Grachan

Looking at the riders these sides currently have on their books, plus the possible teams being put up on here, it could be that they aren't even looking for help from this rule but merely trying to stunt the growth of the top sides.

Probably. It's been going on for years. It needs to be stopped. The sport needs to have a proper set of rules that everyone knows. You can't just vote in new rules every year with every club looking to vote for themselves.

Cheating clubs out of 8 point riders to give themselves an unfair advantage? Cheating fans of seeing riders that have remained loyal to the team they support riding for them? Cheating riders out of work if they don't, then, sign one of the 8 pointers themselves? Cheating by voting for an average cut-off above that of their own heatleaders so that they don't have to lose any of their own riders under their new rule? Or are they voting for the good of the sport as a whole by.... er.... nope, can't think of a reason how that can be the case, but maybe there is one?

I AM talking about the good of the sport. It is the lower teams who have voted for themselves rather than the good of the sport. Do you think they voted for Wolves, Swindon and Belle Vue to be forced to shed one of their 8 point riders for the good of the sport as a whole? Of course they didn't. As you say, Swindon can still use Thursdays anyway - so that's not a club issue. It's a common sesnse one, with Denmark on Wednesdays.

Exactly. And what would people do? they'd say they were cheating. Well, it's no more cheating, in my book, than sides getting together and voting riders out of the teams above you (and quite possibly the league).

Although it doesn't directly say how Swindon voted, it's pretty clear from this that they are against it: http://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/sport/speedway/15672317.Rossiter_to_speak_to_Robins__big_two_after_points_limit_blow/ Swindon were also against Wednesday nights as it clashes with Denmark.

We know. But why vote for other teams to have to lose 8 point riders if you are not going to use them yourselves? If that does happen then it's even more pathetic from the teams that voted for it. I used to be a fan of speedway. I now just support Swindon rather than the sport, and that is because they are constantly fighting against this nonsense. If Swindon were a team voting in favour of stuff like this I'd be lost to the sport because I would no longer support them.

My thoughts exactly reading this. The same on the King's Lynn thread. People putting forward teams without 8 point riders when teams are being forced to release them. So of the 4 vote-happy sides we could have at least two of them not signing an 8 point rider and another one already having signed one from outside the league.

Great idea. Vote to make teams release 8 point riders and then not sign any yourself.

You could do as many as you were able to do. Even double tacs were allowed before.

They'll probably stick to just one. Any more than that and they might have to actually use their brains.

The more I think about this, the more annoyed I get about it. Seriously, what is the point of actually bothering to try and ride well when you just get stuffed up for doing it. If anyone really wonders why Poole Chuck the odd match away, or Coventry got Chris Harris to drop points to keep his average low, here is the reason. Right here. You accept that if you are at the top of the league you will have to shed a few points the following year, but for the clubs to vote for something that is going to stuff the enthusiasm of fans at a club like Swindon annoys me so much. It's not just about team strength, it's about keeping continuity going at a club. Such a shame, and I just hope that whichever rider gets palmed off to one of the happy-voter clubs comes back again. Of course, nobody from those clubs is bothered about the effect this has on Swindon and their supporters. If ever there was a case for having proper rules that don't change every year as teams make up new ones that suit themselves, this is it.

I suspect Somerset are already salivating over that one.

Or even take 7 rides if the second heatleader is missing!

Nick's heat 13 was just an amazing moment. Of course, at the time, Jason was happily way in front and dominating the race. Team-riding is something of a problem with Jason, though, but overall I know who I would want in a heat 15 last heat decider. Nick's progress has been great though. Maybe a time away will be the making of him, like it was with Martin Ashby. Just wish we could keep both. It's such a shame. The points limit would have prevented us getting too strong anyway.

Why would you choose Nick over Jason?

It's not 1.2. I got that wrong because someone was touting a 1.2 conversion rate elsewhere and it stuck in my head.

With tac subs available too, Doyle is a must. He could be taking 6 rides away from home, and there is a long gap between the number one's second and third rides where he can cover. Or, if we fall a long way behind, he could be out in heats 13, 14 and 15. Surely we're not going to get rid of the World Champion. What a mistake that would be.

Nick at number one is new territory for him. Let him test the waters somewhere else then come back as a proper number one if he can make that step. To get rid of Jason Doyle would be a terrible move. Nick is very close to Rosco, so even if he does get loaned out I'm sure he'd be back.

Yeah. I was thinking the conversion rate was 1.2, but that was someone's theory not the real figure. He'd probably be about the same as last year - 13.4 ish.

No brainer for me. Nick can be a number one who will average about 7.99 for someone else, then come back.

It says no restrictions in the statement. Just build a team to the available limit. What would Doyle be in the championship? Probably less than 12! Worth a punt based on Swindon's success this year.

What particularly frustrates me about the over 8 rule is that, presumably, Poole and Leicester would have voted for it. I would have hoped Poole would have been more positive in it, but presumably based it purely on their own team building fans, and Leicester because they, themselves, went out and got themselves a decent number one from the GP but have effectively stopped anyone else doing so.

I agree. I remember a few years back they came up with this rule before the end of the year and Coventry made sure their riders stayed below 8. It's the only way.

This is the problem. It's not a rule based on anything other than teams without a decent number trying to get hold of one from another team. It's not a proper rule at all, and also specifically targets certain teams which is not a fair way to go about things.