gazzac 1,015 Posted May 15, 2017 (edited) I can't see that a rider's age has any particular relevance. If it were Tony Atkin missing meetings then Stoke would similarly disadvantaged. What if a leading rider decided that he wouldn't bother travelling for away matches? As this rule stands, he could do this - and his club would have the benefit of a guest or r/r. I know this is an extreme example, and the liklihood that the authorities would step in and put a stop to it, but I can't accept that it is a good rule if it gives a promoter the opportunity to say to one of his riders "look Joe, you never do much at Mildenbourne, so duck out of our match there and we'll use a guest/r/r in your place." "We can always put your absence down as work commitments." I can appreciate that a case can be made for individual circumstances, but a blank cheque for "work commitments" shouldn't be acceptable. Perhaps I'm a lone voice on this, and I wouldn't fall out with anyone over it, but like most people, I want speedway to have a straightforward and sensible book of regulations and I don't think this is one of these. Perhaps a maximum amount per rider (maybe once or twice a season), or maybe once or twice per club, then revert to a no 8 or a 3 point rider. Would give leaway for exceptional circumstances like exams /child birth etc, but limit any club taking the mickey. On hindsight probably best to limit the amount of times a club does it rather than a rider. Edited May 15, 2017 by gazzac 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
