szkocjasid

It's wrong both ways.

Agree, punching the air in delight would be away to annoy the home fans & far more professional than a rude gesture to antagonise them. Plus Thomsen should remember it's Speedway, he may get dropped by Poole & need a new club next year, would this put Oxford off using him?

Look at this season's riders, if Poole had dropped Perry for Cairns, there wouldn't be many complaints, but if Foord got dropped for Cairns after putting 2 points on his average, would've been very unfair on Vinnie & could expect deserved backlash from fans. Best solution would be signing 2 x 2.00 riders & telling them the strongest rider won't get dropped. For sure if I was a 2.00 rider, Poole would be my last choice.

I don't wonder why we have play- offs, I know why we do, I just disagree with them & think top of the league should be Champions. It's a shame if BSN / KOC meetings don't generate the same level of excitement as the play-offs. If fans, riders & clubs were desperate to win all these events equally, then you should get massive crowds for them all, not just the play-offs.

If true that makes the decision not to replace him on heat 12 even worse. Schroeck should've replaced a fit Boughen with Killeen, but to leave an injured Boughen in for no reason - unfathomable.

What if there were guidelines for the reserve rider selections? Basing it off achievements rather than age / nationality / sponsor etc. For example reserve riders would be: highest Extraliga average (Laguta / Kolodziej) next in line from qualifiers (Thorsell) next in line in GPs (Huckenbeck) Top scorer in SON (Huckenbeck) SGP2 winner (Przyjemski) next in line from SEC (Woryna) Obviously Huckenbeck, wasn't the top scorer in the SON, but everyone above him is already in the GPs.

Brilliant answer by @Bojangles, made me laugh & pretty much happens to be true

But if Oxford had to pull out of the Prem because the Champ had twice as many fixtures, what happens if Birmingham can't compete?

Actually it's not, he once sent one rider out in a race in the Premiership instead of 2. Think someone was injured but he replaced a programmed rider with a tac sub not the injured rider or something like that? He makes so many howlers, it's hard to keep track tbh.

Well Lawson had scored 7 & Ben Cook 7+1, not a lot in it. Plus Lawson is top of their averages. Compared to Killeen getting 12+1 not taking a ride from Boughen 1+1, big difference.

This result certainly makes the second leg interesting for neutrals.

Kinda want Poole to win by 2 on aggregate, so I can say "I told you so" to every Oxford fan who gave me grief for pointing out Schroeck's flaws!

Even Cami Brown, wouldn't be as bad as that either!

Can't believe Killeen didn't come in for Boughen in heat 12, but that's Peter Schroeck for you! That's the sort of comment that got me banned from the Oxford FB page lol!

Poole didn't "wrangle" the second leg. Poole were due the second leg, till Oxford's leg was postponed. Then Oxford were going to get the second leg, till Poole's leg was postponed. Now we're back to where it started.

Prediction: Oxford 45-45 Poole

There's no point in having an extra heat for the top 4. 20 heat format is fine as it is without any extras. Especially pointless here, as the guy in 4th won't care that he didn't win - he's now a GP rider!

Certainly are, looks a stronger field for next year even before the last 4 riders are known.

For me it should be Doyle, Michelsen, Laguta & Sayfutdinov. Assuming they are still banned I'd replace the last two with Madsen & Thorsell (next in line from GPs / qualifiers). I'm quite surprised how many are suggesting Woffinden & Kvech. Woffinden was really poor this year & nowhere near a top 10 spot, let alone a top 6 spot. As for Kvech, he had a decent enough first season & at times showed promise, but he still finished bottom of the (non-injured) GP riders, so I don't see how that warrants a wild card. Could easily see him being one of the higher ranked reserves though.

Sorry, but disagree completely. I see no reason why age should come into it at all, that's what the SGP2 is for. I'm pretty sure the it may be illegal to say wild cards are for U-35s anyway. As for your second point, why would the first reserve "deserve a spot" if they didn't qualify? For me the only riders who deserve wild cards are riders who would've finished in the top 6 bar injury.

I don't think there was anything wrong with Antti's away from. For example if he got 6 at home, 4 away & 5 overall, everyone would say that's a very acceptable first season for a rider new to Britain & no-one would be questioning his away form. But as his home average is nearly 10, it makes his away ave look poor by comparison, when really it isn't. Compare him to James Pearson, rumoured to be getting dropped by Glasgow, presumably for his away form, yet his supporters defend him saying he's "only" had 3 seasons over here, Vuolas outperforms him away in his first season. Obviously if you're looking for improvement next year, as you do with every rider, his away form is the obvious target, well his home form can't get much better lol! But that should naturally happen in his second season.

I totally get your point, having strong reserves is ideal for winning trophies, but it's not that simple. Last year Glasgow looked to have solid reserves, but it meant weaker second strings. Plymouth probably had the strongest reserves all year, but it didn't do them any good as they didn't have top end strength. I'd say Scunthorpe had the best reserve situation, starting with Ablitt on 3.5 & Harrison on 2.00. Ablitt ending above 5 & Harrison nearly 5. These are the figures that should win trophies, strong reserves because of improvement, but Scunthorpe then fell apart elsewhere in the team, when it mattered at the end. If Hagon & Foord go well at Glasgow, I'd look at including them along with a 2.00 rider you expect to up his average.

I'm not saying they wouldn't be good signings, just that of you use up 8.5 point at reserve, doesn't leave much for the top 5, especially with Harris at one. Wether it's a 38 or 40 limit, makes a big difference.

If they are the reserves, would imagine it would be a weak looking middle order.

I honestly feel they've really ruined the league this year. You'll always get people who say "Sheffield are the true Champions" even though they're not. Whereas (correctly) Belle Vue are the Champions. The reasoning being, everyone knew the rules before the season. But this year as they just made up the play-off pairings, I find it hard to celebrate Belle Vue as fair or deserving winners. Belle Vue should have beaten Leicester in the semi-finals & if they met Sheffield in the finals, would've won that too. But the doubt of would Ipswich have beaten Sheffield in the semi's & therefore met Belle Vue in the final can never be answered. You shouldn't have to have a discussion / argument over wether we have rightful league champions, is they simply just followed the rule book.