Arch Stanton

I’ve said all I’m going to on this GM otherwise I’ll just end up repeating myself. I don’t see a big issue, others do which is fair enough it’s up to them. Anyway uppa Witches! A result I certainly wasn’t expecting. Still a job to be done but if we can get over the line, it gives us a great opportunity to get the team sorted and have a good crack at Sheffield in September to retain the trophy.

Seems as though the racing improved after a track grade and water was thrown down after heat 11? Begs the question why that wasn’t done sooner. After the water went down Rew immediately found grip on the outside with a cracking ride in heat 12 and likewise Emil in 15 after he failed to gain any ground in two of his earlier heats when he missed the gate.

On the bottom bit, that decision might have already resolved itself with Worrall having health issues and depending on how long he might be out for. As for the Witches, thanks for the info Siggy, would be a big boost getting Ellis back and with King nearing a return, light at the end of a dark tunnel!

Needed him to step up and he delivered. We’ll need the same from him on Thursday. What a nice lad Blodorn seems to be by the way.

What other heat would you have given him Gav? I’m assuming by saying it should have been 7 and 3 rides so you’re taking out Flint for Pawlicki? That was done in heat 12. You could look at heat 4 and say there’s an opportunity, but only three heats had gone and Birmingham were 12-6 up. Would you take Flint out of his second ride that early in the meeting? You also have to factor in that Pawlicki wasn’t expected to be in heat three but was brought in when Cook went through the tapes. I’m not sure giving Pawlicki three on the trot and three of his potential seven rides by heat 4 would have been wise with nearly 3 quarters of the meeting still to run. He couldn’t replace Flint in heat 8, leaving his next opportunity in heat 12, which the manager took. Pawlicki had four programmed rides, a fifth replacing the excluded Cook, a sixth was to be a rider replacement ride and a seventh was to be a reserve replacement for Flint that was taken in heat 12. If Pawlicki hadn’t have been replaced in 14 then it would have been exactly as you said, a 7 and 3 rides for Pawlicki and Flint respectively. Now the whole issue here is Pawlicki being withdrawn for Flint in 14. Had Pawlicki won the previous heat then you might think he’d have taken his last programmed ride but he ran a last on top of a third place in the previous heat and he seemed to have tailed off as the meeting progressed and had just done 3 on the bounce, so a conversation between manager and rider must have taken place and a decision then made based on that. Was it fatigue? Machinery? None of us know the answer but you can bet there’ll be one. I’m convinced the plan at the start of the meeting was to give Pawlicki a full seven rides why wouldn’t you? But sometimes those plans don’t work during meetings for many reasons. I don’t see the issue here it’s no biggie from where I’m standing but we all have different opinions.

I know you say that tongue in cheek, but I wouldn’t give up on the KOC just yet, not until we’ve seen the team sheet for Thursday. Has Lindgren got his visa sorted and in the team on Thursday? We’ve been ringing around everywhere and are apparently struggling to get suitable guests. Hawkins has already said it’ll be Rider replacement and two guests again so much will depend on who those guests are and also whether Hodder or someone else of that standard replaces Thompson.

Everybody sees themselves as a managerial genius sat at home in their armchairs don’t they. No I'm not contradicting myself, szkocjasid. Lampart wasn’t getting final rider replacement ride in heat 13 on 4 points when Pawlicki on 10 points hadn’t yet taken one. Realistically Pawlicki wasn’t going to replace anyone else other than Flint once he got an unexpected outing early on when Cook went through the tapes. Pawlicki had six of the available seven rides, and heat 14 was his programmed ride which would have been his seventh and final ride. That is the only issue people are having here. But you weren’t there, I weren’t there, and nobody knows the reason Pawlicki was then pulled and replaced by Flint. Nobody in their right mind would willingly choose Flint over Pawlicki so there would have been a reason for it. That doesn’t mean the plan was always to pull him from that heat meaning a trick was missed not giving him an extra ride earlier. Perhaps having three on the trot and only scoring one point from the last two of those had a bearing on that decision that they weren’t expecting to make. If Pawlicki had replaced Lampart early on then his night would have been done in heat 13 regardless, having then taken the full quota of seven rides. I just don’t think it’s the major bollock that you and a couple of others are making it out to be I really don’t. It just seems to be fashionable to scrutinise every move Ermolenko makes and then jump in with both feet when a decision seemingly doesn’t look like a good one. You can be a manager in the pits looking at the programme pre-meeting and have the best intentions and have everything mapped out the way you think it’s going to go, but things can and often do change those plans during meetings. We’ll agree to disagree.

Disagree. The only rider Pawlicki was going to replace was flint. Yes, he could have used Pawlicki in heat 4 for Flint, but Pawlicki had just had two on the trot at that stage and it was still early in the meeting. He then replaced Flint in heat 12. I’m not sure many would have put Lampart in 13 for the R/R when Pawlicki was still able to take it, three on the trot or not. But after then running a last it’s no surprise Pawlicki didn’t then do 4 on the trot in heat 14. It is what it is, I don’t see any major bollock dropped by Sam here if I’m honest.

Think people are being overly harsh on Sam here. Pawlicki as you say had three on the trot, and seemed to look worse after a bright start. Third in heat 12 then a last in heat 13. Not a huge shock he was pulled from having four on the trot. Nobody here knows what is said in the pits either, maybe Pawlicki didn’t want 4 on the trot and asked to be pulled? None of us know.

https://x.com/ipswichspeedway/status/1797606377311154336?s=46 At least the admin has retained a sense of humour. Guess all you can do is laugh at this point!

We’re cursed. Never known anything like it!

I’m not sure Badge, the rule says “track within an 8 day period” not “Team”. Beerhut also quoted this to me the other day.. “a rider may ride as a guest (in an official meeting) at a track only once in an 8 day period (within that league) excluding Play Offs, unless he is replacing the home teams #1 or is ONLY declared in a National Development League Team” Hawkins said after Thursday that we couldn’t use him again this week because of the 8 day rule, has he got that wrong? If the above is correct, he can guest for Doyle at 1 but not for King or Ellis. I’m sure someone who is more clued up on these rules than me will soon clarify if that’s the case

Emil aside, the Ipswich team looks average at best. You’d expect Pawlicki to do some damage at reserve. Name of the game for the Witches tonight is to keep it close enough to give us the chance of winning the tie on Thursday. The final isn’t until September so if we can manage to get through here, it’ll give us the opportunity to get the team sorted and settled. Rew will probably have to take at least one R/R ride for Doyle so put him in heat one to get dialled in before heat two.

Was going to say the same Badge, Scott as a guest or injury replacement for King or Ellis is fine, that’s more his current level. But nowhere near a replacement for Doyle. We’re bad enough at Belle Vue as it is but put Nicholls in for Doyle then you can forget beating them over two legs if we happen to meet in the play offs!

Scott is great around Foxhall but with all due respect if we want to win the title you just can’t simply swap Doyle for Nicholls whether he’d be willing to do it or not. Doyle tops the Premiership averages for 2024 over all meetings, Nicholls isn’t the answer just because he had a cracking meeting on a wet tricky track. We’ll soon find out whether we’re still challengers or not.

Nah not for me TTT.

The Birmingham press release stated he will be in the team on Monday 3rd June so no idea why that’s now not happening. I don’t believe for a second it’s because he’s joining Ipswich instead though.

https://ipswichwitches.co/raceday-preview-birmingham-knockout-cup-semi-final-first-leg-a/

We can’t strategically because the team total is over. So an 8 pointer replacing Doyle’s 9+ still won’t allow enough to make replacing a lower order rider worthwhile. We also have to wait on Ellis’ timescale for a return. Huge headache.

https://ipswichwitches.co/raceday-preview-birmingham-knockout-cup-semi-final-first-leg-a/ R/R for Doyle. Nicholls and Blodorn guest for King and Ellis.

Same Badge. He’ll be replaced, but as Phil rightly says, he’s irreplaceable really.

Team total from June is already over, so it’ll likely be a single change, Doyle for a lower averaged rider. But all options being looked at currently. Kind of depends on the other two walking wounded and how long they’ll miss. All gone a bit Pete Tong unfortunately but that’s Speedway.

Moves are afoot. Massive blow obviously, but think we’ll be ok..

https://x.com/ipswichspeedway/status/1796844090094473619?s=46

I thought Batch did well for us two seasons ago. Looking at the averages for that year, he averaged just under 7, with a GSA just shy of 6. He was averaging more than that most of that season before tailing off a bit towards the end. He won us a fair few meetings by partnering Doyle in last heat 5-1’s that year if I remember. This year in the Championship he’s been riding very well for Workington. Over all meetings, 9.02 average and a GSA of 8.60. Cook does top the averages, but Batch marginally has the better GSA and tops those. When I saw the track when I got there last night it was never going to be his sort of track but as I said, I thought he battled hard and there was no giving up at the back or lack of effort from him.