Jump to content
British Speedway Forum
teaboy279

Nl Agm 14th December.

Recommended Posts

Seems to me that only 3 things were decided:

1. The points limit was set at 39.00
2. Cradley and Lakeside leave the NL with Leicester Bees being granted a provisional place in the league.
3. The entrants of the National Trophy (including Cradley)

No mention about the Swindon Sprockets today, so they must be considered out of the frame next year.

Bearing in mind that the Bees inclusion is subject to confirmation, not even that can be guaranteed. Coventry's proposed joint venture this past season with Belle Vue came to nought. Who holds out greater hopes for Mick Horton's proposal for a joint venture with Leicester next year?

Nothing in writing to the effect, but the absence of anything contradictory and the inclusion of the Brummies in the National Trophy seems to indicate that the BSPA have approved the new regime at Perry Barr. Masonic handshakes all round then,

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that's Jon Armstrong, Jake Knight, Connor Mountain and Ben Hopwood confirmed without a team place next year due to the 39 points limit along with potentially others like JPB and Jack Smith who' s averages have increased last season, this must be the only sport I know you get penalised for getting better .

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Backstraight Viewer said:

,,,this must be the only sport I know you get penalised for getting better .

Not sure that this is a bad thing though. From the bigger picture point of view, don't you want the talent to progress up the league's? Shouldn't JPB now progress in the CL instead of treading water in the lowest league? He can't be  allowed to fester in the speedway kindergarten any longer. He needs to start playing with the bigger kids in the playground.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have a good point but you have to remember JPB is still only 17 and 2018 will still only be his second full season he has a CL place next year with Glasgow yes but if he only gets on average 3 rides a meeting how is he going to get race practice and the chance to earn so he can improve equipment etc 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate to criticise the NL Promoters who have done so much to keep the sport alive for many or us but I think this is a disaster.  When the final teams are declared there will be a load of promising riders without any ride at all. If they were going to do this they might have at least have stipulated no doubling up.

As it is we already have Hulme and Morley in two leagues and probably Ayres, Smith and JPB.  In will come a dozen 3.0 pointers many of whom are not yet ready.  Five have been signed already.  With one less team it is double disaster and should mean about 15 to 20 riders left out including the likes of Bacon and Bowtell.

This could have been covered to some extent by no double up and an age limit for this league.  You cannot take this sort of action without excluding the likes of Atkin, Armstrong,Bowen Hurry, Boxall and Roynan.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Hunters said:

I hate to criticise the NL Promoters who have done so much to keep the sport alive for many or us but I think this is a disaster.  When the final teams are declared there will be a load of promising riders without any ride at all. If they were going to do this they might have at least have stipulated no doubling up.

As it is we already have Hulme and Morley in two leagues and probably Ayres, Smith and JPB.  In will come a dozen 3.0 pointers many of whom are not yet ready.  Five have been signed already.  With one less team it is double disaster and should mean about 15 to 20 riders left out including the likes of Bacon and Bowtell.

This could have been covered to some extent by no double up and an age limit for this league.  You cannot take this sort of action without excluding the likes of Atkin, Armstrong,Bowen Hurry, Boxall and Roynan.

Totally agree, another fine example of diluting a pretty good product ( the nl) and making it less attractive for spectators and bad for the riders on the second/third rung of development as they could be frozen out over averages. Just not enough Kemps and Edwards to justify the points limit, will be a lot of poor 3 pointers in teams next year with a lot of poor races. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Backstraight Viewer said:

You have a good point but you have to remember JPB is still only 17 and 2018 will still only be his second full season 

Bartosz Zmarzlik and Patryk Dudek were in the Ekstraliga at age 16 and didn't have the benefit of a lower league grounding in Poland. I can recall a certain Jeremy Doncaster starting the sport at the deep end too. 

If JPB wants to progress he won't do it in the NL. He has to move up. And this time he has to swim instead of sink. 

Too much British potential has been unfulfilled by being comfortable in low leagues and not being challenged at the highest level possible. Do we want JPB to do a Craig Cook and still be riding lower league speedway at age 30?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

39 point limit will do nothing to put badly needed bums on seats ,and may rule out several promising riders that may not even get a team in the Championship

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately quite a few top end NL riders seem to be looking for a team place abd the low points limit and less teams won’t help and some of these are also struggling to get a Championship place! Further down, even promising riders like Bowtell are looking for a team! Surely his average is guaranteed to go upwards. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone needs to establish what the aims and objectives of the NL are. Are they to:

1. Provide as strong a league as possible, competing for the attentions of CL riders thereby getting as many bums on seats as possible?
OR
2. To develop young British talent, allowing a start in the sport to those with talent and determination and providing a competitive springboard into their future careers at a higher level?
OR
3. To become a retirement home for low achievers at the ends of their careers or after their form or confidence has been lost, and to act as a "Seniors Tour" for the over 30's?

I suspect Stoke would vote for "3", but the problem with 1 & 2 is that you have competing and conflicting interests.  Teams like Belle Vue will be glad to nurture young talent as they have a stake in the bigger picture, with the Aces being one of the teams who will benefit from the throughput of talent. Other teams, such as Birmingham, with no further stake in the sport outside of the exit to their car parks will only really care about themselves, will only get aggrieved at the drain of talent that they nurture, and will therefore do what's necessary to win the league (at all costs if some accusations are to be believed)  The 39 point limit seems to force a happy medium between 1 & 2, and I only wish that there was some way to compel riders with 8.00 & above averages to ride at a higher level and not block the prospects of young upstarts.

I wish that some kind of scheme could be arranged whereby anyone this year finishing the NL on an 8.00 average or above was given a guaranteed CL reserve slot for an entire season, somewhere, in exchange for being barred from the NL next season. It's not penalising success, it's promoting personal development. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, uk_martin said:

Someone needs to establish what the aims and objectives of the NL are. Are they to:

1. Provide as strong a league as possible, competing for the attentions of CL riders thereby getting as many bums on seats as possible?
OR
2. To develop young British talent, allowing a start in the sport to those with talent and determination and providing a competitive springboard into their future careers at a higher level?
OR
3. To become a retirement home for low achievers at the ends of their careers or after their form or confidence has been lost, and to act as a "Seniors Tour" for the over 30's?

I suspect Stoke would vote for "3", but the problem with 1 & 2 is that you have competing and conflicting interests.  Teams like Belle Vue will be glad to nurture young talent as they have a stake in the bigger picture, with the Aces being one of the teams who will benefit from the throughput of talent. Other teams, such as Birmingham, with no further stake in the sport outside of the exit to their car parks will only really care about themselves, will only get aggrieved at the drain of talent that they nurture, and will therefore do what's necessary to win the league (at all costs if some accusations are to be believed)  The 39 point limit seems to force a happy medium between 1 & 2, and I only wish that there was some way to compel riders with 8.00 & above averages to ride at a higher level and not block the prospects of young upstarts.

I wish that some kind of scheme could be arranged whereby anyone this year finishing the NL on an 8.00 average or above was given a guaranteed CL reserve slot for an entire season, somewhere, in exchange for being barred from the NL next season. It's not penalising success, it's promoting personal development. 

 

I think most people would agree a combination of 1and 2 is the ideal scenario, but surely the amount of teams in the league and the combined average of last year should be taken into account in some way. Last year was 39 , averages went up and this year less teams. Would have thought even putting it to 40 would not have threatened the development side, but may have made it easier for progressing 4/5 pointers to get a place, rather than 3 pointers who will falter. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, gazzac said:

I think most people would agree a combination of 1and 2 is the ideal scenario...

And there's the problem. The horse designed by committee scenario. The resulting camel that's designed to be most things to most people and ending up being useless to all.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, uk_martin said:

And there's the problem. The horse designed by committee scenario. The resulting camel that's designed to be most things to most people and ending up being useless to all.

Yep,does tend to give people the hump(or two)!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×

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