Jump to content
British Speedway Forum
Sign in to follow this  
ThinBlueWitch

Ipswich v Birmingham KOC 2nd Leg 06/06

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Bash said:

This is what is wrong with some of the rules in speedway, we can't use Scott Nicholls again because of the 8 day rule but we can use Sam Masters who rode for the opposition last week in the same meeting as Scott. I suppose the only benefit of this rule is we can't use Batch this week!

Scott could have been used as a guest for Jason. Perhaps he we asked but declined as he didn't want to do four meetings in a week. 8 day rule does not apply when riding as a guest for the home #1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gavan said:

No they can’t 

It was tongue in cheek!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can’t use RR for Dan Thompson surely. 
 

that means no RS in your team. Making the team illegal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Witches1998 said:

Different rules if the RS has moved into the top 5. R/R is then an option 

Messenger_creation_d859a359-4b03-4b8f-bf63-9c24b18bcd12.jpeg

That’s ridiculous 

 

Rules are. Teams have to use a RS. Yet tomorrow Ipswich can have an extra liga rider take a ride. A former British champ in Ellis take a ride. 
 

BSPL made a big mistake here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Phil The Ace said:

That’s ridiculous 

 

Rules are. Teams have to use a RS. Yet tomorrow Ipswich can have an extra liga rider take a ride. A former British champ in Ellis take a ride. 
 

BSPL made a big mistake here. 

Dan T has been much improved this season and deserves to be in the 1-5 but r/r should not be an option, it seems yet again they have messed up the rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, foreverblue said:

Dan T has been much improved this season and deserves to be in the 1-5 but r/r should not be an option, it seems yet again they have messed up the rules.

Yeah he does deserve it. No denying that. He’s been fantastic. 
 

I don’t think bspl really thought of this when doing the rules. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Phil The Ace said:

Yeah he does deserve it. No denying that. He’s been fantastic. 
 

I don’t think bspl really thought of this when doing the rules. 

No they never think through the rules properly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Phil The Ace said:

Yeah he does deserve it. No denying that. He’s been fantastic. 
 

I don’t think bspl really thought of this when doing the rules. 

He’s improved more than any other rising star, and has progressed through to the main body. That’s Ipswich’ gain for picking him, and staying with him again this season. Why should Ipswich then be punished when he’s missing by having to replace him by Hodder or another clearly inferior rising star who will undoubtedly score 0,0,0? Why is it wrong to use R/R for him like you can any other member of the top 5? Seems totally fair to me. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Aries said:

He’s improved more than any other rising star, and has progressed through to the main body. That’s Ipswich’ gain for picking him, and staying with him again this season. Why should Ipswich then be punished when he’s missing by having to replace him by Hodder or another clearly inferior rising star who will undoubtedly score 0,0,0? Why is it wrong to use R/R for him like you can any other member of the top 5? Seems totally fair to me. 

Because he’s a rising star.  Good season or not.

 

lets look at it another way. Why when your RS is at reserve you can only get a guest from the rising star list??? What is the difference. Nothing 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Phil The Ace said:

Yeah he does deserve it. No denying that. He’s been fantastic. 
 

I don’t think bspl really thought of this when doing the rules. 

Of course they thought of it  it is a specific paragraph in the rules. It is a clear act of commission, not an omission through oversight.

Whether it is a wisely drawn regulation is certainly up for debate though.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Phil The Ace said:

 

lets look at it another way. Why when your RS is at reserve you can only get a guest from the rising star list??? What is the difference. Nothing 

Clearly it’s a reward for progression and earning yourself a place in the main body of the team, which is why the scheme is there in the first place. It’s not a special rule just for Ipswich and nobody else. If any of the others show the same progression and move out of the reserve berths then they’ll also be granted the same facility. The rules are for all clubs, not just one. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Aries said:

Clearly it’s a reward for progression and earning yourself a place in the main body of the team, which is why the scheme is there in the first place. It’s not a special rule just for Ipswich and nobody else. If any of the others show the same progression and move out of the reserve berths then they’ll also be granted the same facility. The rules are for all clubs, not just one. 

I’m not saying Ipswich are bending the rules or anything. It’s clear the rules there. But that’s an oversight for me there. They not thought that through at all. Easy for clubs to manipulate that rule but saying a riders injured etc. (not saying that’s what Ipswich done)

 

the rule is wrong to me. Not Ipswich 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically the rule contradicts itself. 
 

first it says you MUST use a rising star rider. 
 

But at same time you can use R/R meaning you are not fielding a RS 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Phil The Ace said:

Because he’s a rising star.  Good season or not.

 

lets look at it another way. Why when your RS is at reserve you can only get a guest from the rising star list??? What is the difference. Nothing 

The difference is that Dan has qualified to be in Ipswich's 1 -5 so deserves to be treated the same way as any other rider in a club's main body of a team.

Suppose this ruling existed in 2022 would you have supported the notion of Tom Brennan's absence covered by only an unattached rising star once he had made Belle Vue's 1 - 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy