National League Agm

[Islander15 1,062]

For me the only changes I would like to see are;

 

Limit the amount of times a team is allowed to use R/R. i.e twice home and twice away. Then the rest of the time the number 8's have to be used.

Treat the number 8's like an actual reserve so that they can take any of the rides a reserve would take not just the R/R rides.

If teams are required to have a number 8 they might as well be pushed towards using them otherwise its a pointless role.

 

Other than that the current rules look alright to me. Not sure how many occasions the tactical rides have actually effected the overall result of a match this season?

 

Fingers crossed for a 12 team league, 38 point limit would do for me and the pointless National Trophy to be dropped.

I understand why you would drop the tactical ride for home teams and it's the only reason that Mildenhall beat Buxton at home this year.

 

If the Isle of Wight and Belle Vue are accepted I wouldn't be surprised if there's not enough teams that want extra fixtures for the National Trophy to run.

[uk_martin 1,606]

How about this as an alternative to the T/S - T/R situation? How about teams having the option to taking a #8 and even a #9 with them and having the option of using them as the tactical substitutes?

It replicates what happens in other sports whereby (say in football) the top 11 start the game and the others are on the bench ready to come on if a player that starts is ineffective for whatever reason.

Ok so there may be a difference in initial quality between a teams #7 and those who haven't made it into a teams 1-7 but what is there to lose if a rider has a duff night? There's usually a rider or two who only get 0 or 1 point so why not blood a youngster in their place? It is still a development league no matter what some say. It serves a purpose especially if the next JPB is given a chance as a #8 or #9 a bit earlier than by just waiting for someone to get injured to get a guest booking.

 

So what's the difference between a #6 and #7 and a #8 and #9 you may ask? Well, the #6 & #7 would be contracted riders and would have to have their allotment of rides. They would be subject to CMA's too. My idea is that the #8 and #9 could be non-contracted "guests" on assessed 3.00 averages (permanently for the whole season) picked from a pool of the best MDL (etc) riders who are making good progress and who may be ready to make the breakthrough. Additionally, there would be no compulsion on the teams to use them. It would be a tactical decision on whether to use them, subject to the match score and the team managers discretion. The teams will have the options on whether to have them in their line-ups or not, so those who can't afford it won't have to pay extra expenses, but on the other hand those who want to keep their options open can do so (tactical or what?) Imagine the benefit to the next Jack Parkinson Blackburn of getting rides from May and June onwards instead of having to wait until the season's curtain call?

Edited December 1, 2015 by uk martin

[catinthehat 115]

Thats all great about taking extra riders to meetings but thats all again a cost for the clubs, Lets say that Eastbourne are at Buxton and they bring someone from Exeter or from Cumbria, who then has to pay the travel then if that rider wants to turn up he will want at least a little bit towards his racing that day so bingo you have another 2 bills to pay.

 

seems a great idea on paper if you have local lads to the track to put in at 8 / 9 but who knows they wont be popular with the home teams to ride week in and week out to score against them?

 

maybe i am missing the point.

[Sings4Speedway 3,246]

I think the above posts are similar to what I was saying. If the number 8's are required then give them the same riding rights as a number 6/7. i.e they can take the ride when someone touches the tapes / misses the two minutes, be the reserve rider switch if someone is under performing and take the RR rides.

Im sure like most people on the sidelines I find it incredibly tedious waiting around for the RR rider who has been given extra time as they also appeared in the heat before.

[waco 1,026]

with costs needing to be kept to a minimum these fine ideas are not going to happen.

[Sings4Speedway 3,246]

with costs needing to be kept to a minimum these fine ideas are not going to happen.

Most likely right. I would still like to see the end of RR in the NL though. If its a development league it seems an immense shame for teams to repeatedly track 6 riders.

[TMW 533]

Most likely right. I would still like to see the end of RR in the NL though. If its a development league it seems an immense shame for teams to repeatedly track 6 riders.

It was originally bought in to stop teams strengthening up. In the NL riders can be absent for no reason and it can lead to riders being 'rested' for important meetings

[teaboy279 1,038]

The national trophy is a great way to get competitive meetings for stand alone clubs so I would like both for it to continue and for us to enter again.

The national trophy is a great way to get competitive meetings for stand alone clubs so I would like both for it to continue and for us to enter again.

[Hunters 210]

Mildenhall have announced Halsey which takes their total to 28.66. With 3 more to come they will be at least 37.66. Presumably they already know the points limit is 38 or more. So it is a done deal before the meeting starts.

[arnieg 3,626]

Mildenhall have announced Halsey which takes their total to 28.66. With 3 more to come they will be at least 37.66. Presumably they already know the points limit is 38 or more. So it is a done deal before the meeting starts.

Bacon, Ruddock, a three pointer and a 40 point limit would be my guess then.

[Hunters 210]

Bacon, Ruddock, a three pointer and a 40 point limit would be my guess then.

And that would open the door for a BWD return but I fear there are not enough riders with sufficient points to make up 12 teams. I wonder how many would have to come in some way under the limit and create an unbalanced league.

[John Leslie 3,213]

Bacon, Ruddock, a three pointer and a 40 point limit would be my guess then.

Thought Bacon was on the move because he didn't want the awkward travelling to Mildenhall anymore?

 

Coventry on his doorstep or the new Belle Vue just up the road might suit him better?

[Sings4Speedway 3,246]

Bacon, Ruddock, a three pointer and a 40 point limit would be my guess then.

Bacon already confirmed as signed elsewhere but not yet released who. I suspect Ruddick is nailed on if he can sort his equipment out. Only other certainty is that it looks like no place for Kingston.

 

And that would open the door for a BWD return but I fear there are not enough riders with sufficient points to make up 12 teams. I wonder how many would have to come in some way under the limit and create an unbalanced league.

BWD cant return until his PL average drops below 4.

[Hunters 210]

Bacon already confirmed as signed elsewhere but not yet released who. I suspect Ruddick is nailed on if he can sort his equipment out. Only other certainty is that it looks like no place for Kingston.

 

BWD cant return until his PL average drops below 4.

Now I am confused, He does not have a PL average,they may say that he would come in to the Pl on a 5 but the same applied last year, in fact I think they said 7 originally. As he has not signed for a PL team I don't see why he cannot continue for a second season where he is.

[Sings4Speedway 3,246]

Now I am confused, He does not have a PL average,they may say that he would come in to the Pl on a 5 but the same applied last year, in fact I think they said 7 originally. As he has not signed for a PL team I don't see why he cannot continue for a second season where he is.

 

From the whispers of others / postings on his facebook page he has a PL deal done so would be unable to double up/down.