Sheffield Tigers 2023

[The Third Man 2,217]

2 hours ago, bellevueace said:

Maybe we should have just used Jack Smith for Max?

More honest than buying the title

[foreverblue 6,119]

2 hours ago, bellevueace said:

Maybe we should have just used Jack Smith for Max?

I didn't say it was against the rules or illegal and Poole would have done the same back in the day. 

 

[stevebrum 6,831]

4 hours ago, bellevueace said:

Maybe we should have just used Jack Smith for Max?

Or just RR or guest as has been the case for every other team in the play offs with injuries. 

[mikebv 10,361]

15 hours ago, The Third Man said:

More honest than buying the title

Didn't Sheffield use up THREE of their allowed TWO changes last season?

[bellevueace 917]

On 2/17/2023 at 6:24 PM, The Third Man said:

More honest than buying the title

Think the biggest reason you lost was the non performance of your number 1 at the NSS, weve had bad luck in all our finals and suffered some controversal decisions but still lost with good grace, we even lost two riders last season one a Sheffield track specialist so bringing in a replacement for Max with a lesser average which was within the rules was good management, wasnt there some debate on the signing of Kerr at the time too?

[bellevueace 917]

On 2/17/2023 at 8:30 PM, stevebrum said:

Or just RR or guest as has been the case for every other team in the play offs with injuries. 

We lost Bjerre against Coventry r/r and Kurtz last season r/r which cost us two titles so brought in a guest with a lesser average this season with no rules broken. Badly written rules have been exploited for years Matt Ford and Ian Thomas are two that spring to mind and fair play to them despite all the stick Poole got they didnt break rules, interestingly the football authorities are looking into changing the wording of the financial fair play rules as clubs have been using lawyers to get around breaching the ffp, a poorly written rulebook doesnt seem to be just a speedway problem, Man City have been charged with over 100 offences puts all the hot air over Lambert into perspective,

Edited February 19, 2023 by bellevueace

[stevebrum 6,831]

1 hour ago, bellevueace said:

We lost Bjerre against Coventry r/r and Kurtz last season r/r which cost us two titles so brought in a guest with a lesser average this season with no rules broken. Badly written rules have been exploited for years Matt Ford and Ian Thomas are two that spring to mind and fair play to them despite all the stick Poole got they didnt break rules, interestingly the football authorities are looking into changing the wording of the financial fair play rules as clubs have been using lawyers to get around breaching the ffp, a poorly written rulebook doesnt seem to be just a speedway problem, Man City have been charged with over 100 offences puts all the hot air over Lambert into perspective,

Funny how Wolves got turned down using Woffy when we lost both Freddie and Thorssell that cost us the title as well that year.

Seems the rule is allowed depends who asks, as is the usual case of the back slapping promoters of the BSPL who seem to bend to allow some teams to use those rules for one meaning but denying another team using the same rule.

Its no wonder the sport is a farce.

And yes it can get worse………. 2022 we can now introduce a rider ONLY for the play offs by introducing the world number 5 for one that was nowhere that standard on the same GP floor and fans will claim that Lambert was weaker because his average said so.

Sorry doesn’t sit well with me at all. 

[hyderd 1,216]

24 minutes ago, stevebrum said:

Funny how Wolves got turned down using Woffy when we lost both Freddie and Thorssell that cost us the title as well that year.

Seems the rule is allowed depends who asks, as is the usual case of the back slapping promoters of the BSPL who seem to bend to allow some teams to use those rules for one meaning but denying another team using the same rule.

Its no wonder the sport is a farce.

And yes it can get worse………. 2022 we can now introduce a rider ONLY for the play offs by introducing the world number 5 for one that was nowhere that standard on the same GP floor and fans will claim that Lambert was weaker because his average said so.

Sorry doesn’t sit well with me at all. 

Woofy.

 

[stevebrum 6,831]

57 minutes ago, hyderd said:

Woofy.

 

2 ffs

[Bagpuss 10,828]

1 hour ago, stevebrum said:

Funny how Wolves got turned down using Woffy when we lost both Freddie and Thorssell that cost us the title as well that year.

Seems the rule is allowed depends who asks, as is the usual case of the back slapping promoters of the BSPL who seem to bend to allow some teams to use those rules for one meaning but denying another team using the same rule.

Its no wonder the sport is a farce.

And yes it can get worse………. 2022 we can now introduce a rider ONLY for the play offs by introducing the world number 5 for one that was nowhere that standard on the same GP floor and fans will claim that Lambert was weaker because his average said so.

Sorry doesn’t sit well with me at all. 

Pretty straightforward to me......Fricke had a season ending injury, the rulebook wasn't clear (surprise surprise) on whether BV could replace him. They and the BSPL disagreed so a lawyer sorted it out and permitted BV to sign a replacement with a lower average. Who was only required because Fricke got injured in the first place. Far more satisfactory than guests or R/R which are two of the worst things about British Speedway.

[Skidder1 7,659]

13 hours ago, Bagpuss said:

Pretty straightforward to me......Fricke had a season ending injury, the rulebook wasn't clear (surprise surprise) on whether BV could replace him. They and the BSPL disagreed so a lawyer sorted it out and permitted BV to sign a replacement with a lower average. Who was only required because Fricke got injured in the first place. Far more satisfactory than guests or R/R which are two of the worst things about British Speedway.

Maybe CVS couldn't find a decent enough lawyer?

[stevebrum 6,831]

14 hours ago, Bagpuss said:

Pretty straightforward to me......Fricke had a season ending injury, the rulebook wasn't clear (surprise surprise) on whether BV could replace him. They and the BSPL disagreed so a lawyer sorted it out and permitted BV to sign a replacement with a lower average. Who was only required because Fricke got injured in the first place. Far more satisfactory than guests or R/R which are two of the worst things about British Speedway.

I thought it was straight forward as well. The rule book I thought WAS clear. No replacements after the deadline OR just for the play offs.

And seemingly obvious given both Lindgren and Thorssell had season ending injuries before the play offs for Wolves but using Woffy wasn’t granted because of those rules stated above. 
Fast forward a couple of seasons and now that same rule is ambiguous, so much so that the Aces WERE given permission to replace a rider when Wolves were denied previously.  
As usual the governing bodies applying rules in one instance but denying in another for the exact same reason.

Teams have lost the plays offs for many years because of injuries but so long as rulings are fair for all and applied equally then I see no reason why any team in the future can’t bring in a replacement for season ending injuries from now on. 

[Bagpuss 10,828]

48 minutes ago, Skidder1 said:

Maybe CVS couldn't find a decent enough lawyer?

Maybe.

22 minutes ago, stevebrum said:

I thought it was straight forward as well. The rule book I thought WAS clear. No replacements after the deadline OR just for the play offs.

And seemingly obvious given both Lindgren and Thorssell had season ending injuries before the play offs for Wolves but using Woffy wasn’t granted because of those rules stated above. 
Fast forward a couple of seasons and now that same rule is ambiguous, so much so that the Aces WERE given permission to replace a rider when Wolves were denied previously.  
As usual the governing bodies applying rules in one instance but denying in another for the exact same reason.

Teams have lost the plays offs for many years because of injuries but so long as rulings are fair for all and applied equally then I see no reason why any team in the future can’t bring in a replacement for season ending injuries from now on. 

I think that particular rule was unclear and when challenged by a third party it was proven so as it went against the BSPL's wishes. They really aren't for for purpose unfortunately.

Thete has been lots of bleating from some Sheffield fans but I really don't think they have a leg to stand on.

[bellevueace 917]

17 hours ago, stevebrum said:

Funny how Wolves got turned down using Woffy when we lost both Freddie and Thorssell that cost us the title as well that year.

Seems the rule is allowed depends who asks, as is the usual case of the back slapping promoters of the BSPL who seem to bend to allow some teams to use those rules for one meaning but denying another team using the same rule.

Its no wonder the sport is a farce.

And yes it can get worse………. 2022 we can now introduce a rider ONLY for the play offs by introducing the world number 5 for one that was nowhere that standard on the same GP floor and fans will claim that Lambert was weaker because his average said so.

Sorry doesn’t sit well with me at all. 

Max might not have been up in the GP rankings with Lambert but Roberts BL average was under and without a doubt Max was well capable of going through the card at home and at least equalling Roberts score around Owlerton, we also going back through the years have fallen fould of certain rules that have benefitted other clubs Its not just a wolves thing.

[szkocjasid 3,142]

On 2/17/2023 at 8:30 PM, stevebrum said:

Or just RR or guest as has been the case for every other team in the play offs with injuries. 

The funny thing is, fans spent all season moaning about certain teams using guests & not signing a replacement only to complain when Belle Vue do the exact opposite!