szkocjasid

Every single 2.00 Champ rider is also a NDL rider?

Actually it was Plymouth HL = 22 PTS Poole HL = 19 PTS Both teams has their 3rd heat leader riding at 4. Regardless Kerr has to be the one who would shoulder most of the blame for the loss.

It seems a shame a rider wanting to step away from the Champ has to miss NL/NT matches.

While I agree with that idea, at least in this case I think it's suits Berwick if Edinburgh win on Friday, gives Berwick the best chance of winning the group (however unlikely).

Good points, so far Marson has ridden against teams with strong reserves. I'd wait till he's ridden against fellow 2 point riders before calling Poole a 6 man team.

From Oxford's socials "We showed resilience with a mid-meeting fightback, but Sheffield closed out the meeting strongly to take the win" They scored one heat advantage all match, does that count as a fightback?

100% agree, I remember a previous Edinburgh vs Glasgow 13 heat match (in the 15 hear era) but many riders weren't interested in the second half, so it got forgotten about in the second leg. While I'm not surprised it happened tonight, they shouldn't advertise top 4 riding unless all 14 riders agreed beforehand.

Given Ipswich scored 67 & 65 in their first two matches. To "only" score 60 against a Brummies side with a reserve guesting for a heat leader, must give Birmingham fans some hope for the future (against weaker opposition).

Not the worst ever, I've seen Schroeck & Cami Brown make even poorer decisions. But this level of team managing makes Sam Ermolenko look like a Peter Adams or Neil Middleditch! I would've thought it would be very easy for the new Birmingham TM to be better than the previous one?

I can understand why they did that, but feel it would make more sense for a former "rising star" to have the 2.5% reduction after a team declaration, keep the same ruling as every other Brit?

Can anyone explain how Anders Rowe's average has changed? He had a 3.91 average for April, so should be at reserve with the double changes, but he's listed in the top 5! The only thing I can think of, is that because they've redeclared the team his 25% reduction is no longer used? Is that a rule? Would it make a difference if it was a Brit with a 2.5% reduction? Edit: just noticed Lewis Kerr finished 2024 on 4.89 but starts 2025 on 4.77. So can someone explain why he gets a reduction but Rowe does not? So as things stand it appears every single non "RS" Brit in the Prem has an average reduction, except for Anders Rowe!

Gonna be 60 something, 20 something imo

If there's no facility available, a team can't use r/r, have to use a 75% guest.

Interesting ruling over James stepping down "Stellar Monarchs have been granted a facility for 28 days to cover for his absence but will be attempting to fill the vacancy in the team with a full time replacement as soon as possible" Is there any point to Monarchs being given a facility? If they weren't due a facility they'd be allowed a guest up to 75% of his average but as he's on the minimum 2.00 average, they'd still be allowed a 2.00 guest. If he's withholding his services I guess that means he can't ride NL/NT at the moment? Not sure if he plans to carry on with development league racing, whilst taking a step back from the Champ? Hopefully he'll be back soon, really thought he was promising last season & had the potential to be one of the top 2.00 riders this year.

If only Leicester released Masters instead of Lawson, then Sam could've ridden for Oxford in both leagues.

You mean when he made a factually correct statement in an interview?

I agree with you to a point. Some clubs will give all their riders 4 rides regardless of the score. Whilst others will give their weaker 3.00 riders (who arguably need the rides more) 3 rides each & give a superstar 3.00 rider 7 rides. Now I'm not saying they are doing anything wrong by trying their hardest to win. But if winning & losing matters to clubs, then it's only fair for fans to make predictions, claim some clubs are weaker than others, suggest team changes etc.

I just don't understand that, if it was the top Swedish riders, then yes I get why they'd think that.

From John Campbell "We will always be proud to have high-quality riders in our side that are being called up by their international federations and we wish Paco, Victor, and Jonatan, all the very best. It is a great opportunity to perform on the international stage. Let's be honest no-one considers these three "high quality" riders when it comes to international meetings. Paco was always going to be missing. Can't understand the Swedish selection, if you can pick a stronger pair who didn't have a league match that day why wouldn't you? Almost sound like the Swedish team manager is a Berwick fan?

I totally disagree with that, what about people who have planned holidays etc or those swap shifts because they work different hours each week? If it's a rain-off you begrudgingly accept it, but it would be far worse to have a holiday messed up than to watch an understrength team.

What is Schroeck's excuse gonna be this time? Kildemand is back & Brennan did an acceptable job as a guest. I wouldn't rush to get rid of Tungate, as they have points to play with if he moved to a second string position could that get him back to last year's form? Problem is there isn't an obvious rider to drop, Gusts has been promising, if you replace Tungate with a higher scoring number one, rest of the team still looks average. That's if you can find a new number one. Kildemand has hardly ridden, so he may need more time to show what he can do.

That would only work if teams wanted to get promoted. In every sport being in the top division should be the aim for all. Whether it's costs involved or race nights, clubs not owning their own stadiums, there's many barriers to stop this happening.

I've got to give credit to the clubs for arranging restaging dates so quickly. Despite only having two days to race on, far quicker than Championship clubs at rearranging postponed meetings.

Reading on FB it seems like it's acceptable for Belle Vue to call a match off for wet weather, but not acceptable for Birmingham to do the same thing, just because they are weakened? I know us Speedway fans can be as suspicious bunch, but why automatically assume it's been called off for team strengths rather than the weather? If Birmingham called off every match when they looked weak, they would never run lol!

I can't remember exactly how it worked, but yeah there was a time when teams got an advantage in the play-offs due to league positions. Was it not 2nd vs 5th (home leg only) Then 3rd vs 4th (home leg only) Then 2 winners in the semi final, highest place team at home. Then a two-legged final against the team that finished first? Could also have (or as well as) been top 2 to semi finals, 3rd vs 6th & 4th vs 5th home legs only / points advantage. I feel like that was changed, because the team finishing top had a long wait for the final, when others were racing. I'm sure the season(s) they had a points advantage to the higher placed team, it only occurred in the semi finals. The finals have always been even between both teams.