Premier League Best Pairs

[Cliffeboy 577]

Interesting pairings,can`t see much further than Sheffield or Newcastle for first place,with Redcar outsiders,Lyons goes very well at the OTA.It all depends on which Cory turns up for the Rebels,if he puts in a Coorrryy Gaaatheercole performance the Rebels could be in with a shout.I`ll be there,can`t wait.

[Cliffeboy 577]

Well scratch the Diamonds,looks like no Lemo,looking very good for Sheffield now,but I have to say favourites have never won in the Pairs when it has been staged at the OTA.

[Bash 496]

What a joke the premier league pairs is! Out of the 10 confirmed teams only 3 teams are using their current top two riders. It is meant to be the best pairs so how can the rules be any two from the top three of each competing team, that is not a best pairs.Okay Sheffield and Glasgow have injured riders in their top two, but whats the excuse for the other teams! No disrepect to Plymouth but how can they use their number five in their averages, when the rules state any two from top three.

I agree with some of the other postings when they should have two qualifying competitions to get to the final or even run it like the fours final and have it all on one day, say at Newport the day after the Grand Prix. It can't be called the PL Best Pairs unless every team gets a chance to complete.

[GlasgowBoy2 0]

Strange to see Ben Barker in this meeting as he has raced less meetings than Joe Screen had this time last year !

[topaz325 1,859]

Jimmy Wright and Rusty Harrison represent Workington.

[cyclone 943]

Strange to see Ben Barker in this meeting as he has raced less meetings than Joe Screen had this time last year !

 

Ah conveniently forgetting that Plymouth have raced fewer matches than anyone else and Barker has only missed one league meeting because of being called up to ride for GB at Lakeside.

 

Given that Screen had not been manipulated into the Glasgow lineup from the start of the season and therefore had ridden a negligible percentage of Glasgow's official fixtures at cut-off date, your attempt to stir it is quite pathetic.

[GlasgowBoy2 0]

Take it you didnt know that Barker missed Ipswich away and was replaced by Woodward ? Try coming back with some smart comments when you know the facts

[cyclone 943]

Take it you didnt know that Barker missed Ipswich away and was replaced by Woodward ? Try coming back with some smart comments when you know the facts

 

And why not explain the reason for his absence ?

 

You obviously were aware Barker was riding in the GB semi at Sheffield that night.

 

So why not tell the full facts ?

 

Oops I forgot that does not help you justify your initial pathetic comment

[GlasgowBoy2 0]

If your to thick to have done your homework , dont post

[gav1971 2]

According to the BSPA site the witches are not entering a duo for the upcoming PLRC, i was looking forward to going on my way to Cardiff, Any news please?

[lucifer sam 3,954]

According to the BSPA site the witches are not entering a duo for the upcoming PLRC, i was looking forward to going on my way to Cardiff, Any news please?

 

Do you mean the PL Pairs at Somerset? If so, no Ipswich aren't in it, the rights and wrongs of this are discussed in detail in the top section on the forum.

 

All the best

Rob

Edited June 14, 2011 by lucifer sam

[gav1971 2]

Sorry i did mean the pairs! many thanks for the reply

[Mr Snackette 190]

They did enter, but failed to qualify.

[gav1971 2]

I was just reading the top section forum about it,

I understand all the facts and figures the BSPA have come up with but at the end of the day surely Ipswich would have a strong enough pairing to compete!

How can it be called the Premier league pairs when not all of the teams are in it!?

[nick 14]

I also thought I read somewhere that as the 4 sides involved missed out they all qualify for the Fours, so some other sides would maybe stronger will now miss out for that meeting. Surely as previously suggested they could have qualifiers, to ensure everyone has a chance.