Any news on the statement from the Poole management as mentioned in today's speedway star 🤔

As usual it appears everyone is heading Glasgow. Maybe they should have trials day to sort them out.🤔😂😂

Stene Pijper has had 3 years in the NDL, but hasn't developed as well as expected, no idea why though. Only average 3.6 in the NDL With the rumoured top 4, Ace's average would be too high for Glasgow to fit him in

So, just as a reminder, the SCB statement says 'Following the 2nd Leg of the Championship Play Off Final on Wednesday 7th October 2026 between Poole and Scunthorpe, the Scunthorpe club lodged an appeal against the decision of the result of the Super Heat, where it was alleged that Poole Rider Zach Cook had breached SCB Regulation -   • 012.1.11 Leaving the Track   A rider whose machine crosses the inner edge of the track with 2 wheels must be disqualified unless, in the opinion of the Referee, the action was taken in the interests of safety for other riders or the rider involved was forced off course by another rider.   Having reviewed the regulation as written, this has been breached, however due to the result being announced this was now a Statement of Fact and any appeal is inadmissible as per SCB Regulation 018.1.2 a)   Therefore, the result stands as declared, and the Scunthorpe Promotion have accepted the decision.' So, what fact has the SCB declared?  'A rider whose machine crosses the inner edge of the track with 2 wheels must be disqualified unless, in the opinion of the Referee, the action was taken in the interests of safety for other riders or the rider involved was forced off course by another rider.' It has therefore confirmed that the machine crossed the inner edge of the track with two wheels. As it hasn't said how it has arrived at that conclusion it may well be that it decided that both wheels were over the centre green side of the inner edge.  The reality is that you can't conclude what fact has been decided upon from that statement.  If you have a different statement that validates your version of the facts I'd be very happy to see it.  You also say 'You can't argue against facts' despite that being exactly what the SCB has done by saying the referee got it wrong despite it being a 'statement of fact' which makes an appeal inadmissible   

Stene Pijper needs multiple seasons in the NDL first, he's got a long way to go, brilliant prospect, just not ready yet. I wonder if Ace Pijper could be heading to Glasgow though as their number 2?

No, I don't expect you to accept people's unsubstantiated opinions. But you seem to be getting confused. The SCB statement is not an unsubstantiated opinion. It's a statement of fact, just as the decision of the referee on the night is a statement of fact.  You can't argue against facts.