John Leslie

Paul Carrington

The rule IS crystal clear. A rider can only guest on a track once in 8 days, unless it is as a guest for the home No.1 There haven't. Please provide details of these 5 matches. In fact see if you can even find details of one.

It's down to the SCB referee to check. If the referee doesn't find a mistake, the opposition can protest up to 24 hours before start time.

Correct. This shambles is down to the SCB. The rules are;- At least 5 days before the meeting the home team (Eastbourne) must give their line-up to the away team (Birmingham). Within 24 hours of the above, Birmingham must respond with their line-up to Eastbourne. At least 3 days before the meeting Eastbourne advise the full line-ups to the SCB and referee via a hidden section of the SCB website. I'm told that this all happened exactly as it should. From there it is up to the referee to use the 3 days to check that that the line-ups are legal......( Clearly the referee failed here and should be reprimanded). If either team have any protests about the opposition line up, they have to be made at least 24 hours before the start. Not sure if/when Eastbourne protested, but for a protest to be upheld it must have been before 6.30pm Saturday which surely gave Drury enough time to find a replacement? If no protest was made before 6.30pm on Saturday, then surely Shanes should ride even if it is illegal because it has been accepted by the SCB and opposition. Under no circumstances should it get to the stage of today's farce where the paying public are cheated

Speedway shooting itself in the foot again. Referee should be reprimanded for this massive error. Birmingham will have given their (illegal) lineup to Eastbourne and the SCB referee 5 days ago. It's the referee's responsibilty to check that it is legal. Amazed that Drury made such a mistake, but it should have been checked by the referee days ago, to give Drury time to source a legal replacement

Did you really just write that??????? Do you really not realise that Hancock slowing to let Holder past, but then speeding up to keep Zmarzlik behind, was designed to help Holder gain an extra point in the bid to catch Zmarzlik? Do you really not realise that if Hancock faked an engine failure he would be handing an extra point to every other rider in the race, which wouldn't give Holder any advantage in the bid to catch Zmarzlik? Perhaps if there had been a full (non-monster biased) report in the Speedway Star explaining how the cheating plan was designed to work, and how it was foiled by correct application of the rules, then you may have been able to read it and then you would understand.

I'm sure you're saying that because you have to. I'd hate to think you actually believed it.

And strictly speaking not even the entire UK. Just BSPA clubs within the UK. If, (like other sports who have multiple governing bodies e.g. boxing, darts), there was suddenly a rival governing body sanctioned by the RAC/SCB in competition to the BSPA, then the BSPA registration would only hold over BSPA clubs, not those of a rival body.

You are dead right. It's not the only reason for speedway's current troubles, but it is the single biggest reason for speedway's current troubles.

Belle Vue No.1 in an enlarged top division with a low points limit.

Well, I've never seen one stop to pick up a passenger.... ...not until Greg Hancock in the Aussie GP anyway.

Without question one of the all-time great promoters. Wherever you live in the country, whichever league you follow, the chances are you have watched a team that has been saved by Tony Mole at some time. And he doesn't just throw money at clubs. He turns them around and makes them viable for someone else to take over. He also seems to remember the track staff at every track he's ever owned and often stops for a chat with ex-staff when he revisits those tracks. It'll be a sad day when he quits promoting.

For anyone who doesn't get the Speedway Star (you lucky people) here's a brief summary of their (non) reporting of Hancock's cheat-gate. Cover page - Picture of Hancock - headline "Grin, and Grin, and Grin, and Grin" (?) (not sure what that means.... Grin and Grim may have summed it up better). pages 2&3 - Main story (by Paul Burbridge) from Hancock perspective - how the poor sod was "hard done to". how he was "hurt" and "bizarrely excluded from heat 9". (think they mean he was disqualified from heat 9 after bizarrely cheating). It repeats all the Hancock Bull-excrement excuses about the clutch, but doesn't challenge this nonsense with any facts. It doesn't go into any detail about Hancock spitting his dummy and walking out To the left of this main article is "Holder - Shocked" (by Paul Burbridge). Holder is reportedly "shocked" by Hancock's disqualification. It repeats the clutch nonsense without pointing out that it is nonsense. To the right of the main article is - "FIM Stand by decision" (by Paul Burbridge). It basically reports that the FIM investigated Hancock's actions. The jury viewed replays of the race, examined the bike, decided unanimously that Hancock had broken the rules, and disqualified him as per the rules. It doesn't report any FIM comments on Hancock's walking out of the meeting. Mr Burbridge doesn't seem interested in this side of the story. Page 6 - The meeting report (by Paul Burbridge) Tells us "American legend Greg Hancock underlined why he's one of speedway's all time class acts on and off the track as he rose above FIM accusations to celebrate his fourth World title" Yes...Mr Burbridge believes blatant cheating, failing to own up to cheating, and them throwing toys out of the pram makes you a "class act". Mr Burbridge tells us that Hancock's cheating and spoilt brattishness will "vanish into the mists of time" (so that's ok) but his great record in joining Hans Nielsen and Barry Briggs on 4 titles won't ever vanish. (This arse-licking drivel continues onto page 8.) Page 9 brings us an article "Jury Justice?" It tells us "What should have been one of the greatest night's of Greg Hancock's storied career was unfortunately tarnished by the bizarre decision to boot him out of heat 9" It doesn't tell us who wrote this drivel (but we could guess his initials may be P.B.). Basically this is more "woe is me" stuff. It's not Hancock's fault he cheated. Not his fault he spat his dummy....etc etc It is totally the FIM jury's fault for upholding the rules. Page 10 and we have some (selective) social media comments (compiled with a certain bias by who other than the ubiquitous Mr P.B.) Of course we have the tweets of those two empty vessels Middleditch and Havelock, and they are surprisingly joined by Hans Nielsen who thinks the exclusion was a farce. The hundreds of tweets and other social media comments from all of those who thought Middlo and Havvy were talking out of their backsides, don't make it into the Star. The only one who slightly dares to side with commonsense and integrity is Chris Louis who "agrees with the FIM for upholding the integrity of the sport". Page 14 gives us a meeting report from long-serving Aussie correspondent Peter White. His view on Hancock's cheating is... "We'll forget the Hancock issue entirely in this column and focus on the good"...... Well that's bloody helpful! Someone who may be able to give an unbiased opinion ducks out. All we know is that he doesn't rate that part of events as being part of the "good". And that's it....that's all the Star give us. it's almost as if no one cheated......no one gave a bull-excrement excuse for cheating...no one spat a dummy, threw toys or walked out. After all it will all soon be forgotten in the mists of time...

Hancock's side and Holder's side...

I have only one question for those of you cynics who claimed that today's Speedway Star would be full of Hancock/Monster-biased bulldroppings and completely one-sided rubbish... ...Can you give me next week's lottery numbers? You were spot on.

There's a play about Clem Beckett called "Dare Devil rides to Jarama" http://www.thelowry.com/event/dare-devil-rides-to-jarama http://www.townsendproductions.org.uk/feedback/test

http://www.greghancock.com/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rg-jtYXvI7M

To be fair, Havvy and Middlo aren't the first people you'd choose to put on Mastermind. They seem to be the only 2 who couldn't see what blatantly happened.

So Hancock still can't accept that cheating is wrong. Every time I see one of those M bottles I get a massive urge to go out and buy a can of Red Bull

Not Hancock's day really. Just when he thinks he's done everything possible to land the Nobhead of the Year title, Neil Middleditch comes along and steals it away from him.

Iversen passes his fellow dane there to get a vital point he needs

So 30 mins after winning the world title we have a disgraced cheat as world champion. ...and then 10 minutes later a dummy spitting brat of a world champion who can't face up to what damage he's just done to the sport. Agree with Natalie and Scott. Holder should have his points deducted too, but there's nothing in the rules to allow that

Correct. Tom B is at 7 in place of Harris

Column A is the average to be used in team lineups up to 3/10/16. Column C shows the average to be used from 3/10 onwards, for anyone whose average changed on that date. Columns B and D are just the averages plus 5%. This is the figure that can be used when booking a guest to replace the rider.

That was the line up from the original staging in August, which was rained-off. The line up will have changed since then. e.g. Stokes is now out, Hume and Bewley are out injured. Ayres and Greaves are at Glasgow. etc