szkocjasid

I don't think I'd go for Jack Smith, previously defended him as I thought he had a few years barely getting a chance, but after a season at number 7 with his average dropping below 3.00, I'd look elsewhere for a reserve.

Even if Scunthorpe were thinking they'd be able to make a change once Pickering gets a new average, it may not all be plain sailing. I believe if a rider finishes the season with a club, but doesn't start the next one, he can't be brought back it without management committee approval i.e Lambert. If they thought Scunthorpe had tried to pull a fast one with the averages (even if it's legal) they may not approve. Secondly what if the first match got postponed, then they didn't race till after 23rd of April, would mean Pickering wouldn't get a new average till 1st June. Then the team averages may have gone up, not allowing as many points available to strengthen up, would a rider be willing to dot out the start of the season & risk their team spot no longer being there?

I'd argue that's what the development league is for "bringing youngsters on". Besides if they ride better than "has-beens" they won't get dropped.

depends who he is, if they signed a Cairns or Rushen certainly wouldn't drop him, but if it was a sub 2.00 rider like Spencer this year or Perry at Poole last year of course they're gonna wanna strengthen up.

If you treat it like signing Lambert on a 2.00 ave instead of a 4.5(ish) ave, it's a no brainer imo

those are the rules used for Riss at Redcar this season

While Pickering's average will be 11.46 - 11.64, as soon as he races ONE match, he'll revert to his Champ rolling ave from the 2024 season (9.21). So if Scunthorpe planned their first BSN / league match to take place before 23rd April, they'd be dropping over 2 points from their limit in time for May. Could sign a temp 2 pointer, then replace him with a 4 pointer for the first set of averages?

Great signing for Scunthorpe & gives them a brilliant number one. Might be hard to build a strong team using up over 1/4 of the points limit on one rider. But if I was a Scunthorpe fan that wouldn't bother me, I'd just be happy to see Picko flying around the track each match.

I've seen many races from Powderhall & Shawfield in 95/96 & thought the racing was awesome. Of course back then it was a thrill for div 2 fans to see world class riders at their tracks, plus other former div 1 heat leaders. Of course now there's less world class riders racing over here, plus fans will be used to seeing some Prem heat leaders ride in the Champ, so wouldn't be as exciting now as it was 30 years ago I'd suggest

Philip Hellstrom Bangs being talked about for Belle Vue. Would be a good signing for Glasgow on a 6.00 average imo

Seems a simple answer is heat leaders getting paid more than second strings, who get paid more than reserves. Not easy to work out the averages fairly, but I'd prefer a format like that for better racing.

His average could be expected to shoot up by over a point = good guest options

They can, if no-one else wants to move up.

If there is a "one over 8.00" rule. Who would Monarchs want as their number one? Any chance of getting Sam Masters back? Of course a team may choose to go without an 8 pointer.

I can't imagine that they have to move up / stay in Prem. Believable that they've been begged to though.

I know it's not the job of Glasgow & Poole to "save" British Speedway, but is their reluctance to step up gonna harm them in the long run? If no-one wants to join the Prem & it collapses. Riders no longer get to double up, said riders now want paid more due to less meetings. Clubs can't afford it, Champ clubs begin to drop off down to NL / Nora. Like I said at the start it's unfair to expect a team to ride at the level they're not comfortable with, but the alternative could be far worse! I mentioned those teams, as they seem the best set to give it a go. Sticking to what's safe (not a criticism as it's their money on the line) won't be an issue in the short term perhaps, but what's the long term future going to be?

Just need to sign a decent 5 pointer with potential to improve, then they won't have lost much on this year's reserve strength. Easier said than done of course.

The only suggestion I would have is clubs "democratically" voting for decisions that would encourage Poole & Glasgow to step up. Allow Wednesday's for Poole, lower the points limit to make it more affordable, lower the points limit in the Champ to put them off, make a ruling that every Champ club has to enter the NL or NT? Would Oxford stick to Prem of they could race on Wednesdays? I know people say Wednesdays wouldn't work because of Denmark, but not every Prem rider races in Denmark, they already play second fiddle to Poland on some Thursdays, besides it's not an ideal situation. It's a case of, would you prefer a 7 team league with guests, or a 5 team league without guests?

I think the complete opposite, to me he's at the stage of his career, when he's got to decide if it's time to leave the Champ behind & just do Prem with Poland (& Sweden)? This year his average would've made him a number one at Berwick, Edinburgh, Plymouth, Scunthorpe & Workington! If he stays in the Champ, I've no doubt he'll average above 9 & be one of the top riders in the league.

I've never really rated Blodorn, feel his progress slowed when he was no longer at reserve. However, I now feel he's good value on his average & is worth a team spot (such is Speedway). Also feel makes sense to bring Zischke back, seems counter productive to keep a struggling reserve all year, unless you expect to benefit the following season? If the rules allowed, I'd bring back both Bewley & Kurtz. Also think Mulford will be one of the better "rising stars" with Flint & Jenkins graduating from the scheme. I'd definitely stick with him.

While I partly agree with you, look at what's happened in the Prem, possibly down to only 5 clubs & that's if Sheffield get a new owner. Truth is the top clubs need to help to weaker clubs to survive, or they'll have no-one to race against. If that means a 1 over 8.00 rule, so be it.

I'm not really sure why knowing the final averages a few weeks earlier we could assist when they have 5 months to pick a team tbh. Just find it strange if they don't include all the matches.

Normally I'd agree with you, but in recent seasons it seems to be the same clubs with string top ends always near the top & the same strength in depth clubs always near the bottom. Could argue it'll make the racing better, with the top riders in the league riding against each other rather than with each other?

1) Top riders will be meeting the same top riders, it's just that they'll be spread out amongst the teams. 2) The following season, could just change the average, so the top 9 riders are spread out evenly. Could be 7.9 or 8.1!

Not really, still stops a club picking 2 or 3 of the top riders in the league & sharing them out. Will this ruling stop the top riders asking for more money than clubs can afford? Once the 8+ riders get signed & spots fill up, the remaining ones will know it's sign for a "leftover" club or miss out, less options than normal.