Star Fever

Sure he's a great rider, but it might have been a totally different outcome if he'd been (rightly) excluded in his first ride instead of Norris....

Pole Henryk Glucklich always had a big smile on his face....and Glucklich is German for 'happy' !! Was that a coincidence or perhaps Glucklich was a nickname!

Whether its TS or TR next year hopefully they'll stop it in ht14, especially if they insist on ht 14 being a 'weaker' heat. Thats always been far too late to have a possible match-winning tactical move IMO. I hope that there are other tweaks too IF the old tac sub is re-introduced, like Vog's idea for instance:

By RacerX: Well Ok, but it's happened, astonishing or not. Perhaps it is because it doesn't happen to such an extent in any other sport that the concept seems so strange to SOME people. I should perhaps have added that these people soon got used to the move - just as I would expect people to gradually accept the new rules. But once again the same applies doesnt it? If your sentence said TR instead of TS that statement is also true. Whatever happens the nominated TS or TR has to perform. No I didn't - I said "in a perfect world" Do they then? Looking at the current averages the bottom two for most teams have averages of less than 5pts - this is normal isn't it? Its only the top teams that have reserves of a higher average - again, nothing odd with that surely. I'd have thought it was swings and roundabouts anyway - if their averages ARE artificially high, then they'll soon not be once they're in the top 5? As for SCB's question "who's going to want Paul Lee on a near 7 point average when you can have Pavel Ondrasik on 5.5" I'd guess LOTS of teams would go for Paul Lee - I'm sure Lynn would! Just as a matter of interest do you think the TR rule would more acceptable if it could only be used say, from ht 4 to ht 12? Or shift the ht14 line-up earlier in the match and have say, riders 3 & 4 in ht14? After all we have heat-leaders in ht13 & 15. If the match finished with a trio of top-class heats there should be no need for TRs or TSs! Anyway, over to you or shall we just agree to disagree? We're so obviously entrenched in our different views this debate could go on forever. Whatever the outcome next year, one of us is going to be unhappy!

By RacerX: But don't you think this statement equally applies to the old TS rule? I've known newbies who were totally gobsmacked by the fact that a losing team could substitute a poorer rider with their top rider. And surely doing this is even more an 'off-track manouevre' than the TR? Obviously in a perfect world there shouldn't be a need for ANY tactical subs or tactical rides or whatever - out of form riders should simply be replaced by an on-form reserve, and if that doesn't work then tough. Its just that in our strange but compelling sport there is a desire to keep the scores closer to make the match 'more interesting' - and IMO the current way is preferable. Perhaps we ought to have a season totally devoid of tacticals of any kind - it wouldn't make much difference in the long run really would it?

Well I'm still for it for the following reasons: - I always thought the old TS rule was ridiculous. Why should team A ride out of their skins only to have an in-form member of team B pop-up where they shouldn't be and more often than not nick points back? Team B might only have 3 on form riders but putting them in the right places could win team B the match. Hardly a TEAM performance and most unfair on team A. With the new rule there's no chopping and changing and riders either succeed or fail where they would have done anyway. As riders in heats are unchanged the use of a TR rarely alters the match result and if it does it means the rest of the team have improved sufficiently during the match to give their team a deserved win. Hence the result is fair and it was a TEAM performance. - In addition use of the old TS stopped lesser team members having a full quota of rides, more often than not losing their easier rides in hts 8 or 14. This cannot help up'n'comers much. With the new rule though there've been several cases when a rider has scored none or one point from first 3 rides only to get a vital point or points in his last. This can only boost their confidence and help their development? I've probably just repeated what I said in the original thread but my views certainly have not changed.

Hmm - So why isn't everybody having a pop at Hans Andersen as well then - similar moves - similar results? Is it because he isn't Nicki Pedersen? If it had been any other rider would all this fuss have been made? Anyway this thread is about the referee's decision - lest we forget he didn't exclude Pedersen so presumably he thought it was purely a racing accident too. Either that or he wasn't wearing his hate glasses.

Joking? No - just saying what I saw. Pedersen didn't deliberately look across to see where Hancock was - he simply took the natural and fastest line out of the bend, as other riders had already done (especially Andersen). In fact Andersen's moves in hts 11 & 16 were more suspect as he was behind the other riders at the time he drifted out into them and obviously could see where they were. Pedersen was actually ahead of Hancock so surely had the 'right of way' anyway. Difference is of course that Andersen hasn't (yet) got Pedersen's bad-boy reputation. I realise that all the Pedersen-haters will jump on this incident with glee (long-time haters Ermolenko and Havelock just loved it didn't they) but I'm not jumping on the band-wagon for what to me seemed a rather innocuous move that I've seen in most every speedway meeting I've seen. Greg's retaliation was a lot more serious imo as it was a calculated move.

1 - Hans Andersen drifted out in ht 11 and squeezed Bo Brhel up against the fence. Bo grazes the air-fence but hangs on. In ht 16 Andersen did exactly the same which pushed Gollob into TRick, but unfortunately TRick got hooked on the fence and goes down. Giving Andersen the benefit of doubt it seemed to me that the natural line for a rider on the inside on bend 2 is to drift outwards. Riders would instinctively shut-off seeing riders doing this and with a normal wooden fence would bounce off, so it was the fence which ultimately caused TRick to fall. I think the ref used good judgement here realising it was a racing accident with no malicious intent, so yes - ref was right not to exclude anyone. 2 - Nicki Pedersen's rear wheel touched Bo's leg, Bo goes down. Exactly the same situation as in Norway last year with Crump/Holta. Crump was excluded then - Pedersen excluded now - another correct decision. 3a - Ht21 - Exactly the same situation as hts 11 & 16 - Pedersen drifts wide and squeezes Hancock against fence. Like TRick he hooks up and goes down. Fence caused fall again - no exclusion again - another correct decision. 3b - Ht21 re-run. Hancock does a corking pass of Pedersen but then makes a point of fencing him on exit of turn 4 in an act of obvious retaliation. Nicki manages to shut-off in time though - wonder what the ref would have done if he'd clipped the fence and fallen? Hopefully he'd have excluded Greg for a deliberate dangerous manouevre. Now that would have been amusing.

When you think about it, theres not really a lot of difference between the new and old rules - they both help a losing team to catch up - BUT if a losing team actually manages to WIN using the NEW rules, then they will have deserved it, as it is a lot harder to do so from programmed rides IMO. Even the nominated GD has merit, as the rider has to come from a handicap, and rely on his team-mate to do the business as well. After the initial outbursts by the "what a daft name for a TS" and " I can't add numbers bigger than 5" factions its now good to see a lot of people on here willing to give the GTs a chance after thinking it over. Oh and RacerX, yes I was wide awake during the KOCup thank-you, and most enjoyable it was too, as I did indeed mention in my post. And yes, both NORMAL and GT type tacticals served Lynn well throughout the season (as surely they did for most teams), so....what was your point again?

At last the horribly unfair TS rule has gone! Why the heck should a team who may have contrived to be 6pts down be able to whack in their heat-leaders at opportune moments? How may times have we seen poor teams with 3 good heat-leaders win a match when they shouldn't have done? OK it may still happen, but at least this way they have to do it the hard way with 2 out of the 3 GTs from programmed rides. Lynn lost out v. Sheffield in the KOC with these rules (was this the only time the new rules enabled a win?) but it was one of the best matches at Lynn this season because of them. The moves are much more 'tactical' than 'substitute' and have far more credibility than the old rule imo. Great idea, I reckon - but if others don't like it then thats fair enough, we're all entitled to our opinions. But lets see a full season of it first eh?

Promotion and relegation would work IMO as long as the leagues aren't too far apart so that any side that went up or down at the end of the season wouldn't experience too great a culture shock. This seems to be the case in Sweden and Poland where it appears to work already. If (or when) the EL crumbles then those remaining would be PL Div 1 along with the top half (or whatever number is needed) of the existing PL. The lower 13 or so would be PL Div 2. Obviously PL teams would not want extra costs so basically the EL teams would have to reduce costs by shedding their top GP riders. Or of course by capping payments and letting the riders themselves decide whether they'll take part. There's probably only 10-15 riders in this range so whether they did or not it would not take much jiggling of team strengths to equalise the ex-ELs with the top PL sides. So basically div 1 would be slightly stronger than the PL is now, whilst div 2 would be the same as now. As the EL surely can't go on with fewer teams each season, and as PL sides don't want to go into an EL as it currently stands, I feel that this is the only way forward for British Speedway.

calm down calm down ...and no it probably ain't fair but then is it fair that its his home track anyway? :roll: ...no it don't make sense to me that Olsen would prepare the track for THAT reason - but gawd knows why he did - if he did - probably just because he's a Dane..... :?

.....wouldn't have thought he needs practise on that track, he was more than likely just testing engines! .....but why? (and don't say 'to make one-off tracks look better' - thats a corker!) ...definitely! But this GP wasn't processional was it? so more of the same would do me! OK if you insist!

Seems to me that all Polish ladies are very attractive and all the Polish blokes wear peculiar hats and blow trumpets :roll: ;-)

Blimey, talk about picky! It might not have been THE BEST meeting we've seen at Bydgoszcz but it was still WAY WAY better than any other GP this year! So if it was tampered with by Ole (...yeah, right), then he failed miserably.

Posted by Midnight Lady Well it might have continued past the finish, but he started it as he came off the last bend I thought..... :-o

Nice one Skittles I too saw NP try to block LA......I've also seen TRick/ Sullivan/ Olsen/ Nielsen/ Tatum/ Mauger/ Carter/ Havelock/ Crump/ Nicholls/ Gollob/ Hamill (to name but a few) do the same over the years but for some strange reason very little fuss was ever made of it .... I think it's called 'track-craft' when they did it..... :? :!:

..yeah, I thought he was VERY professional and a GREAT example when he laid into a fan who was barracking him at Lynn a couple of years ago !....He DOES seem to have grown out of that now though, I'd agree. Yeah right....good one KK!! Indeed - I suggested this on another thread and that the clip may now feature in their quickie-ads, and sure enough it did - course they cut it off before he told his mechanics to 'get the muck off' (his bike?) [copyright 2003 danni Lynn Forum] Quite - he's absolutely hopeless (with a vengeance)

Quite agree Trees - it was just the sort of reaction the cameraman was waiting for. Wouldn't be surprised if we see that shot in opening credits now, just like Boycie's whack on Gollob, and Nicki P's reaction to his exclusion in the last GP. It's TV's bread and butter - they cater for the masses and assume the masses want to see that sort of thing. They haven't grasped yet though that Speedway fans aren't bothered by all that tosh!! (Well, most of us :roll: )

"British Grand Prix" Surely the most important part of the above are the second and third words?? Shouldn't these meetings be a contest between the best riders in the world? This one seems to have one of the weaker line-ups! The series is already worse off for the loss of Hamill, so (love him or not)to omit him was error number one IMO. The GP authorities would expect a British nominee as well, so you'd have thought either the best non-qualifier from last year (Stoney) or the best young up'n'comer (Harris). Nope - error number two. I've not got anything against Howe and Stead - I just don't think they deserve it (yet).