Plymouth (42) v (48) Poole

[Doners123]

1 hour ago, Mr Blobby said:

Klindt doesn’t ride till the Sunday but they’ll just use the 75% rule again so he doesn’t get a ban. 
 

Notice you’ve never heard a peep from Lewy on all of this as he knows Klindt and Plymouth are well and truly at it. Normally very quick to comment on things but this he’s stayed silent on.

Plymouth are not doing anything wrong. They are playing within the rules to give themselves the best chance to win. If they could change to another rider I’m sure they would, but unless you have a brilliant idea on who to bring in instead as a heat leader let us know. 
 

when the rules change Plymouth will have to change with it but currently the rule in place is best for Plymouth and arguably best for public as they get some of a heat leader as apposed to no heat leader. 
 

anyways up the glads and let’s go get this bonus point.

[Mr Blobby]

7 hours ago, Doners123 said:

Plymouth are not doing anything wrong. They are playing within the rules to give themselves the best chance to win. If they could change to another rider I’m sure they would, but unless you have a brilliant idea on who to bring in instead as a heat leader let us know. 
 

when the rules change Plymouth will have to change with it but currently the rule in place is best for Plymouth and arguably best for public as they get some of a heat leader as apposed to no heat leader. 
 

anyways up the glads and let’s go get this bonus point.

Well they are they’re letting Klindt do what he wants by not turning up. If you’re okay with him and your club cheating the general public then that’s fine. 
 

How is it best for Plymouth and the public you’re replacing one of the top guys in the league with someone who has 75% of his average cause he’s refusing to turn up. Give your head a wobble.

Edited 7 hours ago by Mr Blobby

[lewy]

7 minutes ago, Mr Blobby said:

Well they are they’re letting Klindt do what he wants by not turning up. If you’re okay with him and your club cheating the general public then that’s fine. 
 

How is it best for Plymouth and the public you’re replacing one of the top guys in the league with someone who has 75% of his average cause he’s refusing to turn up. Give your head a wobble.

I think you need to give your head a wobble if we get rid of klindt where do we get a replacement?any suggestions welcome  plus getting a rider on 75% of Klindt's average still allows us to bring in a reasonable replacement, the Plymouth public in no way feel short changed in fact generally makes us stronger at home as klindt never really come to terms with the Plymouth track. I think we have 2 away matches left watch this space!

[Mr Blobby]

39 minutes ago, lewy said:

I think you need to give your head a wobble if we get rid of klindt where do we get a replacement?any suggestions welcome  plus getting a rider on 75% of Klindt's average still allows us to bring in a reasonable replacement, the Plymouth public in no way feel short changed in fact generally makes us stronger at home as klindt never really come to terms with the Plymouth track. I think we have 2 away matches left watch this space!

Not suggesting get rid of Klindt, I’m suggesting you actually get your number 1 to turn up to a home meeting. 
 

However suits both parties to play with the rules as he’s not great round the place. 
 

Hopefully this will now be changed next year from the abuse you’ve used it for Klindt. As he’s basically withholding his services.

Edited 6 hours ago by Mr Blobby

[IainB]

Something for the children to do while waiting for the kids race...

 

[Doners123]

1 hour ago, Mr Blobby said:

Well they are they’re letting Klindt do what he wants by not turning up. If you’re okay with him and your club cheating the general public then that’s fine. 
 

How is it best for Plymouth and the public you’re replacing one of the top guys in the league with someone who has 75% of his average cause he’s refusing to turn up. Give your head a wobble.

Plymouth are not cheating anyone or the public Infact by having klindt as an actual heat leader for 5 matches as an example as apposed to a random second sting that just happens to be available. If Plymouth wanted to cheat the public they would have not bothered getting in Nicholls. If you could let us know of the available heat leader you know so well that will not cheat the public do let us know. 
 

as stated it’s benefiting Plymouth and Plymouth are doing well with it, winning at home, running Poole close away, Plymouth are more than happy to keep doing what we are doing even if no one likes it. the riders that have come in have given great entertainment and points to the team. 

[IainB]

I'm not sure anybody is blaming Plymouth, they've been badly let down by Klindt. The Speedway Control Bureau has once again proved itself as not fit for purpose, handing bans out willy nilly, especially last season not so much this, and then turning a blind eye to other rule breaches.

Until the SCB steps up and applies the rules in a consistent and unbiased way Speedway will always be a Mickey Mouse sport in this country. I can't decide whether the SCB are incompetent or willfully neglegent... I suspect it's the latter.

[foreverblue]

21 minutes ago, IainB said:

I'm not sure anybody is blaming Plymouth, they've been badly let down by Klindt. The Speedway Control Bureau has once again proved itself as not fit for purpose, handing bans out willy nilly, especially last season not so much this, and then turning a blind eye to other rule breaches.

Until the SCB steps up and applies the rules in a consistent and unbiased way Speedway will always be a Mickey Mouse sport in this country. I can't decide whether the SCB are incompetent or willfully neglegent... I suspect it's the latter.

You are correct, not Plymouths fault but it is cheating the public to not be able to use their number 1 , the rules are wrong, if you could not use a rider 75 per cent of his average this may happen less. A lot of fans who attend speedway meetings do not know the rules and would expect to see Klindt, I bet there is a lot of joking and hilarity when they are told why he is not there.

[IainB]

4 minutes ago, foreverblue said:

You are correct, not Plymouths fault but it is cheating the public to not be able to use their number 1 , the rules are wrong, if you could not use a rider 75 per cent of his average this may happen less. A lot of fans who attend speedway meetings do not know the rules and would expect to see Klindt, I bet there is a lot of joking and hilarity when they are told why he is not there.

Why has Ben Cook received a 28 day ban for breaching SCB Regulation 010.5 j) and Nicolai Kilndt hasn't?

Klindt may not be in "dispute" with his club in which case surely paragraph p) should be applicable "has been approved in a teams declared 1-7 at the start of the season but due to extenuating circumstances is not available, a facility may be granted, up to a maximum of 28 days, at the SCB Co-Ordinators discretion."

[Youhave2minutes]

27 minutes ago, foreverblue said:

You are correct, not Plymouths fault but it is cheating the public to not be able to use their number 1 , the rules are wrong, if you could not use a rider 75 per cent of his average this may happen less. A lot of fans who attend speedway meetings do not know the rules and would expect to see Klindt, I bet there is a lot of joking and hilarity when they are told why he is not there.

Too many riders now taking the piss out of British Speedway.

[Youhave2minutes]

31 minutes ago, foreverblue said:

You are correct, not Plymouths fault but it is cheating the public to not be able to use their number 1 , the rules are wrong, if you could not use a rider 75 per cent of his average this may happen less. A lot of fans who attend speedway meetings do not know the rules and would expect to see Klindt, I bet there is a lot of joking and hilarity when they are told why he is not there.

Bob Geldoff didn’t like Mondays and Nicolai hates Saturdays.

[IainB]

1 minute ago, Youhave2minutes said:

Bob Geldoff didn’t like Mondays and Nicolai hates Saturdays.

Or as Elton John sang, Saturday night's the night for... travelling 🛫

[Arthur54]

1 hour ago, IainB said:

Something for the children to do while waiting for the kids race...

 

That could apply to where's Lewy 

[SteveArena]

Just used to pop in and out years ago SS as an observer.  Used to enjoy your verbal jousting with Gavan amongst others!

Seemed like a interesting forum so joined up.  Used to go to Lakeside every week doubt if we will ever come back.

[Neila]

2 hours ago, Mr Blobby said:

Well they are they’re letting Klindt do what he wants by not turning up. If you’re okay with him and your club cheating the general public then that’s fine. 
 

How is it best for Plymouth and the public you’re replacing one of the top guys in the league with someone who has 75% of his average cause he’s refusing to turn up. Give your head a wobble.

Didn't Edinburgh run most of the season without a heat leader a few years ago ?

[IainB]

22 minutes ago, Neila said:

Didn't Edinburgh run most of the season without a heat leader a few years ago ?

Was their heat leader holed up in a Polish hotel room on race night and racing around the rest of Europe during the week?

Edited 3 hours ago by IainB

[arnieg]

1 hour ago, IainB said:

Why has Ben Cook received a 28 day ban for breaching SCB Regulation 010.5 j) and Nicolai Kilndt hasn't?

Klindt may not be in "dispute" with his club in which case surely paragraph p) should be applicable "has been approved in a teams declared 1-7 at the start of the season but due to extenuating circumstances is not available, a facility may be granted, up to a maximum of 28 days, at the SCB Co-Ordinators discretion."

Because when he has been unjustifiably missing Plymouth have not used a guest for him. Instead they have gone the "no facility" route which means a facility of a 75% guest.

Me thinks this would be better understood if the terminology wasn't so batrubbish contradictory!

[IainB]

2 minutes ago, arnieg said:

Because when he has been unjustifiably missing Plymouth have not used a guest for him. Instead they have gone the "no facility" route which means a facility of a 75% guest.

Me thinks this would be better understood if the terminology wasn't so batrubbish contradictory!

They had Kye Thomson guesting against Worky, Tobias Thomsen against Oxford, Kyle Howarth against Scunny and Chris Harris against Poole. 

Even if none of that were true, it is not for Plymouth to decide whether rules have been broken, the tail seems to be wagging the dog 🐕

[Arthur54]

According to the Poole website, Kye Thompson guesting for Klint (traveling to Poland) Anders Rowe down to ride 

[foreverblue]

3 hours ago, IainB said:

Why has Ben Cook received a 28 day ban for breaching SCB Regulation 010.5 j) and Nicolai Kilndt hasn't?

Klindt may not be in "dispute" with his club in which case surely paragraph p) should be applicable "has been approved in a teams declared 1-7 at the start of the season but due to extenuating circumstances is not available, a facility may be granted, up to a maximum of 28 days, at the SCB Co-Ordinators discretion."

No it seems rules dont apply to everyone.

Barker and Bowtell recovered from injury which is good news. Kye is guesting, so same as last week, thought 8 day rule may apply but probably doesnt apply to your number one.