Belle Vue Vs Wolves, Nss, 27/9/17... Playoff Semi Final 2nd Leg.

[Steve0 5,517]

You did have choice, if you can't host 2nd leg on a Wednesday nobody's fault but yours

Yes - it's all Aleksander's fault!

[Red Flag 454]

No it is not, it is the owners of the stadium and whoever agreed a wed for one of the legs. What would they have done if neither club could race on a wed.

 

Can't be a random choice of dates must have been agreed with the clubs, I wouldn't mind the 2nd leg away, we have done it 4 times and won 3 of these, best team wins every time

[noggin 1,391]

No it is not, it is the owners of the stadium and whoever agreed a wed for one of the legs. What would they have done if neither club could race on a wed.

 

I expect BT thought Poole would be in the final, was always consecutive Mondays.

[WestGorton1884 621]

Most important meeting of the year and we have to race it without Fricke .

What an absolutely farcical situation ,

[Beowulf 1,513]

Most important meeting of the year and we have to race it without Fricke .

What an absolutely farcical situation ,

Can't do anything about the weather.

[SCB 15]

Most important meeting of the year and we have to race it without Fricke .

What an absolutely farcical situation ,

Your meeting was rained off 10 days ago, maybe you should have rearranged it sooner 🤷🏻‍♂️

[ReadingRacer2017 159]

Confirmed teams for Friday

 

1. Kenneth Bjerre

2. Steve Worrall

3. Hans Andersen (Guest)

4. Rohan Tungate

5. Craig Cook

6. Dan Bewley

7. Rob Shuttleworth (Guest)

 

1. Freddie Lindgren

2. Kyle Howarth

3. Rory Schlein

4. R/R

5. Sam Masters

6. Mark Riss

7. Nathan Greaves

 

 

Prediction - Belle Vue 51-39 Wolves - Wolves go through, JUST!!

Edited September 27, 2017 by Danny Birds Of A Feather

[Beowulf 1,513]

Confirmed teams for Friday

 

1. Kenneth Bjerre

2. Steve Worrall

3. Hans Andersen (Guest)

4. Rohan Tungate

5. Craig Cook

6. Dan Bewley

7. Rob Shuttleworth (Guest)

 

1. Freddie Lindgren

2. Kyle Howarth

3. Rory Schlein

4. R/R

5. Sam Masters

6. Mark Riss

7. Nathan Greaves

What kind of strange pleasure do you get from doing this ? It has already been discussed that Andersen cannot guest. Weirdo.

[ouch 1,199]

Most important meeting of the year and we have to race it without Fricke .

What an absolutely farcical situation ,

Was always going to be the case after the rain off.

 

Run Thursday and screw wolves. Run Monday and (slightly) screw BT. Run Friday and screw Belle Vue and get double bubble as it screws the Colts.

No brainer for the powers that be, win win in fact.

[B.V 72 1,054]

I am really pd off that the Belle vue management have agreed to rerun this meeting on Friday.

I have spent a lot of money on not missing a home match and a few away matches for both the aces and the colts this year.Watching both teams reach the play offs has been brilliant but one silly decision could blow any chance of both teams winning anything this year and makes me think what's the point of supporting both teams all season.

First the Aces.I know Wolves are missing Thorsell but with a 13 point lead and R/R using 4 of their top 5 riders as replacements round Belle vue I do not think their return will be much different to what Thorssell would have scored he does blow hot and cold round the NSS 3 wins and 2 last places in the PLRC proves my point.

But imo with 13 points to catch up Fricke is not replaceable round Belle vue no replacement rider(if allowed) on his average will score anywhere near as many points and R/R will not replace his score as we cannot use Bjerre and a reserve will have to take one of his rides.It would have been bloody hard with Fricke but without him it makes it very unlikely that we will progress to the final.

Now the Colts which Ps me off the most.They have finished top of the league and if I am honest they look for the league they are in a better team than the Aces and I had massive confidence that they could win the play offs.But now all this could come crashing down as on the same night the Colts are in a play off semi final at Lakeside.We are already without Smith and payne but with a good guest and R/R I think we could overcome this and hold them to a catchable score.But now because of this silly decision to ride both meetings on the same night we will now be without Bewley and Shuttleworth as well that's our top 4 riders missing for a play off semi final crazy. As I said one stupid decision could destroy a whole season for both teams.

This is no slight on Wolves at all it just how this decision has made me feel and as I said I am more pd off with the affect this decision has had on the Colts as if they and my support of them all season does not matter.

Edited September 27, 2017 by B.V 72

[Aces51 2,778]

It may not be the fault of the Aces management. I suspect they were told by the BSPA that it had to be run before Monday and Friday would obviously be Wolves preference. Any night other than Thursday and we would be missing one or more riders.

[B.V 72 1,054]

It may not be the fault of the Aces management. I suspect they were told by the BSPA that it had to be run before Monday and Friday would obviously be Wolves preference. Any night other than Thursday and we would be missing one or more riders.

Who ever is to blame has really pissed me off I will be getting a refund on my Wolves ticket in the morning(I have not missed a home meeting in years) as I will not pay for a meeting that my team has little or no chance of winning because of the stupid way the sport is run.More so I cannot attend a meeting that says sod the Colts and could destroy any hopes of the Colts making their final. Edited September 28, 2017 by B.V 72

[BWitcher 12,453]

18.10.1 If a rider is representing their FMN in an FIM Speedway Championship, irrespective of the

rider’s MA, a choice of Guest or Absent Rider Replacement facility (if permitted by Art 18.10)

is available.

 

According to that rule a guest isn't allowed. Otherwise why 'if permitted by Art 18.10'. Art 18.10 clearly doesn't permit a guest for a rider in the 2-5.

 

FACILITIES

a1) Absent #1: G or RR

a2) Absent D-up (if riding for the “other” team) G or RR

1 Absent rider (2 – 5): RR

c) More than 1 Absent rider (1 - 5) 1 x RR facility and G for all others

d) Absent #6 or #7: G

e) “No Facility” Premiership 1-5 Championship rider with an MA up to and including 4.00 Premiership 6-7 & Championship 1-7 NDL G* not declared in a SGBP & SGBC team declaration

 

Is there any other reason why it would say 'if permitted by Art 18.10'? Maybe I am missing something?

 

Edited to add: Only thing I can think of is it meaning that only 1 x RR facility can be used.. but then it should specify, if permitted by Art 18.10 c

Edited September 28, 2017 by BWitcher

[waiheke1 4,295]

 

According to that rule a guest isn't allowed. Otherwise why 'if permitted by Art 18.10'. Art 18.10 clearly doesn't permit a guest for a rider in the 2-5.

 

FACILITIES

a1) Absent #1: G or RR

a2) Absent D-up (if riding for the other team) G or RR

1 Absent rider (2 5): RR

c) More than 1 Absent rider (1 - 5) 1 x RR facility and G for all others

d) Absent #6 or #7: G

e) No Facility Premiership 1-5 Championship rider with an MA up to and including 4.00 Premiership 6-7 & Championship 1-7 NDL G* not declared in a SGBP & SGBC team declaration

 

Is there any other reason why it would say 'if permitted by Art 18.10'? Maybe I am missing something?

 

Edited to add: Only thing I can think of is it meaning that only 1 x RR facility can be used.. but then it should specify, if permitted by Art 18.10 c

Looks like a contradictory rule.

As "regardless of MA" is surely meant to indicate the facility is there for all riders?

But as you say if that is the intent then there should be no need to refer back to "if permitted by 18:10"

[BWitcher 12,453]

Looks like a contradictory rule.

As "regardless of MA" is surely meant to indicate the facility is there for all riders?

But as you say if that is the intent then there should be no need to refer back to "if permitted by 18:10"

 

This is the point, what has the MA got to do with anything in either rule? If it said regardless of team position it would make sense. It's pretty clear, a guest isn't permitted by Art 18.10.

 

As you say, what other reason would there be for the 'if permitted by 18.10"?

 

I have no doubt a guest will be allowed though as there is a precedent earlier in the season...

 

So best choices seem to be Lambert, Harris or Nicholls?

Edited September 28, 2017 by BWitcher