SCB

TBF, you suggested that Workington had no issue. You made the accusation, not me I'm pretty sure its ineptitude rather than any cheating or colluding tbh. Theres only a handful of promoters/managers who are clever enough to cheat.

But what is the point of a straightforward rule book if one of the simpler and more straight forward rules is ignored? Sometimes I agree the rules are a bit "chaotic" and can be read many ways (see the Redcar vs Glasgow, was a result guaranteed thing) but in this case there is simply no way at all, whatsoever, way that Peterborough should have been allowed a facility. Even more so after Newcastle were told they couldn't have one for Robert Lambert last week who was actually racing speedway, not some other sport. How about we start using the rulebook we have no properly (even if it is pants in a lot of places). I probably will take your advise and email Neil, about a few things actually.

Lets not forget the rules actually state that the two clubs cannot agree to ignore the rules when it suits. So if this was wrong (and Ive yet to be convinced it wasn't) what we have here is an incompetent referee and two dodgy clubs managements. But hey, it's ok. Speedway is a joke not take serious by the media. So nobody will know and it doesn't matter. Next week people defending this farce will be asking "why doesn't speedway get the media attention it deserves" but are happy to sweep this collusion and rule breaking under the carpet because it suits. WE HAVE TO STOP BREAKING THE RULES AND JUST SHRUGGING IF THE SPORT IS EVER TO BE TAKEN SERIOUS!

Because in both of them cases, they have broken no rules. Both been dicks but sadly there nothing in the rules about not being a dick or we'd see a lot of riders banned. I assume Luke Harris and Richard Hall were meant to be riding NL? If so, they've done nothing wrong, the rules allow a facility for any reason in the NL. They're not at all relevant to this discussion, no rules were broken. Again, speedway fans confusing rules with, "I'm not happy with and it should/shouldn't be allowed" Or maybe they quite rightly don't agree that you should get a facility for riding around a field in an amateur event? Because you know, that makes perfect sense. If Chris Harris wants to pursue his Longtrack ambitions he should quit riding speedway if the two don't tie in. I'd like to be able to do my job, be an alcoholic, play with cars and watch speedway every day. Sadly time means I can't do them all. Why does Chris Harris think he can be a speedway rider and a grasstrack/longtracker?

He's impressed me every time Ive seen him. Doesnt know hes beat.

When I feel sorry for Poole you know it's a shocking decision.

Anyone who doesn't think this is great racing really should just give up on speedway. It's a smashing meeting. Theres 12 riders giving it there all - not sure about Holder and Lahti.

Don't worry people, using the Chris Harris/Peterborough rule I heard BWD is playing dominos in the local pub league. Competing in another sport allows you a facility and apparently to complain about it would be a "fuss about nothing" The sport is a joke, it's not worth getting upset over.

Speedway fans, "WAH, too many missing riders, too many facilities, the sport is a joke" Speedway fans, "Whats wrong with a rider going missing to take part in another sport? Thats seems perfectly fine to me. Especially as the rules don't allow it" Chris Harris needs to decide if hes a speedway rider or a grass/longtrack rider. And Peterborough need to not use a facility when the rules say they can't because a rider has gone off to compete in another sport.

I've maintained all along he should be banned The ban is automatic because Peterborough used a facility that the rules don't allow. Thats how it works. Still, by all means show where I've said he shouldn't get a ban. But as you've not been able to quote a rule that shows a facility was allowed I won't be holding my breathe while you prove my double standards either. Christ, I started a thread about Chris Harris getting a 28 day ban, I'm hardly likely to start posting elsewhere he shouldn't get one am I?

Because (s)he got it wrong? Imagine that! So far nobody has actually pointed to a rule that says I'm wrong. I've posted rules that says Peterborough (and the referee) are wrong. Weird that.

So BWD scores paid 10 from 4 one day but is injured the next and Poole fans think they'e stronger for it? Yet when Dakota North was totally off form but went AWOL it was all OK? Poole have been fiddling for years and if Swindon are doing the same then it's just karma. But frankly, the idea that any team would need to cheat to win at Poole this season with their home form is laughable, it's as if Poole fans think they're an actual, credible threat. If Swindon were going to get a rider to miss for dodgy reasons it would be Bellego with his form, not BWD.

It would seem Chris Harris had no choice. But Peterborough Speedway did. The rules didn't allow the use of a facility.

For the same reason that last week Robert Lambert had to ride in Poland according to the rules. But in doing so his club (Newcastle) were not allowed a facility. Just because the rules say you have to ride in a certain place doesn't mean the club should get a facility. And if a club uses a facility they shouldn't use then the rider gets a ban according to the rules. As for the suggest this is bias or hatred, lol. Chris Harris is my favourite rider. I own more Chris Harris merchandise than all others combined. I have prints of Chris Harris hanging in my living room, hallway and bedroom. But none of that changes my opinion that based on the rule book he should be banned.

Theyve broke James Sarjeant because of this. Off 1 and 4 he's lightening but never touches the tapes. Where I will admit he has issues is off 2 and 3 where he either misses or by a mile or jumps through the takes where I assume he sees the ridernofg 1 or 4 twitch so he goes. £100 for an off the shelf transponder. It's peanuts. We're told it's a pro-sport so where's the issue?

How many of them make a living riding grasstrack? They might be professional speedway riders. It doesn't make them professional grasstrackers u less they're earning a living from it 🙄

Sabrina Bogh won (or maybe only finished on the podium) the Danish under 21 title in about 2000. She also qualified for the European Under 21 Championship around the same time ahead of, amongst others, this weekends GP winner, Matej Zagar who was only a reserve.

They have not followed the rules. The rules don't allow a facility for grasstracking. It didn't matter how many times people say it, it's not true. Notice, no mention of grasstracking. As for jumping to conclusions, I've tweeted Peterborough Speedway three times asking what rule they have used. I've not had a reply but in tat time they were able to tweet twice about some old couples wedding anniversary. Makes me think they have something to hide!

"You believe"? Based on what? Certainly not the rule book.

The IOW had a Frenchman around about 2001 who couldn't slide the bike at Newport. It might have been Jeremy Bauraex (so?) who was a rider who rode for them around that time but tbh, it may have been a different French rider. He genuinely two wheels around all 12 laps he did at Newport. It was shambic. He lasted about 2 meeting with them. Edit - He was Christophe Cayre, he had 3 meetings in 2001 scoring 0. Barraud rode 7 meeting in '99 averaging just under 3. If you ignore Sabrina Bogh

I don't doubt that, but why should Peterborough gets faciltiy? Last week the rules said Robert Lambert had to ride in Poland but has he ridden in Poland then Newcastle would have got no facility because the rules didn't allow it. How is this situation different? Rules conflicting. Peterborough should not have had a facility. TBF, the updates on the Facebook grasstrack group don't mention Harris in any of the results.

Some riders I'd agree with you on but Doyle can only go flat out if he crashes, it's why he didn't team ride. Doyle giving any less than 100% is more dangerous for Doyle than not.

He shouldn't have been at the Masters. He is a speedway rider, he has a contract to ride speedway. So why is he swanning off to ride around a field with amateurs and why are Peterborough getting a facility if he is? Where do we draw the line? It's bad enough imo you get a facility for longtrack but grasstrack? Ffs.

Thyre just ignore me!

No way can a plumber earn £1000. But let's assume you're right. This young rider does speedway because he loves it, that's nice. I watch speedway becuase I love it, I spend hours a week updating speedway-stats.co.uk because I enjoy it, I spend my weekends taking apart and rebuilding cars because I love it. Do you know what those 3 hobbies earn me? Nothing. In fact between the three of them they cost me a damn fortune. Be it he petrol and entrance fee for speedway, or the Sky and BT sport subscription. Then there's the £12 a month I pay for hosting speedway-stats (not a lot really but it's still a cost) or the frankly £1000s a year I spend on cars. If these riders love it, why the need to milk the sport for every penny? While speedway riders think they're capable of earning 52k a year in another job they're going to moan they're underpaid. News flash, the average person in the U.K earns 26k.