Should the points limit be set to the highest team average from the previous season?

[Skidder1 7,634]

2 hours ago, Falcon1983 said:

46.34 for Swindon to keep their same line up and others have the same limit, remember that swindon have 2 x 3 pointers in this side so Ipswich as an example could have this side

1. Iversen 7.54

2. Heeps 6.37

3. Grajczonek 7.29

4. King 6.83

5. Klindt 7.43

6. Allen 5.56

7. Covatti 5.27

I think this team would beat Swindon over two legs as the strength in depth is too much, so think the limit should stay at 42/42.5 

I think you might have to consider at least 3 other rider options.

[PHILIPRISING 7,298]

3 hours ago, Call me wolfie said:

I'm well aware of that, and for his reasons in not riding in Sweden next year, which makes him more likely to be tempted back to the UK, in my opinion

HE says he wants to concentrate all his efforts on winning the World Championship and that means racing in just one league. 

[Falcon1983 557]

1 hour ago, Skidder1 said:

I think you might have to consider at least 3 other rider options.

Not really, it was just an example of what you could achieve if the limit is what Swindon finished on, you'll find some teams can have better overall strength 

 

So limit should stay at 42.5

[Beowulf 1,513]

1 hour ago, PHILIPRISING said:

HE says he wants to concentrate all his efforts on winning the World Championship and that means racing in just one league. 

Well if that is the case, then fair enough. I would love to have Freddie back in Wolves colours. But if that can't happen, then so be it. Even if he doesn't ride for Wolves but becomes World Champion I would be absolutely delighted. Woffy is a Wolves World Champion, but personally I have much more affinity with Freddie.

 

[Beowulf 1,513]

In relation to the the title of this thread. Every team that wins the title wants to, quite reasonably, retain their squad. Swindon are not the first, and definitely not the last, who will have to de-stengthen their squad for the following season. All very disappointing, but that's the way it is. As a Wolves fan, I have had to witness the de-strengthing on a few occasions. Unfortunately, you just have to suck it up. In my opinion no special exception should be be made for Swindon, or any other team.

[Bagpuss 10,778]

3 hours ago, Phil The Ace said:

100% yes it should. Or scrap the limit totally and let clubs spend there own money how they want 

Not for me, I think you have to try and make teams as even as possible on paper. But I certainly agree with using the champion’s team as the benchmark. 

[DC2 11,150]

26 minutes ago, Beowulf said:

In relation to the the title of this thread. Every team that wins the title wants to, quite reasonably, retain their squad. Swindon are not the first, and definitely not the last, who will have to de-stengthen their squad for the following season. All very disappointing, but that's the way it is. As a Wolves fan, I have had to witness the de-strengthing on a few occasions. Unfortunately, you just have to suck it up. In my opinion no special exception should be be made for Swindon, or any other team.

 

Well, it wouldn’t be an exception if it were the new rule! That’s the point of the thread.

If Terry Russell can point to three or four eight pointers who want to come over from the continent at a reasonable price he might have a case.

Otherwise, it wouldn’t be fair.

 

 

[Steve0 5,517]

19 minutes ago, DC2 said:

 

Well, it wouldn’t be an exception if it were the new rule! That’s the point of the thread.

If Terry Russell can point to three or four eight pointers who want to come over from the continent at a reasonable price he might have a case.

Otherwise, it wouldn’t be fair.

 

 

What wouldn’t be fair? All teams built to the same team average.  Some teams had improvers and some teams didn’t and the reward for improvement? Need to find another team!

its stupid to build to the weakest team - as it always has been when Ipswich and Eastbourne were the worst culprits.

Why have a points limit at all? 

[DC2 11,150]

15 minutes ago, Steve0 said:

What wouldn’t be fair? All teams built to the same team average.  Some teams had improvers and some teams didn’t and the reward for improvement? Need to find another team!

its stupid to build to the weakest team - as it always has been when Ipswich and Eastbourne were the worst culprits.

Why have a points limit at all? 

 

No points limit would allow a club to buy the title - Man City - and pretty quickly put the lesser supported clubs out of business.

Wouldn’t it?

 

[stevebrum 6,820]

6 hours ago, Call me wolfie said:

I'm well aware of that, and for his reasons in not riding in Sweden next year, which makes him more likely to be tempted back to the UK, in my opinion

I wish that were the case too. I’d love to see Freddie back as well. 

Im surprised he is giving his own countries league a miss but it appears top riders are going the same way as the UK top flight as more and more are leaving the Swedish league. 

Sadly I think Fred is lost to the UK scene now he is an established world title contender. Such a shame as he always seemed to be a rider keen to ride as much as possible which would have given the UK league a chance of an appearance but a lot of the top boys now seem happy with the GPs and Poland. 

[hrhbig 69]

All that seems important is that all teams are equal at the start ,and that the solution is having "the correct averages", seems to me that the more you "dumb" down a product the less chance there is of it being successful

[CountyGround 75]

1 minute ago, hrhbig said:

All that seems important is that all teams are equal at the start ,and that the solution is having "the correct averages", seems to me that the more you "dumb" down a product the less chance there is of it being successful

 

1 minute ago, hrhbig said:

All that seems important is that all teams are equal at the start ,and that the solution is having "the correct averages", seems to me that the more you "dumb" down a product the less chance there is of it being successful

You set the points limit to the "quality" of the league you want to present to your punters. The status quo is 42 it's that simple.  

[Beowulf 1,513]

1 hour ago, DC2 said:

 

Well, it wouldn’t be an exception if it were the new rule! That’s the point of the thread.

If Terry Russell can point to three or four eight pointers who want to come over from the continent at a reasonable price he might have a case.

Otherwise, it wouldn’t be fair.

 

 

But as we don't have a new rule, then allowing Swindon to keep the same team would be an exception. So why are they "special" ?

[A ORLOV 8,628]

14 minutes ago, hrhbig said:

All that seems important is that all teams are equal at the start ,and that the solution is having "the correct averages", seems to me that the more you "dumb" down a product the less chance there is of it being successful

But in many seasons the limit is kept and good riders that have improved are penalised because of the average they have earnt, some of which then just ride abroad and the league is weakened.  The team limit should either be increased or got rid of so that the best riders can ride here.  Maybe the answer is for a starting point then any team can keep the same riders for say 3 or 5 years and it is up to other teams to get stronger rather than weaken the successful clubs.  I want to see stronger riders here, preferably British ones so that we can then compete against the other speedway nations.    

[DC2 11,150]

32 minutes ago, Beowulf said:

But as we don't have a new rule, then allowing Swindon to keep the same team would be an exception. So why are they "special" ?

 

They’re not.

As you’ve said, it’s been said for years, So is now the time to adopt it? Regardless of the fact that it’s Swindon.

It should encourage loyalty from riders and fans and please the fans, which is quite the opposite of breaking up teams every year.

Pleasing fans is what the sport needs!