Grachan

Andrew Silver and Shawn McConnell. And Per Jonsson.

Guess what, Sidney. I remember seeing Mark Loram as a 16 year old at Hackney too. Hackney v Swindon when Simon Wigg was in the Hackney side. There was a "Yoof TV" station filming and it was on later on Channel 4 I think. Loram was featured because he was the youngest rider in the league at that time. I've probably still got it on an old video tape somewhere!

Didn't Hull win the National/Premier league once with a team of that sort of make up?

This is the World Cup though. I'm not so sure that Sky have much influence on that even if they do with league racing.

I don't think he was. It's the rule that's the farce. sky have constantly gone into a state of frenzied excitement at the prospect of Jokers and double-points ride while fans around the country cringe at the very thought of them. It was funny to hear Nigel getting indignant about what was happening. Seriously. Double points just for being behind in a match? Think about it. It's bloody stupid!!!!! And of course team managers are going to do what's best for the team to win a match. It's just so bleedin' obvious.

I agree, but for some reason these embarassing double-point fiascos keep being talked up on tv as if they are something great. Seeing girls dressed up all sexy and prading Jokers cards is, quite simply, a load of old nonsense. And well done the Danes for not only using the tactics they did but also openly ridiculing the rule in their interviews. Still think their tactics were prefectly legitimate though, bearing in mind the rules as they stand.

In the context of the meeting that's exactly what they WERE doing. I just don't see why some people are so outraged that Denmark were trying to make sure they won the meeting.

I suppose the closest thing in football would be away goals taken into account if scores are level on aggregate on champions league matches. A team could play accordingly to use that rule in their favour - so even though it's a draw they win. As for cricket it just baffles me. One team is all out for 40. The other team gets 742 for 1. So it's a draw. Or, at least it seems that way to me.

Blimey. And to think Iris thought my analogies were bad

It wasn't cheating. No more than, say, a football team going a goal up and then sitting back and defending the lead. Or a cricket team just running a single in the final ball of an over when they could have got two so that the best batsman faces the bowler again. There is absolutely no way that was cheating. Why be ashamed of trying to get your side to win the meeting?

The tactical ride etc is rubbish. Pure nonsense. Trying to limit its effect is a perfectly valid tactic for as long as it is in place. Not bad sportsmanship at all.

Why? They are doing their best for the team. I don't understand the outrage at riders slowing to prevent a joker in the latter stages of the meeting. What they are doing is trying to win the meeting. They are not throwing anything. Why shouldn't there be tactical riding? What is WRONG with tactical riding? There is a rule in place. A team 6 points behind can put in a TS and Joker. Sucha scenario can swing 6 points in favour of a team that might otherwise have scored nothing in that race. Trying to prevent that is trying to do your best for the team. It is not cheating anything. It is not throwing anything. It's doing all you can to get your side to win the meeting.

I don't think it's a farce at all. I think it's interesting to see the tactics of both teams. If you're going to have double point races then these are the tactics that go with it.

What's the point of waiting until you're already out to use a tactical substitute?

Don't agree with that. There's no point giving points away. Australia gained 3 points with the joker. For every point you "protect" you can take a point off from that. I can see there might be a reason to do it towards the end as the final few heats unravel, but not early in the meeting. In fact, you could argue that the tactics with the Joker were pefect because they went 6 ahead with Holder in the next heat so nullified the TS.

I agree that Harris is our best rider, so I would imagine that the organisers are hoping he can get a big finish and make a final or two so they can re-select him. Harris may be struggling this year, but he is above Woffinden.

Nope. Would still be daft.

Something like this did happen before, but reserves were allowed then. 1989 World Team Cup Final - all 4 riders in the opening heat were wiped out of the rest of the meeting. You'd think they would learn from history in case it happened again. I like the "substitute" idea that was raised earlier. That works well. The Joker is ridiculous and in many cases (eg Poland winning a few years back and Russia on Saturday) grossly unfair on the team that wins on track. It's the daftest rule. I'm not so sure about that. It's a regular thing for it to be used in that way. Australia would have done exactly the same had the race line-up been different or they felt it was worth waiting. But, yes, allowing not only a Joker but a TS at the same time does make it ridiculous and you can get a 6 point swing in one race rather than 3 points with a straight Joker and wipe out your deficit in one go. It's crazy really.

I'm guessing this is the original Rye house. http://www.britishpathe.com/video/speedway-school/query/speedway

I love watching Chris Harris when he's in this sort of form. It's like the second coming of Peter Collins.

It looks like Swindon pre-homestraight Grandstand. So many things remind me of Swindon. The shop after the stand. The shed looks like the old pits. grass banks. I'm sure that's Swindon. Edit - Dunno. It looks like Swindon but the banking looks low and the grandstand is after the pits which would put it on the wrong side as it looks like the stand on the other side. Dunnooooooooo....

With tactical substitutes, the same race and gate position format and bonus points included my guess is about the same percentage.

So, if that is the most recent rule book then it means FIM races CAN be awarded. So why do they keep saying they can't?

If that's what happened tonight, then effectively the rule is the same as allowing races to be awarded if the riders are on the last lap. For example, if a rider was brought off on the first bend of lap 4 then the race could just continue to its conclusion and the race awarded.

Just watched replay. He hadn't crossed the line.