dontforgetthefueltapsbruv

fank ru

Does Ged have a boating lake in his business portfolio? Think he must have and keeps getting it mixed up with his speedway..... "Come in No3 your time us up" "Come in No6 your time is up" Come in No6 (again) your time is up" 😆😆😛 The right signing btw imo just wouldve been better had Hall not been in the middle of the process. Fair play to Ged he wont be left wondering what if.... 👍

did you get that info from the Chinese branch of the supporters club? 😀

That would be typical Speedway Delete a regulation that makes sense whilst ignoring those that are a pile of s#!t and need changing 😠 It has been mentioned a few times on other threads when teams have looked to be making changes without challenge to it still being the case Shanes would be a coup for any Championship side and even better for him if it was one he could only ride 7 matches for 😉😲

Indeed no complaints and fully aware it was a big bonus to have him against Glasgow. Although the rider he replaced in our case was capable of matching the score Shanes got 😛

Shanes cant sign in place of JPB at Sheffield as he is now above 2. Cant sign for Peterborough as max 2 d/u from same side in other league. Unless Starke or Holder will be dropped by one of the sides or Shanes drops Poole.

So which one of Starke or Holder would be dropped? No team can have more than 2 d/u from the same side in the other league. Unless of course Shanes doesnt stay with Poole....

Was the tranny pre or post op? 😜

Harsh on Fricke that....

Thank you all 👍 Wasnt expecting that. Surprised to see Doyle not resting. Could be injury doubts over Morris and Lambert

have the final teams been decided/announced?

Dont think Rory is in a squad (Brit or Oz 😆) Starke unlikely to make the final cut But the other 3 look nailed on Edit Holder not nailed on I suppose- if Kurtz not in main 4 then he may well be the u21. If Kurtz in main 4 then Holder the likely u21

Edited and still a spelling mistake Lukas 😜 (And yes I know you meant it really)👍

Any riders involved in the SWC wont be available as far as I know. Once signed into the competition cannot ride elsewhere until eliminated is the rule I believe.

Yes it was my introduction of 'issues' No intent to imply that was from you ✌ Used the ' ' as I didnt really feel that was the right term to use myself! He has been impressive in his Witches performances and become a fans favourite already

Will be waiting to see the SWC pick and how that affects the line upsStupid decision for Witches to accept that fixture in world cup week when 99% sure Danny would then be missing 😕

I hope not but it could be 😦

The result wont harm Glasgow in any way No impact on their ensured place in the play iffs and perhaps a kick up the butt that spurs them on/ stops any possible complacency Does show just how good Boro can be and that they can be a threat to any team home or away. Will dish out some big defeats to a few at the showground before the end of the season

the only way this should go against Sheffield is if it can be proved that they knowingly presented information about the JPB situation that was false in order to get a facility that otherwise would not be due to them.

So 14 days for Birmingham as he is looking to return (in line with Auty precedent) But is obviously hasnt been happy to return to Sheffield so whether that ruling affects/overrides the initial regulatory 28 day facility for them isnt clear or indeed covered in that release (you wouldnt expect Birmingham to) If the MC were as a result only allowing Sheffield a 14 day facility this shouldve been clear and unequivocally communicated to them. Subsequently when Pboro protested it shouldve been upheld prior to the meeting as 'a matter of fact' as per the regs. Until the full details are in open its still all up in the air

so with JPB not having agreed to return his ban should be 28 days and the facility match that. If the facility was subsequently reduced/withdrawn then this shouldve been invoked prior to the meeting upon Pboros legitimate protest. If the protest them was turned down it should then become 'a matter of fact' whether right or wrong Note - lots of shoulds and of course that nobody so far has confirmed a timeline for any part of the saga which means all comments are effectively p!$$ing in the wind

Thats a refreshingly pragmatic response 👍 Keeping a 40 point limit all season was just plain daft though. A team averaging 40 will definitely be a bottom end team. Initially the regs indicated it would be 42 after the first revised averages which would at least set it at the norm level. Quite why it was felt sensible to only apply this in the Prem in the end is anybodys guess. 😕

Greaves 'issues' (if he is having any) may well be as much mechanical as anything else. Unexpected servicing and a blow up of his 2 GTRs must put a strain on the finances. There was a bucket collection this week at Ipswich to help fund replacement.

Pboro didnt cheat with the change.It is a poorly witten/administered regulation but Pboro are not to blame for that. feel free to continue to have a pop at my choice of words -I have broad shoulders. Perhaps you could actually add to the debate instead but thats your choice. I have also clarified my respect for Neils knowledge which is genuine. I have no gripe with Neil (never met him) and no comment has been degrogatory to him personally. Nowhere have I said Pboro are in the wrong to protest or made any snidey comment regarding it.

This is where speedway shoots itself in the foot. The length of the ban should just be a matter of fact. Sheffield should have in writing a formal notification from the ruling committee. There should be nothing to query. Also the regs are in this case recently (2/3 years ago) reworked to try to avoid post match changes. It is very clear the intention is for these decisions to be pre match and final. Neil has highlighted the one part of the regs where there could be a challenge in this case. 👍 From that I would say this case depends on whether the decision to grant the facility was made with the full knowledge of JPBs riding intentions and whether these changed breaking the terms on which the facility was granted. Of course Sheffield could argue even if his intentions changed which would break the terms of the facility this would be beyond their control. It would be the same ruling committee allowing him to ride outside the original terms and not Sheffield.