as weakening an already weak product. Speedway is supposed to be a competitive sport. Evening out teams lessens that competitivness and makes it more of a 'show sport.' Sport does not require fairness - but it does require competitivness to be a sport.

 

i agree, all this rule does is make speedway a pre-determined farce. On top of punishing teams and riders for being too successful we already have jokers (the clue is in the title) and golden tacticals to make the product look more interesting. What next? Maybe a rider who wins a race should have to swap bikes with the opposition? Oh god, BSPA i was only joking!

[Steve Shovlar 10,439]

Sport does not require fairness - but it does require competitivness to be a sport.

 

So tell me how is Coventry V Belle Vue competitive when Hans and Harris lineup for Coventry against Belle Vue number one Hougaard or say, Kylmakorpi?

 

For a sport to be competitive it must have teams of similar strengths otherwise we will end up with the same two or three teams winning the league every year and the rest making up the numbers. Whilst this may work OK in football, in speedway the sport needs the trophies to be passed around a little. Even I, as a Poole fans, would think it not great if we won the league for the next 5 years on the bounce.

 

If Hans doesn't want to ride for BV and there is no room at Coventry, then he misses out and no one uses him. But Coventry don't gain an advantage over the other teams by having two number ones.

[ImpartialOne 160]

So tell me how is Coventry V Belle Vue competitive when Hans and Harris lineup for Coventry against Belle Vue number one Hougaard or say, Kylmakorpi?

 

For a sport to be competitive it must have teams of similar strengths otherwise we will end up with the same two or three teams winning the league every year and the rest making up the numbers. Whilst this may work OK in football, in speedway the sport needs the trophies to be passed around a little. Even I, as a Poole fans, would think it not great if we won the league for the next 5 years on the bounce.

 

If Hans doesn't want to ride for BV and there is no room at Coventry, then he misses out and no one uses him. But Coventry don't gain an advantage over the other teams by having two number ones.

 

answer my question then.

[Aces51 2,778]

Can Belle Vue afford a number one?

 

Apart from 2007, when they couldn't find one, they always have so I can't see why not in 2011.

[alan_boon 1]

Apart from 2007, when they couldn't find one, they always have so I can't see why not in 2011.

That they own, not a loaner...

[Aces51 2,778]

First of all, where have you got the information that Coventry want both HA and Harris?

 

Secondly, 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?

The 8.01 rule was designed to cater for 8EL teams. No problem finding one with that number, only if everyone votes to let Cov & P'brough back in.

[SCB 0]

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?

 

 

 

BV started 2007 with a number 1, this forum was full of BV fans telling us that Stead was a number 1, plus he did start the year on 8+ didn't he?

Edited December 27, 2010 by SCB

[alan_boon 1]

The 8.01 rule was designed to cater for 8EL teams. No problem finding one with that number, only if everyone votes to let Cov & P'brough back in.

Given that it was (apparently) one of the issues that Coventry & Peterborough walked over, it was brought in for 9 teams - Kasprzak, Harris, Andersen, Bjerre, Zagar, Nicholls, Lindgren, Holder, Richardson.

[Aces51 2,778]

That they own, not a loaner...

I am sure that they could but it is wiser to keep any funds at the moment in the hope that the new stadium is approved. Why should they buy one anyway, as far as I know Coventry didn't buy KK last year, Eastbourne have not bought Pedersen nor Swindon, Nicholls. If rumour is correct and Andersen rides for Coventry, will they be buying him?

[alan_boon 1]

I am sure that they could but it is wiser to keep any funds at the moment in the hope that the new stadium is approved. Why should they buy one anyway, as far as I know Coventry didn't buy KK last year, Eastbourne have not bought Pedersen nor Swindon, Nicholls. If rumour is correct and Andersen rides for Coventry, will they be buying him?

It's just a bit wonky when clubs are forced to buy riders (Kennett comes to mind) and others expect to borrow every single year. Yes, the stadium is important, but if you can't compete on the track then it's no use at all - look at Darlington, for example. Better to, as some have suggested, drop down into the PL while you get your new track sorted, or secure the use of a foreign number one you can actually call your own.

[Aces51 2,778]

 

BV started 2007 with a number 1, this forum was full of BV fans telling us that Stead was a number 1, plus he did start the year on 8+ didn't he?

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.

Edited December 27, 2010 by Aces51

[Aces51 2,778]

It's just a bit wonky when clubs are forced to buy riders (Kennett comes to mind) and others expect to borrow every single year. Yes, the stadium is important, but if you can't compete on the track then it's no use at all - look at Darlington, for example. Better to, as some have suggested, drop down into the PL while you get your new track sorted, or secure the use of a foreign number one you can actually call your own.

Problem is no-one can identify a foreign No.1 who is willing to race here at the rates on offer in the EL.

 

If you applied your reasoning to all clubs then B'ham, KL and Eastbourne would be joining us in the PL so not much of an EL left.

[alan_boon 1]

Problem is no-one can identify a foreign No.1 who is willing to race here at the rates on offer in the EL.

 

If you applied your reasoning to all clubs then B'ham, KL and Eastbourne would be joining us in the PL so not much of an EL left.

Birmingham and Kings Lynn are unusual cases, and there should be an argument for Kings Lynn having gotten some cash for Darcy Ward, but Eastbourne have received a large amount of money for Eddy Kennett and not spent it on a number one of their own - that's negligence.