dontforgetthefueltapsbruv

The reg though states does the rider HAVE an established MA NOT has the rider EVER HAD an established MA By the fact that the old MA is not considered suitable and needs to be reassessed Lambert no longer has an established MA "When it suits" sums it up perfectly

I'm still of the opinion that Lambert guesting is NOT within the rules The fact that he has been ruled suitable and allowed to line up is a shameful disgrace and a travesty NEVER before has a rider with an assessed average been allowed to take a guest booking and there has been quoted precedent (BWD?) where it has been declined in the past in the same circumstances as now being allowed

I'm half expecting with how the regs seem to be interpreted lately that it is announced that Harris has to honour his guest booking and Glasgow have to find their own guest

Completely missing the point and looking at too narrow a picture The semi - irrelevant, the final - irrelevant, who wins and loses - irrelevant Integrity, transparency, consistency - relevant

I've said I would've like to have run with RR even if it meant we didn't win One guest with an average under 7 for an injured 9+ rider taken from a team not in the playoffs is on the sliding scale integrity issues at the very low end Two guests, one a 10 point ringer in a fake 8 point wrapper that is 4 years old (considered irrelevant in EVERY regulation that INCLUDES it but suitable ONLY due to the fact it is NOT mentioned in another) and the other having already been involved in the play offs for another team I will let everybody make up their own mind as to where in the scale that sits....

Can see a Witches win by 10-12 leaving the aggregate finely balanced Bound to be a few surprises through the tie where one of the big boys runs a last or the lower end get a win (either side) It's a final and the adrenaline will be pumping I hope the Witches can edge it - after all can the sport afford to inscribe Sheffield Multi Change and League Select Guests Tigers on the trophy?

How many riders have Sheffield used this year? Do you think bringing in Tai and big Holder etc has cost any less than the squad idea?

Nah we would gazzump Sheffield and get Lambert

Indeed My comment was rather tongue in cheek

Let's hope you're right - as nothing goes wrong for the Witches then......

Your system must be flawed otherwise Lambert wouldn't be able to guest.......

Can't lay my hands on it right now I think it has been placed inside a unicorns scrotum and then filed in an invisible diary under the date the 12th of never

Is it not? Just the usual lack of integrity, transparency and consistency then......

Yes the one achieved in 2019 that the regs state is no longer valid as it is too old and so he was given a new assessed average - albeit that they then attached the very same figure from 2019!! A direct contradiction - it's either relevant and suitable or it's not...... The reasoning also relies on what is NOT written in the regs rather than what IS. A bizarre approach to take! There in lies the basic problem. The reassessment should have reflected the true up to date ability (shown in his GP performance and play off appearances last season for example) Even now he COULD have an official average from 2023. Although the ideal is to use the first 3 home and 3 away meeting there is provision to attach an official figure without riding those 'minimums' Given Lambert has ridden a total of 6 (2 home 4 away) those results would give a fairer reflection and COULD be used

All principles are made up "a fundamental truth or proposition that serves as the foundation for a system of belief or behaviour or for a chain of reasoning" The literal dictionary definition......

They had a choice to use Lambert - on a ridiculously low assessed average and unavailable in terms of how the guest rule has always been interpreted OR if he was awarded a true figure They had a choice to use Harris who has already ridden in the play offs No point in anymore debate about either really I will likely be I the minority but I will again choose not to part with my cash to see this as it doesn't meet the principles I expect Enjoy yourself

No disagreement from me on the principle of what went on at Peterborough has been a complete crock of rubbish too. A typical speedway shambles Ipswich actually had to go to both Boro and Lynn after each had strengthened where others didn't so I'd hardly say that it was cut and dried that it was only that that Leicester defeat that meant qualification Too many variable to pin it on one instance but carry on with the smoke and mirrors distraction tactics.....

Indeed he should And what happened to the "gentleman's agreement" that was supposedly in place to prevent it despite the regs not ruling it out? Can only assume that means that one of the parties isn't a gentleman.....

Sheffield - Not use an illegal guest (Lambert) for starters. As I say tip of the iceberg and so much more than just the play off picture Ipswich - Potentially should've been only RR available. I even posted on the semi thread that RR was my preferred option. Harris guesting though, whilst undesirable, was 100% within the regs as they stand

Tip of the iceberg..... Just carry on in your see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil bubble

My suggestion for Sheffield wouldn't pass the forum filters

Calm v Panic Fairness v Manipulation Good v Evil Cmon the Witches !

Shameful farce

Doesn't mean it is within the regs though , just that the regs are ignored when it suits

With rain in the air it opens up another potential test for the regs I believe the team trailing at heat 10 can request the match be be curtailed if conditions are poor, the team leading cannot So what if Wolves are leading by 8 after 10 - can Sheffield request it called as the team trailing in the meeting or is it the aggregate score More and more it seems what the regs don't say is taken as most important as opposed to what they do say - it could be vital if the above were to occur.......