Jump to content
British Speedway Forum

Recommended Posts

As usual it's a rule which is far from clear and could be interpreted a dozen different ways and you can understand why some might be disgruntled by the signing. For me it's ok because Allen was declared as a temporary signing, because the league hasn't started and because Zagar enhances the product and will put more bums on seats. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Bagpuss said:

As usual it's a rule which is far from clear and could be interpreted a dozen different ways and you can understand why some might be disgruntled by the signing. For me it's ok because Allen was declared as a temporary signing, because the league hasn't started and because Zagar enhances the product and will put more bums on seats. 

Spot on...

The Aces team is within the average that all teams should be built to so no issues at all...

The sport hamstrings itself with all sort of nonsense and given the rules it allows to be used it almost commits Harakiri rather than giving itself an opportunity to be taken seriously...

The more "top riders" over here the better, and everyone seems to recognise that more riders are needed, so getting more quality over here has to be the perfect solution to that problem....

If they ever want the sport to be taken seriously then EVERY team should make whatever changes they want as long as it comes within whatever the designated average is....

If that means seven changes after a month then so be it...

If nothing else it means that the League is seen as something worth winning rather than "as long as we win at home" being the mantra...

Use the League Cup as a competition to assess how you are doing then (if you wish), make as many changes as you want (depending on the average allowed and rider availability of course) for the "main show"....

 

 

Edited by mikebv
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, mikebv said:

Spot on...

The Aces team is within the average that all teams should be built to so no issues at all...

The sport hamstrings itself with all sort of nonsense and given the rules it allows to be used it almost commits Harakiri rather than giving itself an opportunity to be taken seriously...

The more "top riders" over here the better, and everyone seems to recognise that more riders are needed, so getting more quality over here has to be the perfect solution to that problem....

If they ever want the sport to be taken seriously then EVERY team should make whatever changes they want as long as it comes within whatever the designated average is....

If that means seven changes after a month then so be it...

If nothing else it means that the League is seen as something worth winning rather than "as long as we win at home" being the mantra...

Use the League Cup as a competition to assess how you are doing then (if you wish), make as many changes as you want (depending on the average allowed and rider availability of course) for the "main show"....

 

 

The first bit in bold is completely irrelevant Mike. Any change that has ever been made at any point during any season, would have still fell within the points limit. This isn’t the point. 
 

The second bit in bold, I completely agree with you on, although there should definitely be a cut off point to stop things happening like the Woffinden to Wolves thing a few years ago. 

Edited by Arch Stanton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Arch Stanton said:

The first bit in bold is completely irrelevant Mike. Any change that has ever been made at any point during any season, would have still fell within the points limit. This isn’t the point. 
 

The second bit in bold, I completely agree with you on, although there should definitely be a cut off point to stop things happening like the Woffinden to Wolves thing a few years ago. 

But the first point is relevant because, for example,  you could have two riders eg Woffy and Pedersen, doing a shared job for a team...

With both coming under the average set individually but not together...

The result being we get to see the very top riders over here, with these riders happy to take the extra rides which don't over stretch them...

Klindt is now avaialble so any team who want to have him should be allowed to bring him in as long as they keep within the average limit designated for this season. ..

No need for waiting for 'x' matches, get as many of the better riders in as and when they want to ride..

As, if nothing else, that increases the amount of options for the teams as riders who get replaced, become available. ..

100% re Woffy coming in so late in the season when you have a competiton with play offs..

There should maybe be a minimum amount of meetings ridden by the individual to be eligible to ride in the play offs...

Or a cut off date to be riding for that team around mid season ...

Edited by mikebv

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the rule was to mean 25% of a teams meetings it would have said 25% of a teams meetings. It says 25% of league meetings because it only means league meeting. It’s not ambiguous at all as long as you’re not trying to bend things around to suit a weird BSF point of view. 

I still think we should have announced Zagar in March and ran RR for him as Ipswich (to name one) did last year against, well you can guess who against. It’s not within the rules and you have to get your committee buddies to ok it but one for all and all for one - who am I kidding. 

Incredible that The Aces once again abide by the rules yet get berated while other teams continually flout them with next to no comment. Still it’s not as though many people are watching, now why is that?

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, ouch said:

If the rule was to mean 25% of a teams meetings it would have said 25% of a teams meetings. It says 25% of league meetings because it only means league meeting. It’s not ambiguous at all as long as you’re not trying to bend things around to suit a weird BSF point of view. 

I still think we should have announced Zagar in March and ran RR for him as Ipswich (to name one) did last year against, well you can guess who against. It’s not within the rules and you have to get your committee buddies to ok it but one for all and all for one - who am I kidding. 

Incredible that The Aces once again abide by the rules yet get berated while other teams continually flout them with next to no comment. Still it’s not as though many people are watching, now why is that?

It is up to the MC to explain what they mean but this is what they have said:

'A Premiership Transfer Window opens after 25% of the League fixtures are complete and closes when 75% of League fixtures are complete. This permits changes to the team on 2 occasions, except for proven long term injury.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Arch Stanton said:

The first bit in bold is completely irrelevant Mike. Any change that has ever been made at any point during any season, would have still fell within the points limit. This isn’t the point. 
 

The second bit in bold, I completely agree with you on, although there should definitely be a cut off point to stop things happening like the Woffinden to Wolves thing a few years ago. 

There has been since 2017. No team changes may be made after 28th August.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

There has been since 2017. No team changes may be made after 28th August.

I know tocha I didn’t maybe word that right. I meant that rule should continue to be in place. Wouldn’t be against it being earlier either. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve just emailed them on BSF behalf. 

When you say league fixtures do you mean league fixtures or something different than league fixtures, it’s just that putting league fixtures has led some to believe you don’t mean league fixtures. It might be better if you put “ league fixtures and we really really really mean just league fixtures” in future to lessen the percentage of BSF members who cannot work out you mean league fixtures. There would still be around 60% of BSF members unsure if you meant league fixtures even if you added the really really really bit. 

Just while I’ve got you can I check if the 2022 regulations are for the 2022 season!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, tocha said:

It is up to the MC to explain what they mean but this is what they have said:

'A Premiership Transfer Window opens after 25% of the League fixtures are complete and closes when 75% of League fixtures are complete. This permits changes to the team on 2 occasions, except for proven long term injury.'

As the league fixtures have not yet started, the rule won't apply, as Ouch has already explained, Zagar signed before the league begins so no rules have been Broken.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wouldn't people rather see a more attractive and competitive BV come to their track? Sick of people moaning about lack of big names - one turns up and there's hell on

  • Like 6

Share this post


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

If the rule was to mean 25% of a teams meetings it would have said 25% of a teams meetings. It says 25% of league meetings because it only means league meeting. It’s not ambiguous at all as long as you’re not trying to bend things around to suit a weird BSF point of view. 

I still think we should have announced Zagar in March and ran RR for him as Ipswich (to name one) did last year against, well you can guess who against. It’s not within the rules and you have to get your committee buddies to ok it but one for all and all for one - who am I kidding. 

Incredible that The Aces once again abide by the rules yet get berated while other teams continually flout them with next to no comment. Still it’s not as though many people are watching, now why is that?

But the cup was a league.. 

In fact. Two.. :D

Edited by mikebv

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, hyderd said:

As the league fixtures have not yet started, the rule won't apply, as Ouch has already explained, Zagar signed before the league begins so no rules have been Broken.

Or perhaps the season starts upon the commencement of the first League Cup match? That's what's not particularly clear. 

But I'm glad Zagar is here and I'm looking forward to seeing him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, hyderd said:

As the league fixtures have not yet started, the rule won't apply, as Ouch has already explained, Zagar signed before the league begins so no rules have been Broken.

..and this is the problem. You may well be right but the rule as it is written requires explanation. I don't know if MC mean no team changes once the league campaign starts until 25% (ie., 30) fixtures have been completed or no changes at all until this milestone has been reached. Then what happens after that? Is there to be another transfer window once 75% matches have been ridden or can another change(s) be made at at anytime between 25% and 75%? Also, do the changes involve individual riders or wholesale re-declarations.

More questions than answers right now.

Edit: I don't know whether to read anything into this but new Greensheets for the Championship were published yesterday but nothing yet for the Premiership.

Edited by tocha
item to be added.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, ouch said:

If the rule was to mean 25% of a teams meetings it would have said 25% of a teams meetings. It says 25% of league meetings because it only means league meeting. It’s not ambiguous at all as long as you’re not trying to bend things around to suit a weird BSF point of view. 

I still think we should have announced Zagar in March and ran RR for him as Ipswich (to name one) did last year against, well you can guess who against. It’s not within the rules and you have to get your committee buddies to ok it but one for all and all for one - who am I kidding. 

Incredible that The Aces once again abide by the rules yet get berated while other teams continually flout them with next to no comment. Still it’s not as though many people are watching, now why is that?

 

10 hours ago, ouch said:

If the rule was to mean 25% of a teams meetings it would have said 25% of a teams meetings. It says 25% of league meetings because it only means league meeting. It’s not ambiguous at all as long as you’re not trying to bend things around to suit a weird BSF point of view. 

I still think we should have announced Zagar in March and ran RR for him as Ipswich (to name one) did last year against, well you can guess who against. It’s not within the rules and you have to get your committee buddies to ok it but one for all and all for one - who am I kidding. 

Incredible that The Aces once again abide by the rules yet get berated while other teams continually flout them with next to no comment. Still it’s not as though many people are watching, now why is that?

See below

9 hours ago, tocha said:

It is up to the MC to explain what they mean but this is what they have said:

'A Premiership Transfer Window opens after 25% of the League fixtures are complete and closes when 75% of League fixtures are complete. This permits changes to the team on 2 occasions, except for proven long term injury.'

It's clear as day to me that this clearly means as it says. 

The League Cup matches precede Premiership matches so the rule stats changes can't happen until after 25% of league matches. At no point does it say Premiership only. 

Belle Vue signing Zagar is illegal. Also, regardless whether Belle Vue offers a 28 day contract to a rider it to doesn't stand up within the rules. The contract issued by Belle Vue ISN'T a facility as Jake Allen didn't cover a previously declared rider. He becomes an officially declard rider. Zagar could be signed as a new 28 day facility but only if there's a genuine reason for Jake Allen to be missing, to which there isn't. 

No matter how you look at it, unless you're totally bias this deal with Zagar shouldn't be ratified according to the rules. 

This is British Speedway though so anything goes

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
  • Sad 1

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