00000 1,279 Posted March 16, 2019 On 3/15/2019 at 2:53 PM, bigcatdiary said: That’s sounds like a suggestion from Jim Lawrence, the new SCB Chairman Nice to see some common sense being applied. The NDL rocked along with nicely without IRR and TS. Shame that such artificial devices have now percolated down. They are rubbish 'rules' and open to abuse. 1 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bigcatdiary 3,164 Posted March 16, 2019 11 minutes ago, Richard Weston said: The NDL rocked along with nicely without IRR and TS. Shame that such artificial devices have now percolated down. They are rubbish 'rules' and open to abuse. I disagree, should be the same for all three Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WalterPlinge 657 Posted March 16, 2019 13 minutes ago, Richard Weston said: The NDL rocked along with nicely without IRR and TS. Shame that such artificial devices have now percolated down. They are rubbish 'rules' and open to abuse. Agreed. Should have left the NDL rocking along without TS. They slash the points limit ridiculously low because they want to bring in the young 2.00 kids.... ...and then in the next breath they bring in TS, so one of those young kids is going to have to give up a ride to the No.1, whereas on the other side their youngsters are going to come up against the opposing No.1 who can now have a 6th ride. 1 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
00000 1,279 Posted March 16, 2019 24 minutes ago, bigcatdiary said: I disagree, should be the same for all three So speaks a Premiership warrior. NDL is a development league as the BSPA has made clear. Anyway, they are rubbish rules. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Halifaxtiger 5,318 Posted March 17, 2019 7 hours ago, Richard Weston said: The NDL rocked along with nicely without IRR and TS. Shame that such artificial devices have now percolated down. They are rubbish 'rules' and open to abuse. I don't really have an issue with TS or IRR. I have no doubt, though, that the NDL was fine without them. 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
teaboy279 1,038 Posted March 17, 2019 The top leagues should be doing what they did last year, and try to copy the NL. The one thing I really hate is IRR. Leads to tactical injuries. (Although if a rider is injured and withdrawn in a crash where an opponent is excluded, then in my opinion the guilty rider should sit out the rest of the meeting as punishment.) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sings4Speedway 3,237 Posted March 19, 2019 Whilst they were largely pointless anyway as most clubs failed to use them the introduction of IRR virtually kills any sensible use of number 8's in the NL. This facility was generally put in place to enable extra opportunities for breakthrough riders, by removing it is another step away from the Development tag the NL has. There is really no clear direction in which this league is supposed to take. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
arnieg 3,614 Posted March 19, 2019 On 3/17/2019 at 4:37 AM, Halifaxtiger said: I don't really have an issue with TS or IRR. I have no doubt, though, that the NDL was fine without them. I think as a general principle the fewer differences between the leagues the better. It makes for a simpler easier to understand rulebook. As there us no compelling reason for making these different in the NL I think they should be harmonised. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sings4Speedway 3,237 Posted March 19, 2019 10 minutes ago, arnieg said: I think as a general principle the fewer differences between the leagues the better. It makes for a simpler easier to understand rulebook. As there us no compelling reason for making these different in the NL I think they should be harmonised. Whilst harmonising has its merits, it is certainly not a simple rulebook. Why not ditch the IRR, if a rider gets injured then the rides are covered by reserves. If a team is already running RR then they must have a number 8 on standby. That is easy to explain rules "that average guy got injured so they can only replace him with the reserves" rather than "that average guy got injured so now the best 3 riders can all take a ride each and completely swing the match". If a rider has to withdraw does a mandatory X day lay off still apply? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IronScorpion 1,405 Posted March 19, 2019 Have you read the IRR Rule? It states if a rider is injured then any rider under his average can take an additional ride. It is not the best 3 riders all take a ride each. It is much fairer if a no1 gets injured than having reserves take rides. 1 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tsunami 10,219 Posted March 19, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, IronScorpion said: Have you read the IRR Rule? It states if a rider is injured then any rider under his average can take an additional ride. It is not the best 3 riders all take a ride each. It is much fairer if a no1 gets injured than having reserves take rides. At the end of the day, IRR was introduced so the paying public would as least be treat to the same level as they had paid for. It tries to match the teams, instead of a team using reserves and makes the races a mockery and a good meeting is spoiled. In saying that, most tactical rules should only apply to the top 2 divisions, and let the NL to use reserves. Edited March 19, 2019 by Tsunami 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
