Berwick 2017 50th Year

[Goldmember06 90]

Not at all. Can you give me a valid reason why Berwick should not be allowed to redeclare their line up?

[dontforgetthefueltapsbruv 10,710]

The only reason he hasnt got his new higher average is due to missing meetings to ride elsewhere where the BSPA do not allow a facility.

The MC should therefore not allow gain from that situation and should invoke the reg specifically written to stop such. Whether the manipulation us deliberate or accidental matters not.

[northyorksbear 610]

Not at all. Can you give me a valid reason why Berwick should not be allowed to redeclare their line up?

No reason why Berwick shouldn't redeclare their lineup, provided it is within the league rules.

 

Don't get the "best interest of the sport" being let's ignore the rules we have in place to favour any specified team

[Goldmember06 90]

The rules get ignored all the time, don't single Berwick out. Best interest of the sport for sure, does anyone want to see crowds dwindle at Berwick to the point we are struggling then another winter of uncertainty. Speedway in the UK is on its arse big time so let's just bury our heads in the sand as long as our teams alright (aimed firmly at others northyorksbear)

The only reason he hasnt got his new higher average is due to missing meetings to ride elsewhere where the BSPA do not allow a facility.

The MC should therefore not allow gain from that situation and should invoke the reg specifically written to stop such. Whether the manipulation us deliberate or accidental matters not.

Has happened before. Did Edinburgh not get to keep Katajisto at reserve for another month one year due to him being at Cub Scouts or some meaningless meeting. No doubt the new Berwick line up won't get verified and all the haters on here can be happy

[Paulco 7,101]

If Gappmaier hasn't raced the necessary meetings to acquire a new average , then it makes perfect sense to make this move before he does . Everyone else uses or bends loopholes in the rules to get what they want , so I don't see what Berwick are doing wrong . If dodgy burgers at Berlin airport can start you on an assessed 7 the following year , then the all-Austrian Morris dancing best pairs is a legitimate miss .

[dontforgetthefueltapsbruv 10,710]

Not singling any team out.

 

I agree rules are ignored all the time. Id be surprised if there is any team that hasnt benefited at some time.

 

Doesnt make it right to keep doing it though.

 

How many new starts with transparency and integrity are we going to have?

 

And actually this could benefit my team. We have already won at Berwick. Another team may not as a result and could lose out on a play off place to Ipswich because of it.

 

How would that be in the best interests of a sport aiming to be professional?

[Goldmember06 90]

Not singling any team out.

 

I agree rules are ignored all the time. Id be surprised if there is any team that hasnt benefited at some time.

 

Doesnt make it right to keep doing it though.

 

How many new starts with transparency and integrity are we going to have?

 

And actually this could benefit my team. We have already won at Berwick. Another team may not as a result and could lose out on a play off place to Ipswich because of it.

 

How would that be in the best interests of a sport aiming to be professional?

Oh well Berwick will struggle along in the interests of keeping it fair for everyone that hasn't been to Berwick yet so they can get a fair chance of winning. Edited May 8, 2017 by Goldmember

[Paulco 7,101]

Not singling any team out.

 

I agree rules are ignored all the time. Id be surprised if there is any team that hasnt benefited at some time.

 

Doesnt make it right to keep doing it though.

 

How many new starts with transparency and integrity are we going to have?

 

And actually this could benefit my team. We have already won at Berwick. Another team may not as a result and could lose out on a play off place to Ipswich because of it.

 

How would that be in the best interests of a sport aiming to be professional?

But Berwick aren't doing anything underhand , they're just adjusting things while they can , before Gappmaier's average changes .

[dontforgetthefueltapsbruv 10,710]

But Berwick aren't doing anything underhand , they're just adjusting things while they can , before Gappmaier's average changes .

One of my earlier posts was actually to say I see why it has/will be allowed.

Already this season it has been the case that other teams havent had adjustments. For that reason alone it shouldnt be blocked.

My follow on posts have really only been in response to why I think this type of sutuation SHOULD be dealt with differently in the future.

Oh well Berwick will struggle along in the interests of keeping it fair for everyone that hasn't been to Berwick yet so they can get a fair chance of winning.

In an ideal world yes! But dont take that the wrong way - see the bit above.

[Goldmember06 90]

Maybe other teams haven't needed to make such adjustments other than like for like signings due to injuries/other reasons. I may though it's about time SGB was run by an independent body and not the promoters

[northyorksbear 610]

But Berwick aren't doing anything underhand , they're just adjusting things while they can , before Gappmaier's average changes .

I don't think anyone is suggesting Berwick any doing something underhand

 

The bottom line is that a rule has been introduced for the situation of a team having majority of riders getting their new average and then also having another rider who hasn't completed the required number ( for whatever reason ) and by using this old average redeclaring for a new 1-7.

 

Whether the rule should be there is up for debate,but it is and therefore should be enforced!

[sparks123 151]

 

 

None of the Scunthorpe rider who hadnt achieved a new average yet were averaging more though, they were all going to drop, so Scunny would have actually had a little more to play with.

 

As for guests, it's not relevant. Different rules.

Scunny average at the start of the season 39.27. They put a rider in who is 1.53 higher than the rider being replaced because of only 3 riders gaining an average (If you add 0.3 for Josh and 0.32 for Lewis and 0.1 for Josh they wouldn't be able to fit Nielsen in).

 

Ipswich put a rider in who has a higher average than Nico so not a like for like change. Cameron Heeps didn't have the 2.06 added to his average or Danyon have the 2.57 added to his average.

 

Not sure why Berwick team is causing such a stir while other teams are doing exactly the same and people think it's ok for them and not for Berwick.

[Fromafar 10,413]

It's farcical in what is meant to be a professional run sport, that every season discussions are always the same ,the rule book and its interpretation and anomalies in the " best interest of the sport".

[dontforgetthefueltapsbruv 10,710]

Scunny average at the start of the season 39.27. They put a rider in who is 1.53 higher than the rider being replaced because of only 3 riders gaining an average (If you add 0.3 for Josh and 0.32 for Lewis and 0.1 for Josh they wouldn't be able to fit Nielsen in).

 

Ipswich put a rider in who has a higher average than Nico so not a like for like change. Cameron Heeps didn't have the 2.06 added to his average or Danyon have the 2.57 added to his average.

 

Not sure why Berwick team is causing such a stir while other teams are doing exactly the same and people think it's ok for them and not for Berwick.

Ipswich is slightly different as there was not a single rider that had raced the set 4h 4a and the new 7 would still be under 40 before May 1st which is the date set in the regs.

I do accept however that potentially even that situation could have fallen into my arguement. If so we wouldve looked elsewhere and signed Batchelor or similar.

Of course we now have the opposite situation to Berwick. We have a no7 averaging 4.57 from 7 meetings who even running 7 lasts in the 8th meeting would be on 3.8 yet we can only replace with a 2.27 ptr.

[northyorksbear 610]

Scunny average at the start of the season 39.27. They put a rider in who is 1.53 higher than the rider being replaced because of only 3 riders gaining an average (If you add 0.3 for Josh and 0.32 for Lewis and 0.1 for Josh they wouldn't be able to fit Nielsen in).

 

Ipswich put a rider in who has a higher average than Nico so not a like for like change. Cameron Heeps didn't have the 2.06 added to his average or Danyon have the 2.57 added to his average.

 

Not sure why Berwick team is causing such a stir while other teams are doing exactly the same and people think it's ok for them and not for Berwick.

 

Scunny changed their team before 1st May and although they utilised some riders averages dropping, the potential to review the others averages wasn't available to be used.

 

Ipswich changed their team before any rider got a new average and kept below the 40 limit hence why their team was legal. You could argue that real averages could have been applied across the board for their team and I don't know if that would have taken them over the limit. However I think the rule is specifically aimed at a mixture of new averages and old averages.

 

So other teams haven't done the same.

 

I reiterate I'm not anti Berwick, but if a rule is there it should be applied.