Nellie 144 Posted March 12, 2015 It is going to be hard to replace Dakota North or Davey Watt really as you can only have TWO 7+ riders in your team using the starting averages. So even if Dakota North averages 8.08 early on, he can only be replaced with a rider that started the season on an average under seven unless they release Magic or Holder too Do you have any evidence of this rule at all? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Daniel Smith 5,661 Posted March 12, 2015 You HOPE they will ....... Don't under estimate Wolves as they will have their days when they give a spanking and you could be suprised on how good Museliak is It is going to be hard to replace Dakota North or Davey Watt really as you can only have TWO 7+ riders in your team using the starting averages. So even if Dakota North averages 8.08 early on, he can only be replaced with a rider that started the season on an average under seven unless they release Magic or Holder too Wrong, 2 over 7 is for the start of the season only. After the 1st set of averages, teams can do as they please. If every rider has a 10+ average they can be replaced like for like. I can only see the 2 over 7 rule being enforced for redeclaration. There's no way if Holder gets injured Poole would only be allowed a 6.99 replacement if North or Watt up their averages. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
T.N.T. 355 Posted March 12, 2015 (edited) Wrong, 2 over 7 is for the start of the season only. After the 1st set of averages, teams can do as they please. If every rider has a 10+ average they can be replaced like for like. I can only see the 2 over 7 rule being enforced for redeclaration. There's no way if Holder gets injured Poole would only be allowed a 6.99 replacement if North or Watt up their averages. You have misunderstood what I posted. Should Chris Holder be injured then Poole can sign whoever they want upto his average (or the 34 limit) and that is fine. However if North or Watt move their averages to say 7.67, they can not be replaced by a rider that has a 7+ average now like Tai Woffinden, Piotr Pawlicki or Peter Kildemand as their 1-7 will contain THREE riders that started the season on 7+ averages. If Poole or any other club wanted to sign Woffinden or Kildemand or Kasprzak for example it would have to be at the expense of a rider that started on a 7+ average UNLESS that team never started the season with two such riders like Wolves and Lakeside EDIT; I could just imagine if this was allowed, Poole releasing North 7.67 and Gomolski 7.05 mid season and bringing in Kildemand and Woffinden to give them a top five of Holder, Janowski, Kildemand, Woffinden and Watt Edited March 12, 2015 by T.N.T. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SCB 0 Posted March 13, 2015 Like-for-like signing are allowed. So if North goes over 7 he CAN be replaced by a rider over 7 (but under Norths figure). BUT Poole couldn't redeclared back to 34 including Holder, Magic and North if they're all over 7. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
T.N.T. 355 Posted March 13, 2015 (edited) Like-for-like signing are allowed. So if North goes over 7 he CAN be replaced by a rider over 7 (but under Norths figure). BUT Poole couldn't redeclared back to 34 including Holder, Magic and North if they're all over 7. Any rider currently with an average over seven points a meeting CANT sign for Poole unless it;s in place of Holder or Janowski. The TWO 7+ riders will be in place all season with those figures at present. So if Dakota North is averaging 7.67 they cant sign Kildemand or Woffinden etc Edited March 13, 2015 by T.N.T. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nellie 144 Posted March 13, 2015 (edited) Any rider currently with an average over seven points a meeting CANT sign for Poole unless it;s in place of Holder or Janowski. The TWO 7+ riders will be in place all season with those figures at present. So if Dakota North is averaging 7.67 they cant sign Kildemand or Woffinden etc The rule is as follows TNT, with the relevant bit in bold: 17.4.2 A Teams combined MA for the top 5 positions must not exceed 34.00 points nor include more than 2 x Riders, whose MA exceeds 7.00 or 2 Doubling-Up Riders (satisfying the same conditions as for the initial Team Declaration) when re-declared, either permanently or temporarily, except where the MA of the introduced Rider is equal to, or lower than the Rider being replaced. i.e. the first bit is irrelevant when the rider being replaced is a like for like switch, as Screamer and SCB pointed out. Edited March 13, 2015 by Nellie 4 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
g13webb 4,254 Posted March 13, 2015 Like-for-like signing are allowed. So if North goes over 7 he CAN be replaced by a rider over 7 (but under Norths figure). BUT Poole couldn't redeclared back to 34 including Holder, Magic and North if they're all over 7. I've always felt this scenario is worded wrong, and favours teams with riders who score above CMA. To illuminate this manipulation of team changing and make it more fair to all teams, any replacement of riders should be governed to the averages, the team was assembled with at the start of the season. What's the point of having a point limit to building a team, when at the first opportunity it can be abused. Surely that's not the intention of the rules ??? Teams, with riders who are finding it hard to score and their CMA is dropping, are the ones that need help and , to me it is wrong that teams are penalised by the rules, if it that means, any replacement have to be governed by a their diminishing scores instead of the ones he started with. Another loop hole filled in.......... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Daniel Smith 5,661 Posted March 13, 2015 Any rider currently with an average over seven points a meeting CANT sign for Poole unless it;s in place of Holder or Janowski. The TWO 7+ riders will be in place all season with those figures at present. So if Dakota North is averaging 7.67 they cant sign Kildemand or Woffinden etc Of course they can sign Woffy or Killer if their averages fit. You're making it up. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skidder1 7,637 Posted March 13, 2015 Surely its been the case for many seasons that any team that shows the most improvement on their starting average is likely to at least be in the play-offs if not the eventual champions. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
g13webb 4,254 Posted March 13, 2015 Surely its been the case for many seasons that any team that shows the most improvement on their starting average is likely to at least be in the play-offs if not the eventual champions. But that doesn't make it right. Surely the idea would be for the rules to help the struggling clubs, The teams that have good scoring riders don't need to be helped. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
barrow boy 119 Posted March 14, 2015 (edited) Surely its been the case for many seasons that any team that shows the most improvement on their starting average is likely to at least be in the play-offs if not the eventual champions. Exactly what I said. Edited March 14, 2015 by barrow boy Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skidder1 7,637 Posted March 14, 2015 Exactly what I said. Indeed you did! but some clearly don't see that skill in team-building?! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
00000 1,279 Posted March 14, 2015 My prediction is that Eastbourne will finish bottom of the Elite League. that's what everyone always predicts. so why change now Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
noggin 1,388 Posted March 14, 2015 (edited) Poole Swindon Coventry Kings Lynn Belle Vue Leicester Wolverhampton Lakeside Edited March 25, 2015 by noggin 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Game On 1,117 Posted March 25, 2015 Poole Swindon Kings Lynn Belle Vue Leicester Coventry Wolverhampton Lakeside You might want to have a re-think on that prediction. Poole Coventry Kings Lynn Swindon Belle Vue Leicester Lakeside Wolverhampton Bees to win the play off final. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
