Bagpuss

Why would Lynn not want to replace Museilak?

I suspect we've both heard the same thing and will probably never know the truth but if Lynn was being run that badly then I'm struggling to believe that Museilak wouldn't be allowed to race elsewhere. And why the riders who do and have ridden for Buster et al at Lynn and P'boro and keep doing so don't withhold their services too.

Lynn now have 'no facility', which is a 75% guest nowadays.

Of course I'm risking the comeback of 'you would say that' but for me if a rider witholds his services then he shouldn't be allowed to go elsewhere that season. If hes sacked then fair enough, or settles his differences and comes back for his original club but there has clearly been some underhand stuff going on here on the rider's part, however he dresses it up. Don't blame Ipswich for asking but I think the BSPL have decided correctly.

I've seen several Peterborough fans at every Lynn meeting this year so far, so there must be some interest. Probably more than you are prepared to admit. Swaffham and Lynn just wouldn't work, it's a sparsely populated area compared to Wolves and Cradley, like comparing apples and oranges. Would have to be one or the other.

I was under the impression that the 75% rule is the lowest level facility available, ie if a rider is absent without a good reason? The idea being that it's way below the level of R/R or a proper guest.

The Chris Holder fiasco I'd imagine.

Presumably we're on the 75% of Musielak's average thing from now on then.

Is this a rearranged fixture?

Heat 15: https://www.facebook.com/share/v/2NvtWfA3ndumstiW/

On what basis is Tom required to be in Poland rather than Redcar?

What a ray of sunshine you are.

He'd be a bloody miracle worker if he can get an away natch called off! As for this, it's a pity Brennan isn't guesting for Lynn rather than Sheffield, would be a far better and closer meeting.

Mainly on the plain?

Why do you make things up? Nobody is blaming anybody for Lynn tonight, as with the other week when it was called off an hour before, all three parties are in agreement. It's the only way Buster and co are allowed to postpone nowadays.

It's a fair point, but they quite clearly can only do it now with the agreement of the other club and the authorities which in theory eliminates all dodginess from the equation.

I don't necessarily disagree, just saying why I believe they do it. They are in serious danger of running out of dates now though.

Watch out, ianb will be along shortly.

Leicester literally have an article on their website saying the two promotions have been in contact and have agreed that there is little product of racing, and as has been said several times the authorities have to ok it after Lynn had their wrists slapped. Just like the late call off the other week, all three parties are clearly in agreement.

If Leicester wanted the points they wouldn't have agreed to the postponement one would imagine. I did wonder if both sides have new signings lined up and want to run it on a dry night when those riders are in.

I imagine they do it the day before to stop riders flying in. At the end of the day these kinds of postponements are designed to prevent financial losses, simple as that really.

'The two promotions have been in contact and have agreed the forecast for Monday evening offers little prospect of racing.' And one presumes the BSPL/SCB will have been involved too as a result of goings on earlier in the season.

https://x.com/KLSpeedway/status/1812548677086417220?s=19

You seem to have a real bee in your bonnet about this......I expect the idea was that Lambert would be more comfortable round the kerb than Bewley and Dan probably better from the back at BV as it's his home track. It's a team event and the idea is you use riders to their strengths to get the job done, that's exactly what GB did and it worked. I keep reading this and find it inconceivable that the two riders didn't have more of an input than the TM.

Tee hee