AlanF 295 Posted July 1, 2017 Issue 1 9.27. Issue 15 6.88. Says it all about Kennett. In may be looking at it wrong, but surely the original average was from the championship. Actual Premiership averages were x1.4. 6.88 x 1.4 = 9.63, so you could say he is doing fine. Problem is he is #1 and that was never realistic. Everybidy knows that you need a team of riders who can increase their average to win anything, but Rye picked a team full of riders in the downside of their career. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WalterPlinge 657 Posted July 1, 2017 Would have thought the main priority for Rye House is to be winning at home to keep the fans happy. I'd have thought Kennett & Perks is stronger than Sedgmen & Barker at home. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RobMcCaffery 2,752 Posted July 1, 2017 (edited) It's a results based sport - if someone under performs they can expect to be released. Of course, if you don't want to win anything then you should have kept him Never used to be and it was in a damn sight healthier state then. Yes they were important, but not life or death as now. People actually enjoyed the racing and the wins were a bonus. I know many people would go to watch and have no idea of the result, or in extreme cases not even know there was a match on. They'd just turn up to watch a night of entertaining racing, not buy a programme or bother listening to the p.a. I'd say they're the ones that have gone missing, just leaving the results-obsessed seeking reflected glory. Would have thought the main priority for Rye House is to be winning at home to keep the fans happy. I'd have thought Kennett & Perks is stronger than Sedgmen & Barker at home. Most supporters notice home defeats far more than away wins. I know of at least one track where it was rumoured the promoter banned all talk of away matches by the announcer/presenter, especially defeats, apart from running coaches, on the basis that all most fans cared about was what happened at home and there was no point is disillusioning them. Edited July 1, 2017 by Rob McCaffery 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rayleigh 362 Posted July 1, 2017 At Swindon it was so apparent that this team was simply not up to it away from home and fans would have shouted that every other team have made changes but not us, well we have and who knows it might just pay off, at least we tried to roll the dice, how about getting behind the team and if it doesn't work, moan then. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Steve0 5,517 Posted July 1, 2017 True but always harsh on riders like Perks who improve and then get the chop. I agree but speedway is a stupid numbers game. Obviously Branford should have got the chop rather than Perks but that would have put Rye House above the average limit even though their team average is 4-5 points less than Wolves - it's stupid!! 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
A ORLOV 8,628 Posted July 1, 2017 I agree but speedway is a stupid numbers game. Obviously Branford should have got the chop rather than Perks but that would have put Rye House above the average limit even though their team average is 4-5 points less than Wolves - it's stupid!! Agreed, for this year a better option might have been that the team limit should have been the highest that any club had as at the point the new averages were calculated. They could have then started with a proper average for 2018. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stevebrum 6,821 Posted July 1, 2017 Perks hopefully will get another spot somewhere else i bet Wolves wished they could fit him in. Why would we? His average is 4.08, lower than Riss on 4.34 so it's possible. It's not a strengthener tho. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wolfsbane 12,944 Posted July 1, 2017 Why would we? His average is 4.08, lower than Riss on 4.34 so it's possible. It's not a strengthener tho. Instead of Greaves it would be!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stevebrum 6,821 Posted July 1, 2017 Instead of Greaves it would be!! No argument there! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted July 1, 2017 The wisdom of the Rye House team changes will be reflected in how they perform in their next away match, at Wolverhampton on Monday, July 10. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Game On 1,117 Posted July 1, 2017 The wisdom of the Rye House team changes will be reflected in how they perform in their next away match, at Wolverhampton on Monday, July 10. Well thats easy another defeat 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stevebrum 6,821 Posted July 1, 2017 The wisdom of the Rye House team changes will be reflected in how they perform in their next away match, at Wolverhampton on Monday, July 10. On paper a strengthener. Barker is hit and miss at Wolves, Sedgman in the main body is unlikely to score more than Perks would have at reserves. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WalterPlinge 657 Posted July 1, 2017 The wisdom of the Rye House team changes will be reflected in how they perform in their next away match, at Wolverhampton on Monday, July 10. No it won't. They would be slaughtered at Wolves with or without the team changes. The wisdom of the team changes will be shown by how they perform at home for the rest of the season to keep the fans happy. I suspect the changes won't improve results. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SCB 0 Posted July 1, 2017 The wisdom of the Rye House team changes will be reflected in how they perform in their next away match, at Wolverhampton on Monday, July 10. Kennett scored 0 last time so at least Barker doesnt have to do much to be considered an imporvement then! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted July 2, 2017 RYE HOUSE PRESS RELEASE http://www.ryehouserockets.co/news.php?extend.1443 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
