cyclone

Barring injuries, Somerset look certs, with Glasgow beaten Playoff Finalists again. With Garrity returning in such fine form, Sheffield's 1 - 5 could possibly outscore any other team over two legs, but their reserves would have to up their game. Newcastle could also be in the mix, but whilst Lindgren has improved, Lambert seems to have faltered slightly, and Phillips is likely to be the weakest #7, if Ayres & Wajknecht return from injury. Edinburgh are unlikely to remain third in the table as I do not expect them to pick up any further points from their remaining away fixtures at Somerset, Sheffield, & Newcastle, and they might struggle to maintain their unbeaten home record against Somerset, Glasgow & Peterborough. Despite their dodgy home record, the Panthers away record should still ensure they grab sixth spot, and if Rathbone does find a way of shuffling his pack, they might cause a ripple.

IIRC Paul Gachet was one of two riders who featured in an action shot of practice racing at White City in an episode of The Sweeney

Most races I've seen home & away this Season are usually decided by the moves made on the first two bends. It was not a case of whoever was first away from the tapes, won. If it had been, the Monarchs would have scored a few more points. Tigers adapted better to the track & the prevailing weather conditions. Away Supporters of all Clubs whose team has taken a gubbing, tend to criticize the quality of the racing/track, rather than admit the visitors were poor, and/or the home side rode well. I'll say it again, we were crap on Sunday, Tigers looked good.

What I've got, is you ignore what is actually stated in the Full Regulations and make it up as you go along, Furthermore, as you are still avoiding admitting you made a false accusation in post #69 on the Scunny vs Edinburgh thread, asserting Edinburgh only informed Scunny of the change, late Sunday morning, I would not trust anything you state on here. You're certainly living up to the "Lucifer" part of your Forum name and are your asbestos pants still saving from you from any burns?

You really are making yourself look incredibly stupid - I'll highlight it again for you - pay attention!: A Rider must be released to take part in a higher priority Meeting, unless he is “Doubling Up” or is an “EDR, in which case the priority for a clash of Official Meetings is as follows: 16.1.1 The “owning” Club (ie. on Club’s Retained List) or before the start of the Season was transferred with the full Transfer Fee being paid. 16.1.2 If neither Club has “ownership”, then it is determined by the League status of the Club that does “own” the rider. If that Club is a NL Club then agreement can be made otherwise Art. 16.1 applies If you cannot directly relate rule 16.1.3 to the following part of the the SCB Statement, viz.: The BSPA instructed Edinburgh that as the Buxton v Belle Vue fixture was in the original Fixture List, and the above Meeting wasa re-arranged Meeting, having been postponed on June 12th, that Dan Bewley had to ride at Buxton and Edinburgh were therefore entitled to a Guest as per art 18.10 (d), As Monty Python would say "Time you visited Curry's and got a new brain" See you ignore to mention this part of the SCB:- "Furthermore, Edinburgh advised Scunthorpe by SMS at 15:14 on Friday 15th July (72 hours prior to the Meeting Start time) of the fact that Mitchell Davey would be the G rider replacing Dan Bewley." OK someones arithmetic is poor (Rob Godfrey perhaps? )as it was 48 hours prior, but you appear not to have the cojones to admit your post #69 on the Scunny vs Edinburgh thread, asserting Edinburgh only informed Scunny of the change, late Sunday morning, was completely false.

Apologies for post traumatic shock - I can't tell my Berge from my Bach

We were crap today and Glasgow were good, no problem admitting that. Agree that Erik Riss was rightly penalised for faffing about at the gate too long, although he gave us our single highlight when sweeping past the otherwise unbeaten Lawson on lap2 of heat 10. Tigers did look a complete unit today, with Lunna & Bach, particularly impressive. Finally a a message to Lucifer Sam - you really have a problem understanding the SCB Regulations. For your benefit here, for the nth time, is the relevant Section where a NL fixture does take priority for the services of a Doubling Up rider. Either vanity is preventing you from acknowledging this, or your mind has been degraded by supporting Jeremy Corbyn :- 16. FIXTURES, MATCH AVERAGES and GENERAL RULES The authority of the SCB and BSPA extends over all Meetings listed on the Official BSPA produced and maintained Fixture List. Changes, including Fixture re-stagings must be approved by the BSPA and no Meeting may be staged unless on the Fixture List. 16.1 Fixtures shall take priority as follows: FIM SGP, SWC, SGP Qualifying Meetings, FIM Junior Speedway Championship Meetings British Championships (Senior, Junior), BSPA Shared and Fee Events Official Competitions: 1. Elite League; 2. Premier League; 3.National League. NB. Non-Official Competitions have no priority over any of the above. A Rider must be released to take part in a higher priority Meeting, unless he is “Doubling Up” or is an “EDR, in which case the priority for a clash of Official Meetings is as follows: 16.1.1 The “owning” Club (ie. on Club’s Retained List) or before the start of the Season was transferred with the full Transfer Fee being paid. 16.1.2 If neither Club has “ownership”, then it is determined by the League status of the Club that does “own” the rider. If that Club is a NL Club then agreement can be made otherwise Art.16.1 applies. 16.1.3 The Original Fixture if there is a clash with a re-Arranged Fixture PS 19.9.3 does not override the above, it specifies that the NLRC will take priority over any PL fixture clash. Oh & BTW still awaiting for you to acknowledge that you falsely stated the Monarchs had advised the change on the Sunday morning which was exposed as untrue in the SCB Statement. Here's the link as it appears you might not have read this:- http://www.speedwaygb.co/news.php?extend.30910 .

Bollocks, Edinburgh did not get away with it, The reason they were permitted to use Davey was because in the case Doubling Up rider, where there is a clash of fixtures, an original NL match does take priority over a re-arranged PL fixture, and the SCB regs clearly state that the PL side will be entitled to a Guest Facility as per 18.10 d). This is a different situation where you are looking at replacing an injured #7. I do not know why Glasgow were not permitted to use Davey as a Guest Replacement for Ayres, but it appears they are applying 18.10 e) in this case. Already the Possilpark Paranoid Brigade are insinuating the Monarchs received special treatment which was not the case. Still any reason to have a jealous dig at the reigning PL Champions.

Was pleasantly surprised by this match which served up some superb racing with both sides,including their guests, fully committed. Most encouraging for the Monarchs was the 5-star performance of Messrs Clegg & Bewley at reserve. IMO this young pair will be the key as to whether or not Edinburgh will be able to finish in the Top Six of the League.

The problem is that #7's have two protected races (2 & 4) against their opposite no. 7, so it could be argued that this arrangement is different from anyone that is not a #7 whose average might fit.

Assume they have forgot to include Ricky Wells in their article & he'll be there for the USA?

Eh - how on earth are Glasgow at fault in any way, as they would have fulfilled the original fixture? It's not as if the original fixture was postponed because of bad weather, and I take it Berwick are only permitted to run one fixture per week, otherwise the original Saturday date could have gone ahead. Did they approach the Local Authorities for permission to run both fixtures, pointing out that TV exposure would be free publicity for the quaint hamlet that is Berwick, and it's "unusual" local citizens

Berwick are certainly to be commended in going down a very difficult route to secure Dawid Stachyra. They have had some decent Poles in their side before,notably Burza, so hopefully they are rewarded this time also, rather than relying on Guests or R/R long term.

SCB can you provide details of where and when the BSPA declared that Bewley's (helps if you can spell the rider's name correctly btw ) riding commitments between Edinburgh & BV Colts would be treated outwith the Regulations referred to above (i.e. Edinburgh would always have priority, irrespective of the rules)? Dare I suggest you either have difficulty in comprehending the Regs or are just making it up as you go along? There has been quite a bit of disinformation on here which has already been exposed as unfounded, such as Lucifer Sam falsely claiming that Edinburgh had only declared Davey on Sunday morning, as the SCB announcement on 22/7 has proved, and it appears likes of you, Lucifer Sam & the usual jealous anti-Edinburgh suspects on here, are hell bent on doing so, irrespective of the truth

Can you clarify if Bewley is registered as an asset of Elite League Belle Vue or National League Belle Vue Colts as that would relevant re 16.1.1? Even if he is owned by BV Colts, 16.1.2 allows Edinburgh & BV Colts to make their own arrangement re priority when fixtures clash, viz.: 16.1.2 If neither Club has “ownership”, then it is determined by the League status of the Club that does “own” the rider. If that Club is a NL Club then agreement can be made otherwise Art. 16.1 applies. I assume that when Monarchs considered offering Bewley the no. 7 berth, that both Promotions had agreed that where there was a clash of fixtures, PL fixtures would take priority, unless the PL fixture was a Re- Arranged match (as per Scunthorpe vs Edinburgh). IMO if Rob Godfrey or whoever was advising him, had read the SCB Regulations in the sequence they are written, it would have been obvious that a Guest Facility for an absent #7 was legitimate. To summarise when there is a fixture clash : 16.1.- PL take priority over NL for Doubling Up riders unless:- The NL fixture is the Original Fixture and PL is a Re-Arranged Fixture (16.1.3) OR The NLRC takes priority over any PL fixture on same date (19.9.3) In the the SCB announcement, it states:- "Furthermore, Edinburgh advised Scunthorpe by SMS at 15:14 on Friday 15th July (72 hours prior to the Meeting Start time) of the fact that Mitchell Davey would be the G rider replacing Dan Bewley." Looks Like Lucifer Sam was either misled, or telling Porkies in Post #69 on Monday morning when he stated :- "Al, if one were cynical, one might suggest that Edinburgh were well aware of the obvious error in the NL Green Sheets regarding Davey, and announced his presence as late as possible (late yesterday morning), to try to stop anybody spotting it in time. Unfortunately for them, Scunny did, and placed a protest in time."

Which contradicts this:- 16. FIXTURES, MATCH AVERAGES and GENERAL RULES The authority of the SCB and BSPA extends over all Meetings listed on the Official BSPA produced and maintained Fixture List. Changes, including Fixture re-stagings must be approved by the BSPA and no Meeting may be staged unless on the Fixture List. 16.1 Fixtures shall take priority as follows: FIM SGP, SWC, SGP Qualifying Meetings, FIM Junior Speedway Championship Meetings British Championships (Senior, Junior), BSPA Shared and Fee Events Official Competitions: 1. Elite League; 2. Premier League; 3.National League. NB. Non-Official Competitions have no priority over any of the above. A Rider must be released to take part in a higher priority Meeting, unless he is “Doubling Up” or is an “EDR, in which case the priority for a clash of Official Meetings is as follows: 16.1.1 The “owning” Club (ie. on Club’s Retained List) or before the start of the Season was transferred with the full Transfer Fee being paid. 16.1.2 If neither Club has “ownership”, then it is determined by the League status of the Club that does “own” the rider. If that Club is a NL Club then agreement can be made otherwise Art.16.1 applies. 16.1.3 The Original Fixture if there is a clash with a re-Arranged Fixture 16.1.4 A Transfer during the Season does not change this priority. 18. PREMIER LEAGUE MEETING REGULATIONS 18.10 FACILITIES a1) Absent #1: G or RR a2) Absent D-U or EDR (if riding for the “other” team) G or RR b ) 1 Absent rider (2 – 5): RR c) More than 1 Absent rider (1 - 5) 1 x RR facility and G for all others d) Absent #6 or #7: G e) “No Facility”: NL G* NL G*: a rider eligible for a NL Team who has never achieved an actual PL MA of 4.00 or above 18.11.3 The Guest must be in a current Team Declaration and have an MA that is the same or lower than that of the absent rider. If a replacement EL rider also has a current PL MA then the higher of the MA’s will dictate the eligibility. 18.11.4 The Guest assumes the position and MA of the Missing rider. Buxton vs B.V. Colts was an Original Fixture, whereas Scunthorpe vs Edinburgh was a Re-Arranged Fixture. Dan Bewley is a Doubling Up rider with BV Colts & Edinburgh Under the Regulations, Belle Vue Colts had priority for the services of Dan Bewley as “Doubling Up” rider, per 16.1.3 Therefore Edinburgh were entitled to a Guest Facility as per 18.10.d) for #7 and did not require to be a rider eligible for a NL Team who has never achieved an actual PL MA of 4.00 or above Mitchell Davey is an Edinburgh asset, UK Passport Holder currently riding for Coventry Storm in the National League, and who previously rode for Edinburgh in Premier League in 2013 and his Final PL GSA was 3.00 Mitchell Davey was therefore eligible to Guest for Edinburgh at Scunthorpe in place of Dan Bewley, at no 7 as he met the criteria of 18.11.3 & 18.11.4 of the Regulations

Firstly as I had previously mentioned, Glasgow only rode 2 Challenge Matches throughout October 2009, so how could they have had "an awful October" ? On the BSPA Website - under the heading - 2009 Premier League Greensheet Averages, Mitchell Davey is listed as 3.77. What you are referring to is called - 2009 Premier League Team Declarations. As the BSPA has differentiated between the two categories, when referring to Greensheet Averages for 2009, is it not logical to refer to the one named 2009 Premier League Greensheet Averages?

What you were looking at is the 2009 Team Declarations, which appear to be calculated differently, and which were used for team building purposes, to the Green Sheets . If you compare them it appears that for every team the figure referred to in the October Team Declarations are there are differences to the Oct 2009 Green Sheet. Here are Glasgow's for October 2009:- Team Declaration 1 James Grieves 9.49 2 Shane Parker 9.08 3 Josh Grajczonek 6.21 4 William Lawson 5.56 5 Aleksander Conda 5.00 6 Lee Dicken 4.67 7 Mitchell Davey 4.23 Total 44.24 . Green Sheet Glasgow M H A R Pts 2008 2009 Previous Club James Grieves 36 19 17 172 370 8.63 8.55 Shane Parker 33 17 16 157 320 9.01 8.15 William Lawson 35 16 19 160 262 5.56 6.55 See Prev. Club Josh Grajczonek 27 13 14 124 193 5.25 6.28 Aleksander Conda *Ass* 5 2 3 16 4 5.00 Lee Dicken 24 12 12 128 134 4.67 4.19 Mitchell Davey 38 19 19 209 197 3.00 3.77 Looking at the above, can you explain how the likes of Grieves (- 0.94) and Parker (-0.53) would differ so much, given that Glasgow only rode 2 Challenge matches during October, 2009 ?

Well according to the BSPA Archives, PL Green Sheet Final Issue, dated 28th October, 2009, Davey's GSA is 3.77. http://www.speedwaygb.co/plgreensheets09 Tom Perry had achieved a GSA over 3 in previous Interim Green Sheets but was classified as a Category 4 PL rider, because his GSA in a Final Issue did not exceed the prescribed limit. It therefore appears that reference to historical Green Sheet Averages are based solely on the Final Issues for each Season, and as such, Mitchell Davey's Final GSA, based on all eligible matches for 2009 is 3.77 (i.e. meets criteria for 18.10.e)

And Davey is also a UK Passport Holder, whose last PL GSA was 3.00, and is not in any other PL team's declared 1 - 7. If it was somehow ruled that only Dan Bewley was eligible to ride at Scunny today, then would that mean that Bewley's 13 for BV Colts at Buxton this afternoon would also be annulled?

I was at Rye that day & ht 15 ended 3 - 2 for Rockets with both Frampton & Fisher being excluded for falling in the first two runs. Monarchs did win 45 - 44 as per today's result

Will this do instead:- "It was a shame that we couldn't race at Edinburgh on Friday due to the weather. I had a look because I wasn't far away when it got called off and it was really wet, so there was nothing they could have done about it" - Aaron Summers, Glasgow Programme, 29th June Did you not see this in the Programme? or were you & George too busy fondling each other again

As you were comparing the results of the League matches to the Play-Offs you should have also looked at the following also:- Steve Worrall in the league scored 4 in the away league match & paid 13 in the home fixture whereas r/r in the Play-Offs were 2 away and paid 7 at home. You also ignored that Oliver Allen only scored 3 in the league match at the Dale while guest Summers recorded 6. Likewise Brady Kurtz only score paid 2 at Armadale in the League whereas r/r recorded paid 9. Oh and by the way, the Final League Table had Edinburgh on 74pts and Somerset on 67 Hope that gives you a more balanced analysis

Care to explain how Somerset were "so unlucky" in 2014 play off final?

This forecast is very good :- https://www.wunderground.com/q/locid:24820;loctype:25?MR=1