Crump99

I thought this would all be over at about 9.30 last night but it's still delivering. I think that Bratters did similar, so I was told, to Oakes at Birmingham a few years back

Yup, the worthless negative ones are still here and attending (just in my case) whereas young Raquel "Fans' Viewpoint of the year 2009 or thereabouts" is nowhere to be seen, apart from Florida perhaps.

We'll hear no more about that then. Can you imagine every similar decision needing to be fully documented and verified, including a full paper trail? What a Pandora's box that'd be. The sport would never take place unless each team had its full 7 out on a mutually agreed date We didn't pick the date or weren't allegedly even asked if we wanted to ride or had a better alternative (which we did btw and would have avoided all of these handbags). I'd say that Peterborough were playing the game for once and making the best of the desperate and embarrasing fixture into which they seem to have been forced.

It's only half time and at the EoES we turn into the worst gaters you've ever seen. We have also lost 4 home league matches. If we think the job is done then Sheffield are perfectly capable of turning us over.

Same applies really. Speedway guidelines are available for any given situation, just depends who's asking and who's interest it's in. You better have a word with 89 then:

PETERBOROUGH have replaced one hot Danish prospect with another for the start of their Premier League play-off challenge. The Readypower Panthers will be without recent signing Anders Thomsen for their quarter-final first leg clash at Sheffield tonight (Thursday). Thomsen has fallen ill with a bout of sickness and diarrhoea but Panthers bosses have moved swiftly to secure the services of Jonas B. Andersen for the trip to Owlerton. The Redcar man impressed when notching up nine points in the recent Premier League Riders' Championship - won by sidelined Panthers skipper Ulrich Ostergaard - at the same venue earlier this month. Promoter Ged Rathbone said: "It is a blow to lose Anders to illness - especially after he had agreed to change his plans to race for us tonight. "But I must thanks Jonas for agreeing to step in at short-notice and hopefully he can deliver the sort of performance he produced in the PLRC." Peterborough team: Rider replacement for Ulrich Ostergaard, Michael Palm Toft, Jonas B. Andersen (guest), Simon Lambert, Ben Barker, Rafal Konopka, Emil Grondal. Panthers web

Seems fair enough. It is the FIM rule I believe? It's not written down anywhere but if you speak to the right person.

That's very true, and with everyone saying their piece in this case, there remains more questions than answers as per usual. Just imagine if there was transparency and clarity in such circumstances though, the BSF would turn into Facebook

Not really. It's a valid point isn't it, if it's true it was a unilateral decision as has been reported. I'll argue my corner until there is a decent explanation out there, which is even more surprising as I'm not bothered either way

It was on the To Do list but we were finding difficult to find the time for a courtesy call to the opposition. We didn't realise that it isn't necessary to consult the opposition.

I assume that's an attempt at humour and that you mean Ged Rathbone? He said that he was under the impression, not that he was 100% sure. It's a good early learning curve though: negotiate early and get everything confirmed in writing and signed off. Assumptions and verbals are worth diddly squat if the brown stuff hits.

The plus side here of course is that once leagues and teams are known for 2016 then the fixture list will be out before Christmas: because based on what we know, you don't have to ask the other team whether they agree with the fixture. Just get your dates and fill them in with the opposition most inconvenienced for any chosen one, knowing that our sports administrators will do everything that they can to assist you to get the meeting on - simples

I'd agree with that. I do get irritated with travelling time being used as an excuse when it suits, and now that it has all become somewhat clearer then I don't think that it's unreasonable that Sheffield & the BSPA said that this is happening. I find it hard to believe though that nobody looked at the possible scenarios and considered that this might be one? Anyway, only 48 hours to go and it's chip paper

I've already given my view on the topic, and that's a bit rich coming from you may I say. Anyway, what I want in 2016 seems unlikely, so as I'm not fussed who rides, I'll leave you to discuss with your colleagues

Oh dear, he likes your post. Change your viewing location and get a disguise would be my advice

Did we need to know that? Does it make a difference?

If it wasn't a PR stunt then it was a cock-up all round so you need to look a bit harder. "They have now agreed a date to host Peterborough next week" - who'd they agree that with "PETERBOROUGH chiefs stress they have not agreed to travel to Sheffield in a Premier League play-off quarter-final next Thursday"? Don't you need to agree it with the other team these days, or do you just pick a day that suits? Personally I don't see why those 3 couldn't ride anyway but don't know enough about the individual circumstance, but it could have been easily sorted without a public slanging match. I suspect that their never was an issue for the BSPA to sympathise with, but even if there was, they'd only change it if it was in their interests,

Peterborough have earmarked September 25 and 27 as possible dates to stage the second leg at the East of England Showground.

I told you before that you need to get to Specsavers, you were looking in the mirror again you div

Still think it was a PR stunt, and not a bad effort come to that.

What a strange saying. The long winter evenings must just fly by

There isn't a right place until the 2015 team has finished its business. You're bright enough to have grasped that bit although it was unlikely to stop you

That's true, but this is the best idea, so far this week, that fueltaps had to have a dig at Panthers. It's like speedway's version of the Daily Arsenal.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing isn't it. The fact that we have to wail, gnash and slag to make sense of it all says much about the sport, it's communications and the way it treats the paying customers. Did anyone at the start or during any of those 6 pages suggest that those 3 could ride, were putting their interests first ahead of paying customers? Nope! If it's all Peterborough's fault then why did the BSPA sympathise with our plight (or did Rathbone make that up?) and what plight was that? What rule did they need to assist us that they haven't currently got?