BluTiger 21,661 Posted November 28, 2017 Unfortunately it's an ambiguous rule that will be applied to suit as per usual. They should just include the word 'current' to the rule... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waiheke1 4,295 Posted November 28, 2017 why not make it 8 for GP riders. as with the one over 8 rule you could only have 1 of them anyway if you wanted.Is the rule 1 over 8 or 1 8 or over? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stevebrum 6,820 Posted November 28, 2017 They should just include the word 'current' to the rule... Current 2017 or current 2018? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BluTiger 21,661 Posted November 28, 2017 Current 2017 or current 2018? The 2017 riders not in the 2018 series are not current, they are 'has beens' Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gavan 5,049 Posted November 28, 2017 Chris Holder never finished the season so his average is just based on pretty much half a season. He should be a 9 along with all the other GP riders Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stevebrum 6,820 Posted November 28, 2017 The 2017 riders not in the 2018 series are not current, they are 'has beens' Fair point! However surely "GP standard as fits those riders who rode in the current season and next season qualification already assured (excludes those who rode as a wildcard, reserves Numbers 17 and 18 and having ridden 2 or less rounds)" is about as transparent as you can get ??? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pirates Of Poole 761 Posted November 28, 2017 Chris Holder never finished the season so his average is just based on pretty much half a season. He should be a 9 along with all the other GP riders I am led to believe this rule covers riders who rode in zero meetings during 2017 and in GP. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
B.V 72 1,054 Posted November 28, 2017 I see it as a cost cutting exercise ensuring that none of those riders could be signed even if they wanted to. The fact that some clubs aren't keen to sign the TV deal speaks volumes about how much money they expect to lose out on. Certainly not enough for the top boys. Should that not be a choice for each club to make if a few clubs want to sign a top heavy team with two 8/9 point riders and can afford to do so.As long as the team is within the points limit what's the problem. Even the clubs fans that choose not to sign the top stars will get to see a few GP riders when these top heavy teams visit their club. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gavan 5,049 Posted November 28, 2017 I am led to believe this rule covers riders who rode in zero meetings during 2017 and in GP. nobody knows though Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waytogo28 2,054 Posted November 28, 2017 They should just include the word 'current' to the rule... No, there just wasn't enough space on the beermat they were writing on, when the rule was written down, to include the word "current". 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BWitcher 12,453 Posted November 28, 2017 So once again, Ford engineering things for his benefit. The cancer returns. 4 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kingbee 510 Posted November 28, 2017 Ha ha. If that's true he's mugged them off good and proper if he signs Holder. A very low points limit last year plus a change in race formula. He's been mugging speedway promoters for years that's why Frost and Sandu made a stance in 2011 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wolfsbane 12,944 Posted November 28, 2017 why not make it 8 for GP riders. as with the one over 8 rule you could only have 1 of them anyway if you wanted. Certain members of the BSPA don't do compromise. Ford the instigator of last season's gp riders being given 9 point averages according to CVS. Looks like it was directly aimed at wolves and belle Vue - pawlicki, woffy, Zafar all on sub 8 average or would have been... Surprise, surprise. So once again, Ford engineering things for his benefit. The cancer returns. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Steve Shovlar 10,439 Posted November 28, 2017 (edited) So once again, Ford engineering things for his benefit. The cancer returns. Sorry? What are you on about? Making sweeping statements about someone over hearsay? Edited November 28, 2017 by Steve Shovlar Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wolfsbane 12,944 Posted November 28, 2017 BW trying to send PM but it looks like your inbox is full! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
