Grachan 7,362 Posted November 21, 2017 As it goes I think the rule is stupid, setting race nights to allow top riders to come back then limiting them but nothing in Speedway surprises me any more. No rider is owed a job though. Points limits have seen riders out of work since they were introduced. Just because you at Swindon may have to lose Morris or Doyle it doesn't mean another club should have to take the one you don't fancy. I'm not sure whether AGM decisions have to be unanimous or a majority but if it's the former then Swindon have also voted for it too, if it's the latter then who's to say that Rye House voted for it by the same token. Although it doesn't directly say how Swindon voted, it's pretty clear from this that they are against it: http://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/sport/speedway/15672317.Rossiter_to_speak_to_Robins__big_two_after_points_limit_blow/ Swindon were also against Wednesday nights as it clashes with Denmark. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ben91 1,743 Posted November 21, 2017 Nigel Pearson in his video blog said as much. Belle Vue were unable to vote & the bottom 4 teams from this years league voted in favour of limiting a team to one rider over 8. If these teams don't use a rider with an average over 8 they have basically screwed other teams & riders over. Interesting to hear. Not sure why we'd vote in favour of it to be honest. As a team that had two riders finish over eight I'd expect Belle Vue would have voted against too if they had a vote. Although it doesn't directly say how Swindon voted, it's pretty clear from this that they are against it: http://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/sport/speedway/15672317.Rossiter_to_speak_to_Robins__big_two_after_points_limit_blow/ Swindon were also against Wednesday nights as it clashes with Denmark. The fixed race nights have to happen for the good of the sport. It's not unusual to see Danish riders at Wednesday tracks here (Kings Lynn and Poole) so I don't see that clash being an issue. Swindon have also been given leeway to use some Thursday nights. The good of the sport as a whole is more important than one club ultimately. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Grachan 7,362 Posted November 21, 2017 Interesting to hear. Not sure why we'd vote in favour of it to be honest. As a team that had two riders finish over eight I'd expect Belle Vue would have voted against too if they had a vote. The fixed race nights have to happen for the good of the sport. It's not unusual to see Danish riders at Wednesday tracks here (Kings Lynn and Poole) so I don't see that clash being an issue. Swindon have also been given leeway to use some Thursday nights. The good of the sport as a whole is more important than one club ultimately. I AM talking about the good of the sport. It is the lower teams who have voted for themselves rather than the good of the sport. Do you think they voted for Wolves, Swindon and Belle Vue to be forced to shed one of their 8 point riders for the good of the sport as a whole? Of course they didn't. As you say, Swindon can still use Thursdays anyway - so that's not a club issue. It's a common sesnse one, with Denmark on Wednesdays. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ben91 1,743 Posted November 21, 2017 I AM talking about the good of the sport. It is the lower teams who have voted for themselves rather than the good of the sport. Do you think they voted for Wolves, Swindon and Belle Vue to be forced to shed one of their 8 point riders for the good of the sport as a whole? Of course they didn't. As you say, Swindon can still use Thursdays anyway - so that's not a club issue. It's a common sesnse one, with Denmark on Wednesdays. I didn't say the one eight point rider was for the good of the sport. The set race night is. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waco 1,026 Posted November 21, 2017 Could it be that 8 point plus riders cost a fortune and its a money saving exercise,? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Grachan 7,362 Posted November 21, 2017 Could it be that 8 point plus riders cost a fortune and its a money saving exercise,? So the clubs that can't afford an 8 point rider are cutting their own costs by preventing clubs that can afford them from having them? How? 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phillipsr 2,053 Posted November 21, 2017 We know that but as your promotion voted to have only one per team, surely the were thinking of signing them - or were they just putting them out of work?? Bow do you know they did? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Steve0 5,517 Posted November 21, 2017 As well as Poole, who also had an out and out number one lined up. Or doesn't this fit your anti Poole agenda? I don't have an anti-Poole agenda (I even disagreed with orion yesterday when he said he thought Poole was at the root of this rule). I didn't mention Poole because I was talking about riders that were riding for their teams last season. Bow do you know they did? I would refer you to hyabb17's post #180 above. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bagpuss 10,779 Posted November 21, 2017 So where is your 8 point rider? Your promotion voted to have a limit of one 8 pointer per team to share them around so obviously they are going to sign one that is being released! Or was the rule just to screw Wolves, Swindon and BV from having an advantage in heats 13 and 15? Unless one of these posters is actually the Rye promoter who voted then I'd suggest they can name whoever they like in their ideas for a team without the need for permission or not from you. While I disagree with the rule too and therefore have sympathy with Swindon fans a few posts have come across as being written by spoilt children who can't get there own way. 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
noggin 1,388 Posted November 21, 2017 Could it be that 8 point plus riders cost a fortune and its a money saving exercise,? How is that cost cutting, Swindon are prevented from using one of their assets, thus probably having to pay a loan fee instead. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
A ORLOV 8,628 Posted November 21, 2017 How is that cost cutting, Swindon are prevented from using one of their assets, thus probably having to pay a loan fee instead. Plus if the rider goes to another team they will have to fork out a loan fee as well. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
noggin 1,388 Posted November 21, 2017 Plus if the rider goes to another team they will have to fork out a loan fee as well. Doyle or Morris could sit out 2018, will the bspa compensate Swindon. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
poole keith 911 Posted November 21, 2017 Although it doesn't directly say how Swindon voted, it's pretty clear from this that they are against it: http://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/sport/speedway/15672317.Rossiter_to_speak_to_Robins__big_two_after_points_limit_blow/ Swindon were also against Wednesday nights as it clashes with Denmark. possibly but mainly they were against wednesdays because the stadium is not available to them ! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cityrebel 2,960 Posted November 21, 2017 What's the point of having fixed race nights if the 'top riders' can't be accommodated. It's just another cost cutting measure by the promoters. It's just a shame the price of admission doesn't reflect the product on offer. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Woz01 3,589 Posted November 22, 2017 What's the point of having fixed race nights if the 'top riders' can't be accommodated. It's just another cost cutting measure by the promoters. It's just a shame the price of admission doesn't reflect the product on offer. Only Iversen and Jonsson are the only 2 riders currently not riding here who could be interested to return with an average over 8. The rest have zero interest in riding here. The one over 8 rule is daft as it just wasn't needed and not sure UK would tempt more than eight 8+ riders here anyway! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
