Jump to content
British Speedway Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Hunters

National League 2018

Recommended Posts

With AGM time approaching it is time to start thinking about next season. For me there are two big questions, How many teams and what points limit?

 

From what I have been reading there seems to be some doubt about Lakeside and Cradley continuing which would be a sad loss.

 

On the points issue I have had my calculator out. There are 33 riders on the current GSA in declared teams including 2 or 3 injured who should be back next year and have an average of over 7. Totalling them up and dividing by 33 gives an average of 8.55. If they could be spread evenly that would cost each team 25.65 for 3 heat leaders and at 39 only leave enough for 3 at 3.0 points and 1 at 4.35. All those others above 4.35 would be out of a team (27 of them) and a couple of dozen at 3.00 most of whom are not ready for the NL would have to be found. This problem was partially avoided last year because the championship brought one into each team at 2.0 and riders like Ellis, Shanes, Perks, Clegg & Carr moved up although some came back when injuries kicked in. I cannot see them increasing the NL 'spaces' next year.

 

Obviously the likes of Bickley, Hunter, Rowe and Atkins are going to get a place which means some of the over 7's will not.

I do not think they will be able to go with less than 42 this time around and of course if there are less than 11 teams the problem just grows.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seen some places it's been mentioned that the limit would be lower. This would be an absolute nightmare. Fans won't pay to see a poor product. With a lower limit it would mean teams going with 2/3 3 pointers. Honestly can't see where these riders would come from,other than it being riders who aren't ready for the step up from mdl etc.

It's got to be the same limit or higher for me

👍

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess the opinions will vary over should every current rider get a place next year or should there be competition for places and riders waiting in the wings when form drops or injuries occur? This year it was clear with the number of teams that it was a real stretch to fill all teams competitively.

 

If the 39 limit is stuck with i can see several of the 7+pointers missing out / moving on as many teams will go with two of them and then build the rest around 3,4, & 5 pointers. To be fair there are probably several who may not want NL next season anyway so sticking with the current limit wouldn't do much harm.

 

For me i would want to see maximum 1 other team so no trebling up, potentially a limit on the number of riders who double up from each team (2 each?), a limit on the number of times RR can be used & unattached riders being given averages as per any 1-7 rider.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They had a meeting last week re NL At Rugby.

 

As long as they maintain the league as a developmental league that’s fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They had a meeting last week re NL At Rugby.

 

As long as they maintain the league as a developmental league that’s fine.

It will far better if the ties to the Championship and Premiership are cut and the NL becomes a full fledged league in its own right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about introducing a grading system and you can build it 1 of 3 ways say 1 a rider 3b riders 3c riders , 0a rider 5b riders 2c riders 2a riders 1b riders 4c riders you get my drift

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All teams should have at least a couple of riders from the amateur leagues named to cover for missing reserves. Eastbourne were the worst culprits with official number 7 Matt Saul and then Charlie Saunders, only riding 1 League match between them all season.

Birmingham also rarely had a proper number 7 available. it is a farce that riders like Alex Spooner, William O'Keefe and later in the season Jason Edwards and Drew Kemp rode for most teams in the League.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest GiveusaB

What about introducing a grading system and you can build it 1 of 3 ways say 1 a rider 3b riders 3c riders , 0a rider 5b riders 2c riders 2a riders 1b riders 4c riders you get my drift

Spot on !

Averages are a waste of time and not always a true reflection of a riders ability!?

They can easily be 'adjusted' by a rider at any point during the season...

A, B, C grades sound like the way forward !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All teams should have at least a couple of riders from the amateur leagues named to cover for missing reserves. Eastbourne were the worst culprits with official number 7 Matt Saul and then Charlie Saunders, only riding 1 League match between them all season.

Birmingham also rarely had a proper number 7 available. it is a farce that riders like Alex Spooner, William O'Keefe and later in the season Jason Edwards and Drew Kemp rode for most teams in the League.

 

Couldn't agree more especially with the way the averages are handled (or not handled) we are on the cusp of a strong new rider deciding not to sign for a team and staying unattached then taking whatever bookings they like & charging whatever they like.

Why not name a number 8&9 in a squad and be made to use them when either a reserve is absent/injured or when RR is in place.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dislike the 8-9 rule for a couple of reasons.

 

Firstly, I watch speedway to see my team win, no, not at ANY cost but I expect the promotion to do what they can to ensure we can win. Development League or not, sport is about winning. (IMHO) So, I dont want to see a number 8 replace a reserve that we have brought in and is going well, I want to replace him with a rider that is as capable

 

Secondly, The poor lad could turn up to every meeting and never get a ride and if he does not go to every meeting he has even lass of a chance of getting a ride!

 

There are always big problems that are pretty unique to speedway. Just looking around you can see loads of riders that will not get team places because of their averages. Riders that started at reserve and are now second strings with a 4 or 5 average that looks too high, riders that have progressed to heat leaders where you have 3 or four of them in a team. It must be a nightmare every year. I should think once the season is ob=ver, its almost nice to be a mid table team that can keep the core of his riders and just pick two or three prospects that can increase averages.

 

The likes of Bell Vue and Eastbourne and Kent have a much harder problem to solve.. .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my view points needs to go up to around 42 points. I follow the amateur scene quite closely and have seen very few riders even close to the league standard yet. And other the O Keefe, and Spooner and the existing NL riders the SDL showed what a gulf there is to the unsigned riders.

A 39 point average will mean most teams will use 2 x 3 pointers, which in my view means at least 15 riders no where near 5he right standard being forced to race, meaning strung out races and could be potentially dangerous.

I think it will be a 12 team league (I believe there is an existing agreement that states 12 teams is max) but with Swindon, Rye House, Kings Lynn, and Coventry all set to apply to enter. I have no doubt it will be at least a 12 team league again in 2018.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Teaboy 279, you seem pretty well informed. How do you know that Swindon, Rye House etc intend to apply. I have heard no rumours to

that effect excepting for Coventry and I don't know if that rumour is true or not. I agree with all those who have suggested a high points limit to

avoid the use of too many Wobblies although I do like to see a newcomer here and there, just not too many of them. Also there is a big difference

between the skills of new riders and we have seen new youngsters this year, allegedly not attached to a club, top scoring for someone. Outstanding

example, Drew Kemp paid for 12 points for Eastbourne at Belle Vue. How is it possible to reconcile a rider of such talent with a young kid finding the

going very tough ? The lower the points limit, the more the likes of Drew Kemp will make a possible unfair difference to the team they join. A high limit

would tend to even out such a difference.. I am very sad that my own team, Lakeside, intend not to run in the league, opting for what I think is a suicidal

re-entry into the top tier.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dislike the 8-9 rule for a couple of reasons.

 

Firstly, I watch speedway to see my team win, no, not at ANY cost but I expect the promotion to do what they can to ensure we can win. Development League or not, sport is about winning. (IMHO) So, I dont want to see a number 8 replace a reserve that we have brought in and is going well, I want to replace him with a rider that is as capable

 

Secondly, The poor lad could turn up to every meeting and never get a ride and if he does not go to every meeting he has even lass of a chance of getting a ride!

 

There are always big problems that are pretty unique to speedway. Just looking around you can see loads of riders that will not get team places because of their averages. Riders that started at reserve and are now second strings with a 4 or 5 average that looks too high, riders that have progressed to heat leaders where you have 3 or four of them in a team. It must be a nightmare every year. I should think once the season is ob=ver, its almost nice to be a mid table team that can keep the core of his riders and just pick two or three prospects that can increase averages.

 

The likes of Bell Vue and Eastbourne and Kent have a much harder problem to solve.. .

 

We can both agree that speedway has some very unique problems but from a personal point of view i watch speedway to be entertained and i dont like to see sides name a rider they have no intention of using so they can then have their pick of unattached riders instead. If the 8/9 system was brought in it would encourage teams to bring those lads up to speed as quickly as possible and show an interest in them rather than leave it for someone else to do as is the approach of many teams.

With regards to the Drew Kemp argument there are riders every year that come in on a 3.00 that are widely known to be way more talented than that and affect results for large parts of the season. Zach Waj, JPB, Smith, Bewley, Bickley, Jenkins.......

 

With a higher points limit its easier for teams to build stronger in the 1-5 and thus keep the result changing riders at reserve for longer whilst at 39 for example a lot of teams build with 3 x 3.00 pointers and the match changers are up into the team at the first set of averages

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Teaboy 279, you seem pretty well informed. How do you know that Swindon, Rye House etc intend to apply. I have heard no rumours to

that effect excepting for Coventry and I don't know if that rumour is true or not. I agree with all those who have suggested a high points limit to

avoid the use of too many Wobblies although I do like to see a newcomer here and there, just not too many of them. Also there is a big difference

between the skills of new riders and we have seen new youngsters this year, allegedly not attached to a club, top scoring for someone. Outstanding

example, Drew Kemp paid for 12 points for Eastbourne at Belle Vue. How is it possible to reconcile a rider of such talent with a young kid finding the

going very tough ? The lower the points limit, the more the likes of Drew Kemp will make a possible unfair difference to the team they join. A high limit

would tend to even out such a difference.. I am very sad that my own team, Lakeside, intend not to run in the league, opting for what I think is a suicidal

re-entry into the top tier.

Swindon ran NT this year to see if the backing was there to enter the NL and I seem to recall them saying that crowd figures were just about high enough to be viable.

Kings Lynn, Buster has stated then intention is to run NL again.

Rye House can't remember if it was shroek or Jensen that said that the reason they did not run NL in 2017 was to focus on the new challenge of top flight racing, but the intention was to return for 2018. With the hope of producing talent for the first team.

I would say of the 4 teams quoted, Coventry is the most likely not to happen imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fingers crossed your right Teaboy on all counts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy