g13webb 4,254 Posted February 2, 2015 I cannot believe another sport would be in the situation that British Speedway finds itself in at the moment. With less than 6 weeks to the start of the season there are so many issues to be sorted: 1. Visas and the availability of Non-EU riders 2 Teams still to be completed 3 Priority of DU Riders 4. Clarification of fast track riders replacement rules (replaced as per PL aver like when the clubs selected their FTR or as EL aver. as last year.??).. 5 Rules regarding gardening at the tapes, 6 Race format and the programme of heats. 7 Position of riders in the teams. ( in average order or as the TM places them???) I'm sure there are more things to sort out but this is just naming a few... The clocks ticking............ 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
orion 7,615 Posted February 2, 2015 TNT the ministry of misinformation . 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
T.N.T. 355 Posted February 2, 2015 No problem with that logic except you have POOLE in the top 4 and they are in the same position!! I think your flaw is that you are making assumptions - best to wait until the team is announced. Poole have Holder all but in just awaiting his visa but have Jamowski, Pawlicki, Ward (ban and visa awaiting), Milik, Gracjzoneck, Madsen all assets not signed up and more plus they always get a title contending team together. Like anyone should take TNT's opinions to heart...it's not as if he is correct on much And where do you get only 3 confirmed with Batch?....do the reserves scores not count towards the overall team scores in 2015....have i missed something?! Noy that far off the mark usually but this is predictions and not a statement. There are 5 members of the team and two Fast Track riders, so once the draw was done, each team had FIVE riders to sign TNT the ministry of misinformation . Like ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Red Panda 366 Posted February 2, 2015 Are we any closer to knowing who gets priority with D/U riders? As far as I am aware it is the team that the rider is an asset of gets priority.............so for example Richard Lawson has now gone on a full transfer to Glasgow so they get priority over Lakeside............where as if Josh G signed for Poole they would get priority over Somerset............ RP Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mdmc82 2,878 Posted February 2, 2015 As far as I am aware it is the team that the rider is an asset of gets priority.............so for example Richard Lawson has now gone on a full transfer to Glasgow so they get priority over Lakeside............where as if Josh G signed for Poole they would get priority over Somerset............ RP Sorry, understand that part but what if not a asset of either club. That's what hasn't yet been confirmed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
T.N.T. 355 Posted February 2, 2015 Must have missed that bit, didn't Lakeside only recently buy him from Workington ? As far as I am aware it is the team that the rider is an asset of gets priority.............so for example Richard Lawson has now gone on a full transfer to Glasgow so they get priority over Lakeside Sorry, understand that part but what if not a asset of either club. That's what hasn't yet been confirmed. Think it is still the PL club that gets priority Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mdmc82 2,878 Posted February 2, 2015 Must have missed that bit, didn't Lakeside only recently buy him from Workington ? Lakeside failed to buy him. Was only announced today about him being brought by Glasgow. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
T.N.T. 355 Posted February 2, 2015 Lakeside failed to buy him. Was only announced today about him being brought by Glasgow. Didn't Lakeside get priority over Lawson last season ? If he was not an asset, those points scored should have been taken out of those meetings. OK - Lakeside fell way short and looking at their results there wasn't many close matches, but had Lakeside of snatched fourth place or even a team lost fourth place because Lawson scored enough to stop them getting three points, this can't happen again. Assets have to be assets and not awaiting payment. If the full transfer fee has not been paid then they are still assets of their former clubs. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TonyE 822 Posted February 3, 2015 Didn't Workington 'exercise' a buy back clause put in the original sale contract to Lakeside? Do not think it is an instance of Lakeside not paying - they do not do things like that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SCB 0 Posted February 3, 2015 Im guessing Glasgow started to splash their cash and Workington saw the buy back clause as a great way to get an OTT price for Lawson fro Glasgow. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ouch 1,191 Posted February 3, 2015 I blame agents! 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
INCOGNITO 357 Posted February 3, 2015 Surely if you buy back a rider you use him instead of having loan riders Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skidder1 7,634 Posted February 3, 2015 Surely if you buy back a rider you use him instead of having loan riders I'll just check that with Swindon.............??! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EnglishRoundabout 1,752 Posted February 3, 2015 Ha! That's rich! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
T.N.T. 355 Posted February 7, 2015 Don't see Meidzinski making Swindon play off contenders so will stick with them not getting in the top four but may just beat Leicester (or Wolves) to miss out on the wooden spoon. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
