szkocjasid

Think that's a fair ruling. SCB obviously cracking down on riders missing fixtures compared to recent seasons.

I read the comment he was missing tonights fixture before I realised he didn't complete his last match in Poland. However, what if a rider agreed with his Polish club to take his first 3 rides each match & pull out of his fourth, then not race in GB or SWE, saying he agrivated his injury? Not saying this is what Kurtz is doing, but there would have to be rules in place to stop that happening.

Gotcha, yes Oxford getting a "second chance" of the win, greatly helps their play-off hopes.

Kurtz not riding at Sheffield, has to get the same ban as Musielak. Writing on Facebook, Kurtz said: “I have a lot of damage to my right lateral ankle ligaments. An MRI scan showed a grade 3/3 tear to one, grade 2/3 tear in another and grade 1/3 to the last. “My absence right now is because I’m currently unable to walk on it, and if my ankle was to take any more damage in its current condition, surgery will be required to repair it. “The recovery from that surgery would most likely end my season. My focus now is recovery and getting myself in a position to return to racing, but also when I know it will be safe to do so.” No mention of how he was able to ride in Poland.

How would you rotate the superfinal if different clubs qualify each year?

A run-off? I wasn't disagreeing with your idea of only using if for aggregate wins, still prefer a run-off though. Don't know what's wrong with having a draw after 15 heats?

Don't see Poole winning at Scunthorpe or Workington tbh.

I would say Oxford won the meeting & Poole drew the meeting. Easy to understand - not!

I think it is a very pointless rule.

Not in this case Poole will be top of the league & miles away from 5th imo. My biggest issue with the scoring system is both teams end up happy, Poole gain a point but Oxford don't lose any. Every other club in the league will be unhappy.

It seems clear Poole would've been better with r/r, perhaps they should've showed more faith in their own riders? I guess it doesn't matter so much if r/r would score more than Tobias, the question is would r/r score more than Joe?

I think Oxford are favourites for the last play-off spot. But a loss here, gives the bottom half of the table hope. Imo Oxford are strengthened & Poole weakened by missing riders, so no excuses if Cheetahs lose.

Years ago I'd have agreed with you. Not so much nowadays. There seems to be far more rain-offs than before, current machinery not suited to racing unless a track is perfect. Plus there's 4 Friday tracks, so fitting in postponed meetings would be difficult. Some clubs seem reluctant to help others where there's no obvious reason they can't race on a particular date? There's been competitions not finished, finals raced on neutral tracks, finals raced in November. If they got rid of play-offs, so clubs had until the end of October to complete the fixtures it could work. But once they have to finish early to fit in the play-offs, problems will occur. One option could be to extend the BSN series (race an extra couple of clubs) or in Glasgow's case, enter the NDL.

I don't think anyone has commented that it won't be a good match etc, just that it should be correctly advertised. If the name doesn't matter, why not call it the Jubilee league final so Poole can say they held their leg

Poole still advertising the meeting as the riders championship, but the British Speedway website advertising as a development series fixture. Could this be a case of false advertising by Poole? Making out it's a bigger fixture than it actually is? Surely by now both Poole & the BSPL have noticed they are advertising different meetings, why hasn't one of them corrected the other? If it is the NDLRC Poole should be raging at the BSPL for not advertising it correctly. If it is a development series match, the BSPL should be telling Poole to be honest about their fixture. If the NDLRC is a development series match, then they should both be clearer about the fixture.

I think fans who feel Oxford have "robbed" them would stay away. They wouldn't be expecting money off this match, but feel let down by the promotion due to the refund for a future Premiership match.

Or they have faith in their riders to turn it around? Perhaps more realistically feel there's no one average wise, who would improve the team?

If Lynn are to have any hopes of a play-off spot, this is a must win & bonus point match.

Before the heat Monarchs would've preferred a 5-1 & as in the first 12 heats would tell their riders to go for a 5-1. They then could have added, if you're losing a 2-4, we'd actually be better off losing a 1-5. Not saying I agree with that idea, a manager telling a rider to lose a place? But if it helps the team, tough call to make!

But that rule already exists if a rider is missing and no facility is allowed (Doyle & Tungate missing flights for example) then the club is weakened. The rules basically say if a rider misses a flight through no fault of their own you get a 75% guest, but if they want to take a break from GB but ride abroad you get a 100% guest. That's why I questioned it, if there's a situation when the authorities deem it acceptable for a club to ride understrength with guests, is a rider withholding their services a scenario that warrants this ruling? Kinda getting away from Belle Vue now, if Kurtz has made a comeback in Poland, then I'd expect him to be back for the next Aces match.

Not saying I wouldn't want a guest, but I don't see how it puts any real pressure on the reserves. Zach Cook gets a ride, Hagon who's having a great season can take 3. Biggest issue is Foord would have to take a 4th ride. For the Oxford match, is Zach & Sam (X3) stronger than Joe T?

Which is my question. Should the rules be changed, even if it hinders the team?

Due to the make up of the teams, doesn't make a big difference moving Klindt from 5 to 4. As Oxford are a strength in depth line up heat 13 (Tungate & Harris) may not be any tougher than heat 14 (Janowski & Riss?). Perhaps the plan is for the experienced Klindt to support the debuting Kvech. While Basso at 5 has back up from Wojdylo?

The whole point of a suspension, is to punish the rider, but not the team, doesn't work if the rider is happy to take a month off though. Maybe they need to change the rule to 75% guests?

The precedent has been set by Musielak / King's Lynn. If Kurtz would rather just race in Poland for the next 4 weeks, he can take a 28 day suspension, then come back & all is forgiven. Belle Vue get to use guests or r/r. Everyone's happy (except the fans).