Shale Searcher 1,264 Posted February 7, 2016 I reckon it's probably 2 to 3 points to high, considering the riders available..? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Steve Shovlar 10,439 Posted February 7, 2016 (edited) Disagree. More to do with certain promoters inability to work and negociate prperly and early enough with riders. The main problem being the agm being held far too late. Why nit have it ib June/July for the following season meaning planning can start far in advance. To be honest both Kings Lynn and Leicester have brought the problems on themselves. Leicester could have has Josh G for 2016, he agreed to ride for them for the money offered, then they didn't send the contract and so Rosco then came in with a contract and snapped Josh up. Edited February 7, 2016 by Steve Shovlar 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
orion 7,618 Posted February 7, 2016 Disagree. More to do with certain promoters inability to work and negociate prperly and early enough with riders. The main problem being the agm being held far too late. Why nit have it ib June/July for the following season meaning planning can start far in advance. To be honest both Kings Lynn and Leicester have brought the problems on themselves. How can you plan in june and july when you don't know the amount of teams there are going to be ? if a myth that the amg is held to late there is loads of time to plan before the start of the season Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Steve Shovlar 10,439 Posted February 7, 2016 How can you plan in june and july when you don't know the amount of teams there are going to be ? if a myth that the amg is held to late there is loads of time to plan before the start of the season Riders want continuity and to know where they are as far in advance as possible. If they know they have a guarenteed team berth in the UK they are likely to agree, especially if there is slight doubt they might not get a ride in Sweden or Poland. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
remembertheracers 171 Posted February 7, 2016 This shows how the stock of the Elite League has plunged in recent years. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brandon 134 Posted February 7, 2016 Disagree. More to do with certain promoters inability to work and negociate prperly and early enough with riders. The main problem being the agm being held far too late. Why nit have it ib June/July for the following season meaning planning can start far in advance. To be honest both Kings Lynn and Leicester have brought the problems on themselves. Leicester could have has Josh G for 2016, he agreed to ride for them for the money offered, then they didn't send the contract and so Rosco then came in with a contract and snapped Josh up. How can you have riders signing for teams for the following season when only half way through the current? Bonkers! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Daytripper 1,123 Posted February 7, 2016 (edited) Riders want continuity and to know where they are as far in advance as possible. If they know they have a guarenteed team berth in the UK they are likely to agree, especially if there is slight doubt they might not get a ride in Sweden or Poland.Steve you know as well as I do that Matt Ford is one of the promoters that start making their plans and lining up riders from about mid season. It's pretty obvious that Belle Vue were getting sorted early on, lining their riders up and at the Lakeside dinner and dance Jon Cook told us 5 riders were offered jobs at the Coventry away meeting in August and they all said they were interested. Kings Lynn and Leicester seem to have dropped a major clanger in dithering too long. Having said that it's difficult to see how these things can be firmed up earlier than the AGM on October.It is common knowledge that they have a pre-AGM a few weeks before that to sketch out their general plans. Edited February 7, 2016 by Daytripper Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KIRKYLANE 537 Posted February 7, 2016 If top riders had not deserted GB then it would have been OK. Now we have three teams struggling to name their 7. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
INCOGNITO 357 Posted February 7, 2016 The forward planning should have been a drastic change and instead of drawing up a list of 36 possible heat leaders they should have drawn up a list of which riders actually wanted to ride here. With Darcy Ward sadly lost to the sport and a clear indication that the likes of Neils K Iversen were not going to be back it left a 40.5 limit hard to achieve and virtually impossible when you are restricted to 3 heat leaders from the list without some even below a six average. In the end less than 20 from the list were willing to return so teams were going to start with one heat leader while some will have 3 and a rider much better than some on the list and with a higher average. The 2016 season should have been a new look for the Elite League with either a fixed race night or a squad system for heat leaders so some could return for half the meetings or made it possible for teams to have a regular team with no doubling up riders apart from the fast track riders. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tellboy 3,670 Posted February 7, 2016 Disagree. More to do with certain promoters inability to work and negociate prperly and early enough with riders. The main problem being the agm being held far too late. Why nit have it ib June/July for the following season meaning planning can start far in advance. To be honest both Kings Lynn and Leicester have brought the problems on themselves. Leicester could have has Josh G for 2016, he agreed to ride for them for the money offered, then they didn't send the contract and so Rosco then came in with a contract and snapped Josh up. There seems only a small pool of riders that seem willing to race here now.You mention Josh G but if he had signed for Leicester then Swindon would have been in the same situation.What you need is a bigger pool of riders willing to race.It seems to me the top riders will stay away unless a very good contract is presented to them.To which I don't blame any promoter for not offering money to which they cant afford. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mikebv 10,328 Posted February 7, 2016 (edited) Maybe as well as putting together the HL list they should also have had confirmation of riders intentions to ride too? If they want to use what is effectively 'semi rider control' by putting a restrictive list together which only allowed three per team from that list, then maybe they should have gone all the way and not allowed any further team building until all teams had their top three riders from the list in place? This could have also ensured that riders of heat leader quality not on the list, who suddenly 'appear' could have gone to teams needing riders, and not instead, making already strong teams even stronger Typical of the way the sport is run in this country that, for the best intentions, a rule is brought in but then badly administered.. What should have delivered a 'level playing field' once again hasn't.. Edited February 7, 2016 by mikebv 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Starman2006 2,356 Posted February 7, 2016 This shows how the stock of the Elite League has plunged in recent years. Really, perhaps you would care to explain in full. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
weatherwatcher 664 Posted February 7, 2016 It is by far the worst line up that the EL teams have ever fielded. If next year gets any worse that this year is, then I see no option for the clubs to call it a day with going any further with the EL. Maube now is the time to just have what has been put forward on here, one league, with a North/South split and at the end of the season, a decideder of the top 4 teams from each league coming together to see who wins a trophy, nothing like the play ofs we have now, but a genuine winner of the league. If there are still 8 teams left next year, I think they will be finding it even harder to get 7 riders per team, without the majority of those riders being made up of PL lads. So if that happens it defeats the whole reason of having an El. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bagpuss 10,802 Posted February 7, 2016 (edited) Several posters said straight away that the limit was too high, was quite obvious that the number of available riders was inadequate to make all teams competitive. Hence the lopsided nature of team strengths this year. Quite possible that Lynn hung on too long for an answer from Iversen as other 'top' riders had signed up elsewhere, and it would be fair to say that our promotion have had a bit of a nightmare winter. But the limit was still too high. Edited February 7, 2016 by Gordon Bennett Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Game On 1,117 Posted February 7, 2016 Really, perhaps you would care to explain in full. Matt Ford Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
