szkocjasid

have to disagree with forever blue & dean machine & side with you have 2 minutes. if referees only make a decision when there's a faller, that only encourages riders to lay it down & penalises riders who try to stay on. Mind you there was an exclusion in the SON2 I think? I rider lifted on the first bend, avoided everyone & got excluded!

should the referee have excluded Howarth then? I notice people are blaming Howarth, but not mentioning the referee?

You say the team is 1.4 over the limit, but also comment that Rew for Doyle or Emil makes the team weaker (obviously). But it would be very hard to avoid having a weaker team (of the rules stay the same). Rew for one of the top 2 would still leave a very strong looking team imo.

Most of the comments defending the track seems to be suggesting Poole could either have a track that allows passing or a track that allows them to win easier. Is it not possible to have both, do the Poole promotion not think their riders are good enough to win on a track that allows passing? I'm not saying make the track designed for Bomber, but if Poole riders can't pass either, what if Glasgow gated better? I would've thought a track that allows for no passing takes away the home advantage cause anyone can win? Were Poole just extremely confident they had the best gaters / knew the best set-up to get round the first bend in front?

I'm basing it on Poole having won at Glasgow in the league, Glasgow only winning by 8 points in the KOC & Poole only once failing to score 40 points in 15 away meetings this year. Do you feel differently?

Can't see Glasgow pulling back 12 points. Poole big favourites, of course it's not an impossible task, but a very difficult one facing the Tigers.

Tbh I don't understand why these promising youngsters think a season (or more) racing at Poole is best for their career?

I personally think it's cheeky to charge the fans £2 more for a match that is no different to any other this season, same riders, same format, same amount of heats etc. Of course I expect fans will still pay in large numbers, so can't blame the promotion too much I guess. I guess if there's a massive crowd, there's nothing to stop the promotion adding £3 to the admission next year!

If anyone is planning to take Northampton into the Prem, they must know the Prem needs them more than they need top tier racing. Should be in a strong position to dictate that heat leaders get shared out etc. Could say the same for Oxford, if they'll only be left with Birmingham's riders, stick to Champ racing?

Agree, a very hard final to predict, maybe slightly favour Poole as they seem to be able to "step up" when it matters most, plus Glasgow may not be able to find a reserve guest to score points at home.

I would imagine Dan T may go Prem only along with Poland / Sweden? I'd think Tigers would want to hold onto Harris & Nagel at all costs. Assuming the points limit doesn't chance, I'd stick with Hodder & Perry*, most clubs will have at least one 2 point reserve, Tigers pair will have a bit of experience over some. While everyone wants stronger reserves, doesn't always mean. ore success, last year Glasgow started with Pijper & Smith didn't make the play-offs. This year Scunthorpe, Oxford & Edinburgh have had at least one strong reserve, while Workington are a lot stronger at the bottom end compared to last year, but had a less successful season. If Glasgow could fit in 6 of this years 7, would mean a powerhouse top 4, but running with 3 reserves! * unless they can sign Cooper Rushen / Jordy Loftus

I'm not denying it's heat advantages, I'm not saying the rule isn't simple. I'm asking, why are two 4-2s better than a 5-1 and a 3-3 to decide a tie? Normally they are of equal value.

I agree wanting the second leg at home could be beneficial from that point of view, no advantage over 30 heats (unless it's a tie). A good away performance could mean a big crowd. Only danger is having a 30 point away loss, meaning a poor home crowd.

Can someone explain the logic behind the rule. If most heat advantages decide the tie, what's the reasoning behind two 4-2s being better than a 5-1 & a 3-3?

Can't really trust the clubs to get all the fixtures on to allow re-stagings tbh. The fact 3 finals are having to be raced in October despite clubs having fewer fixtures these days, shows that. In an ideal world I'd agree with you. My plan would be to never let it go to a ballot (thankfully this didn't) by adding more ways to decide a tie.

Agreed, I don't understand some people being adamant that the second leg at home is an advantage. Poole had home leg first in KOC Semi & final & won. Redcar had home leg first in KOC semi & won. Edinburgh had home leg first in KOC against Workington & won. Oxford had home leg first against Scunthorpe in the KOC & won. Poole had home leg first in the P/O semi & won. Surely that's far too many instances to prove there is no "second leg at home advantage"?

I don't mean this time, rules are in place. I mean for future occurrences, to try for a more satisfactory decision (if they don't want to have a re-staging).

One suggestion would be to look at the scores after heat 14 in both matches, i.e Glasgow having an advantage of an extra heat at home. This would've been an aggregate win for Redcar. The bizarre situation is, had the heat advantages been a tie, it would've been a ballot to decide who goes through, I can't think of a more unsatisfactory way to decide a tie.

Rules are: – If aggregate scores are level but the second meeting has been abandoned then aggregate point is given on countback of heat advantages (most 5-1s, most 4-2s etc) over the two meetings. But I'd much sooner hear the news that no-one is badly injured than confirmation of the result.

I'm almost certain there won't be a replay, there will be a long list on how to decide a tie. Of course main concern is with anyone who may have been hurt? Hope it's nothing serious & match abandoned for another reason, fence damage for example?

The same 3 clubs have 3 competitions to finish, Redcar & Poole in all of them. Couldn't really hold off any longer, matches need to be raced. If they had finished the KOC & BSN especially earlier in this season, then maybe they could've planned around the Prem final?

Could go either way, wouldn't call either team favourites

Apart from Fricke, I don't think there were any other "stonewall" wild card options. Doyle & Vaculik had a few issues with injuries, but still wouldn't have challenged for a top 7 spot. The best non-gp riders made it through already (Madsen, Dudek, Jepsen-Jensen). With no obvious picks, I would've gone with next in line in GPs / GP challenge, certainly not Woffy. Fricke - yes Then 2 or Doyle, Vaculik, Michelsen or Thomsen. If the organisers are choosing wildcards for clicks & publicity, I'm half surprised they didn't go for Hannah Grunwald along with Woffy 🤭

The problem with that, is a club could practically use the same guest in every home match. Mind you home riders don't ride "every week" anymore.

Maybe just keeping his average low for next year, then putting in the effort "when it matters". I don't like it, but the rules almost encourage it - if that is the case of course!