False dawn

With respect.... ITK or your best guess?

Given that Leicester released Max last year for cost reasons, it seems unlikely they would sign two GP riders. And Dougy is very popular at Leicester. But hey, what do I know?

Same thing.

Adam Ellis was born in France. It ain't simple.

That's a hell of a youth development programme 😂

Am I the only one that used to look forward to the AGM to find out all the important stuff for the next season? It was the deadline for teams to declare they were running (Plymouth) it was when the points limit was set and any significant rule changes were announced. It has become clear in recent years that the points limits, at least, have been decided in advance of the AGM. Teams have increasingly announced rider signings ahead of the AGM. Even whole teams have been announced. "Subject to approval" of course. Now we have an official announcement stating, "The meeting, which acts as the formal conclusion of business for the current year" whatever that means followed by further clarification, "The AGM itself does not directly determine the structure of the sport for the following season as discussions regarding 2027 and beyond have been taking place for some time". So the process of control of our sport becomes further clouded in mystery. The lack of transparency is astounding. Well it would be if it hadn't been going on this way, increasingly, over a very long period of time.

And from the rest of that statement its clear that the AGM is fairly meaningless when it comes to next year's rules.

I'll stay up for my online issue!

I'll say a few things just to make my position crystal clear..... 1. I'm not a Poole fan. I've been a Bees fan for a lot of years and our conflicts have been "intense" to say the least. And don't get me onto Poole's track preparation. Its a joke. 2. I watched both legs of the final, supporting Scunthorpe, although they mean very little to me apart from their speedway abilities. 3. I was excited to see the second leg go to a Super Heat. I was particularly impressed by Josh Pickering's understanding of what it takes to win a race where coming first doesn't necessarily win you anything. 4. I saw Zach Cook take a "very tight line" when Josh Pickering let him take over the lead. Did he put both wheels where they shouldn't have been? The evidence (so far) is inconclusive. Yes, that's right, False dawn agrees with the referee and the speedway supporting population of Poole. 5. The SCB clearly said that Zach breached the rules. My conclusion. The SCB ruled on something they didn't need to. They knew before their investigation that the result could not be changed so why do anything? And worse still, why muddy the waters by saying they are 100% certain the rules were breached. And worse still than that, why say the rules were breached without saying how they reached that decision. What evidence do they have that we haven't seen? So, despite my history with Poole, my argument is not with Zach Cook, the club or anyone associated with them. The SCB have many questions to answer and their response to the controversy is silence. I am, first and foremost, a speedway fan. I deserve my sport to be managed better.

When the BSPL (sorry, I mean Poland) decide that the Premiership can run on nights other than Monday and Thursday, especially Wednesday. And Poole move up. Or, more simply Leicester drop down. Then we can run the Jubilee Final. Doesn't feel very likely eh? 🤪

For my part, I'll repeat that I don't consider what Zach did was cheating. The SCB say he broke the rules. That's not the same thing. What happened in the first leg was an entirely different thing. Not that we hear any denials about that incident.

Point 1. The SCB never said this. They said that the rule was breached. No ifs, no buts. It doesn't matter what you or I or anyone says or interprets what was said, the rule was breached. The only reason the result stands is because of rule SCB Regulation 018.1.2 a) which says the announced result on the night can't be overturned after the fact. Poole won on a technicality.

No interpretation... "Having reviewed the regulation as written, this has been breached" Seems clear enough.

The SCB, the ruling body, says otherwise.

We don't have to convince ourselves of anything. The SCB have said he did.