Grachan

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.

I agree. We need to keep Jason. Do a Poole. Loan Nick out and tell him to stay below 8. So, basically, Swindon will still not have had a World Champion riding in their side since Barry Briggs.

Maybe Swindon should drop down to The Championship. Their top two - which is too strong for the top league - is allowed in the lower league. Genius.

Because King's Lynn were rubbish, need a number one, and the Chairman is their promoter.

Jason Doyle tweeted last night (and later deleted it) that it looks like he's ridden himself out of a job. It makes sense now. Swindon need to keep him, but we have stuck with Nick Morris all this time and seen him progress, only to have to now lose either him or the World Champion. Sometimes I hate this sports and how it is run.

Wednesday nights? Well that effectively rules me out for the entire season then. One rider over 8? Load of old nonsense. It's not just about team strengths, it's about keeping the riders that mean something to supporters. It also rules out any new decent riders as Vaculik makes up the full quota of 8 riders. I wonder how many riders over 8 the team run by the Chairman has. Tac subs? Look forward to seeing everyone complain about how unfair they are. Why is it always Swindon that get stuffed in the AGM?

Wednesday nights? Well that effectively rules me out for the entire season then.

Will probably herald an exciting new era in British Speedway.

Maybe that's partly because, to a lot of people, it just looks like 4 blokes riding round a track and they don't see beyond that. Personally I think they should play up the statistical side more and have in depth discussions on it when on the tv. It needs to appeal to those who just like to see 4 blokes riding round a track, sure, but you are going to get that anyway. But the scoring and averages are a major part of speedway's appeal for me. I prefer the old ts rule to the tr rule, for example, not because you see more of the top riders but because it used to provoke in depth tactical discussions as to who was best to use and in what race to get the most out of it. Speedway misses that.

It's no different to tactical substitutes in the "old" days. They, too, were to keep matches artificially close. As for the idea of 4 blokes going for it - this is a common factor I see from people who think the sport should be just that. For me, personally, if it was just that then I'd lose interest pretty quick. I love things like averages, working out team etc. That's what caught my interest in the beginning and probably plays a large part in what maintains it.

Good point.

Here's an example of why this guy's average theory doesn't work. A second division rider has an average of 4.51. This times 1.2 comes to 5.412. Rounded up, 4.51 comes to 5. And 5.412 rounded down also comes to 5. So he has an identical average in both leagues.

To put it another way. Take an 8 point rider in the second division. 8 x 1.2 = 9.60 Take a 9.60 rider in the first division. 9.6 x 0.8 = 7.68. However, using his rounding up system, a 7.68 rider would then be rounded up to 8.00 and 9.60 average rider would be rounded up to 10, 10 x 0.8 = 8.00. So maybe he is thinking it in those terms.

Well he did have a broken foot. Trust me, Swindon fans didn't feel mugged off in 2017.

It can make the last few races more interesting for supporters (well, most of them anyway). As it is now, it is of no real significance to home supporters if the away team gain a point or not if they already have their three by heat 15. Another exampke is Swindon only tended to use Jason Doyle in heat 15 if they needed him. If they had 3 points in the bag then there was no real advantage to putting him in. I'm surprised you can't see that, actually.

Do people think Rugby Union is a joke too? From Wikipedia: 4 points for winning a match 2 points for drawing a match 0 points for losing a match 1 losing bonus point for losing by 7 points (or fewer) 1 try bonus point for scoring 4 tries (or more) In this system, winning teams get 4 or 5 points; drawing teams 2 or 3 points; and losing teams 0, 1, or 2 points.

It's not a farce at all. It was a good system. The only thing wrong with it was that it no longer needed a TR to be available, but it was still available.

No, but I'd bring back 2 points for winning by less that 6 at home.

Nothing wrong with "gardening" as far as I can see. As long as riders are at the start and ready to go when the 2 minutes are up, then what's the problem? If they are still digging about when the two minutes expires then exclude them. That's all you need to do.

Does Grondal for Musielak fit? It would be interesting to see what the pre-season predictions were if that happened!

Maybe Holder was a disappointment, but if you'd kept him in the side King's Lynn would probably have been in the play-offs too instead of struggling to stay away from the bottom. The only team in the top four without a GP rider would then have been Belle Vue - who had a rider who has qualified for next year's GP.

No. Reds and greens.