northyorksbear

I'm trying to find a way to get to 30 points !!!!!

I'm sure Redcar will avoid 60 points, Somerset can't be that bad!! r/r for Roynon, all Bears to take rides (plus double points each time )

Is that Frank ??

Have to say I was expecting to very underwhelmed after all the hype, but in fairness well done - sounds a good one!!

He looked useful last year when you visited - double figure will do on Thursday Are you coming down ?

No chance - he is out for season!!

Well done to Monarchs - good luck in competition. Realistically this was always going to be the outcome, if Bears had their injured riders in then they would have done better, but Edinburgh are a stronger team. Bears actually surpassed expectations by beat Monarchs in the League and then repeating this in the cup

Ok points taken - lets move on

So if you can't recall anyone have personal digs at him, why were you so quick to say they weren't digs - it was only banter?? And I agree you haven't - you obviously do want "to move on and watch your speedway", but please don't try and defend others who have !!

Well this smacks a little of it's ok to say we move on and draw a line under it, but actually lets have some digs on another thread and if we get asked about it we'll call it banter - easy cop out. -

Well it appears that some care enough to post on other threads with snide little digs - maybe you should take your own advice and "move on" Better be careful with comments - don't want any "heavies" coming to my door !!

Apparently Glasgow wanted to sell Berge, but were told by MC that at this stage of season they couldn't insist on that and would have to sanction a loan deal! This only further highlights it has been quite an acrimonious split, and even though only loaned out it does seem to be the permanent end of this relationship. Wouldn't surprise me to see one or other of the parties comment further at some point, certainly Berge is a very unhappy chappy and that is not implying who, if any side, is at fault for whatever the dispute is.

You need to read my first comment, because this seems a very defensive post, and I'm not having a go a Glasgow/P'boro and I'm not saying that today's meeting (which I was nowhere near) should not have been called off at the time it was, but it is always just after heat 10! I'm asking questions as to was the track really safe to run heat 10, or heat 9 etc. I would like to see more teams take a stance and call off at heat 8 or 9 - I just think supporters are getting cheated because we are not seeing proper racing if track is getting that bad and then not getting any refund or discount on future meetings and sorry if this is really cynical but I assume riders only get paid for the races completed (or started) so immediately you have a saving for the promoter and the public pay full price for 66.6% of the product bought and as stated above probably a lesser quality product!!

This isn't aimed at Glasgow or Peterborough, because everyone does it, But doesn't it amaze people that a) meetings can be rushed through to heat 10 when necessary and more importantly b ) tracks deteriorate so quickly after heat 10, its always safe to ride in heat 10, but lo and behold track is now deemed unsafe!!. One final gripe - can anyone give a valid reason why heat 10 is deemed to be the satisfactory point to declare a result? Surely it should be heat 11 - after heat 11 all riders have had 3 programmed riders with exception of both number 2s who have had 4 - this seems a fairer point than denying away team's number 1 his third ride - heat 11 does (on paper) look to favour away teams usually. Ok rant over

Has nobody told Lambert he has got his proper average, so no need to keep avoiding Panthers away meetings

Do you really want to lower yourselves to our standards?? Also I would be doubtful Glasgow would want to sell a good young asset, so highly likely it will be a loan deal

Konopka into 4s line up ??

I think the only people to come out of this with any credibility are the SCB - they have responded quickly and come to the only decision available to them. For anyone to say their decision is the wrong one is ludicrous. Whether you agree with the rules or not they have followed them, imagine the feedback if they had compounded issue by making up some other ruling! As events have turned out Redcar have potentially benefitted, primarily as Kus won the heat, if he had not finished would we be debating Somerset having benefitted as Redcar should have used Robson! As regards cheating, or teams potentially trying similar tactics, you really are living in cloud cuckoo land. To cheat implies knowing what you are doing is wrong and intentionally trying to gain an advantage. If any team tries to do this they are banking on two highly unlikely events 1) the ref is totally incompetent and allows it and 2) the opposing team manager is totally incompetent and doesn't object! Now how likely is that to happen??? Final point - yes I support Redcar, but am looking at this incident impartially, if it were reversed I would be well cheesed off , but still see the correct SCB decision was reached and more annoyed with our TM for not making a big fuss at the time. I do wonder if many of the posters are coming at this with their own teams interests in their first thoughts (not looking at anyone in particular!!)

SCB website to get Regulations for 2015 then Section 2 for Statement of Fact definition 3.4.1 for section on Protests 3.4.3 c for the timescale to object about a heat

You have Redcar suffer because of their inability to know the rules. Or You have Somerset suffer because of Somerset's inability to realise that Redcar (and ref) are not following rules and object at the time. Just a slightly different take it does seem that no one was aware of the error at the time! Whilst it is now obvious that a mistake occurred I don't think result will be altered, problem for Somerset is that to protest about a specific heat (makeup of riders or result) you have to lodge this before next heat, I don't think this was the case. Also you can't protest about Statement of Fact - this includes any ruling a referee makes, so if the referee ruled Kus could take RR ride then this is now fact and irreversible! Got a feeling this may rumble on, but while ref and Redcar may been the wrongdoers as I say big problem from Somerset is that they didn't object or say anything, so by definition accepted what was happening. Not necessarily right and fair, but hey this is Speedway!!

Correct, let me revisit statement - means if Ulrich missing would have to be r/r not a guest

Should be 7 days from tonight (if meeting on & he rides) Doesn't really change too much, if he goes above Ostergaard then Ulrich gets r/r ride instead, just mean a change in riding order plus opportunity for guest when clash of fixtures with Kings Lynn

Maybe difference is that Rye are using him as a guest for a rider with more than 5pt average??

Unfortunately vast majority of supporters only go to see a winning team when a good close defeat can be far more entertaining. With Scunthorpe's performances so far this season the stayaway supporters have no incentive to return!!

I thought riders were limited to two leagues this season, so Bates who already rides in EL & PL would not be eligible for NL, have I misunderstood something ??