Crump99 4,476 Posted October 20, 2013 (edited) 10 minutes? Is it the same principle as 10 heats? Can a result be declared? Was Speedway ahead at the time or should we push to continue?! It's just delayed and will be re-run when Sky are at full strength. Apparently they were going to stick with it but the seats got too slippery with the rain and it became an issue when Russell slipped off his seat after 10 minutes. Although several junior members had hit the deck earlier in the meeting, when someone of his experience does that then it's clearly a H&S issue and it is impossible to continue although the result was still in doubt. Edited October 20, 2013 by Crump99 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
YerRopes 3,009 Posted October 20, 2013 Poole to keep their Title winning side, with the points limit set to whatever their 7 riders combined. The rest of the EL can build upto them for a proper EL Simples. Have always thought that the points limit should be made up to the League's strongest side - team continuity and all that, but obviously the sport cannot currently afford it... The suggested alternative of the likes of Tai, Darcy etc racing even more PL/NL riders will drive even more supporters away. If the sport cannot afford the 'big names' then it is obvious that they shouldn't be employed. Competitive racing please - where hopefully, most any of the 4 riders can win.. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Eagle69 10 Posted October 20, 2013 Can anyone explain to me how come the kray twins (Russell brothers) seem to hold so much power regarding british speedway. They were hardly a resounding success as promoters and what process did they go through to hold the rights to speedway on tv and who if anyone held them before? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
barncooseboy 237 Posted October 20, 2013 Here in Plymouth the rumour is that Argyle were paid £60k and their opponents a similar sum for the lowest of the footba;; leagues for one match, cant imagione it drew a big audience amongst the UK footy fans. That makes the speedway coverage a complete bargain lets not forget that in order to fill the current screen time SKY will have to find an alternative and it will have to be something that advertisers will support maybe at last we will have coverage of the World of Outlaws sprint car series. SKY could rregret not carrying Speedway, how many cancelled their subs last week? They paid too much for their footy coverage and so the other sports are having to suffer because SKY executives can only see one sport, how long before the channels are renamed after the footy leagues a la the Formula 1 channel 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SGP 49 Posted October 21, 2013 GREAT idea in theory, but Birmingham's website couldn't cope with 26 visitors during a televised meeting... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PHILIPRISING 7,298 Posted October 21, 2013 Can anyone explain to me how come the kray twins (Russell brothers) seem to hold so much power regarding british speedway. They were hardly a resounding success as promoters and what process did they go through to hold the rights to speedway on tv and who if anyone held them before? I THINK you under-estimate the contribution of Terry Russell to British speedway. More often that not has put his money where his mouth is and is doing so again at Swindon. It was Terry who secured the original Sky deal and as such he continued to be the negotiator between the BSPA and Sky or others. Of course, he has taken a percentage but without him there probably wouldn't have been a Sky deal in the first place. I can still remember a case many moons ago when the BSPA objected to a sponsorship broker getting 10 per cent of a lucrative deal. Instead of 90 per cent of something they finished up with 100 per cent of nothing. I appreciate Terry has his critics, not least on here, but have said before that if I wanted someone to go into a contract deal for me then TR, shrewd East End boy that he is, would be top of my list. Plus, of course, it is to his own benefit to get the best deal possible. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
John Leslie 3,213 Posted October 21, 2013 It was Terry who secured the original Sky deal and as such he continued to be the negotiator between the BSPA and Sky or others. Of course, he has taken a percentage but without him there probably wouldn't have been a Sky deal in the first place. I can still remember a case many moons ago when the BSPA objected to a sponsorship broker getting 10 per cent of a lucrative deal. Instead of 90 per cent of something they finished up with 100 per cent of nothing. Does he pay anything for the rights to British Speedway though? Or is he just a broker working on a commission? Could (say) a professional sports sponsorship company just decide to have a go at negotiating with ITV4 off their own bat, and just claim a commission if successful? Or do the Russells have some kind of stranglehold over the sport that would stop another party coming in and doing the same thing that they do on a level playing field basis? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The White Knight 9,039 Posted October 21, 2013 Does he pay anything for the rights to British Speedway though? Or is he just a broker working on a commission? Could (say) a professional sports sponsorship company just decide to have a go at negotiating with ITV4 off their own bat, and just claim a commission if successful? Or do the Russells have some kind of stranglehold over the sport that would stop another party coming in and doing the same thing that they do on a level playing field basis? An interesting question is that JL. I wonder if it will get an answer. :unsure: 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pandorum 1,259 Posted October 21, 2013 (edited) It was Terry who secured the original Sky deal and as such he continued to be the negotiator between the BSPA and Sky or others. Of course, he has taken a percentage but without him there probably wouldn't have been a Sky deal in the first place. What a nonsensical statement to make. I am sure that there were 'probably' several people who could have negotiated a deal within the ranks of the motley crew known as the BSPA. I can still remember a case many moons ago when the BSPA objected to a sponsorship broker getting 10 per cent of a lucrative deal. Instead of 90 per cent of something they finished up with 100 per cent of nothing. Which tells you all you need to know about these people Edited October 21, 2013 by pandorum Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PHILIPRISING 7,298 Posted October 21, 2013 What a nonsensical statement to make. I am sure that there were 'probably' several people who could have negotiated a deal within the ranks of the motley crew known as the BSPA. Which tells you all you need to know about these people WHICH begs the question: why didn't they? It was Terry, then Chairman or President (cannot remember which) of the BSPA who got off his backside and secured a TV deal when none looked likely. Credit where it is due... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
oldace 1,678 Posted October 21, 2013 It was Terry who secured the original Sky deal and as such he continued to be the negotiator between the BSPA and Sky or others. Of course, he has taken a percentage but without him there probably wouldn't have been a Sky deal in the first place. I think being in the right place at right time rather than being a super negotiator was a lot to do with it. In the late 90s SKY were pretty desperate for material to "show between ads" and speedway fitted the bill. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PHILIPRISING 7,298 Posted October 21, 2013 An interesting question is that JL. I wonder if it will get an answer. :unsure: I IMAGINE that if the BSPA have charged Terry with getting a TV deal then it would be an exclusive arrangement. Wouldn't show the BSPA up in a good light if several promoters went around knocking on the same doors. I think being in the right place at right time rather than being a super negotiator was a lot to do with it. In the late 90s SKY were pretty desperate for material to "show between ads" and speedway fitted the bill. THE deal still had to be done. You are not being very gracious... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
oldace 1,678 Posted October 21, 2013 THE deal still had to be done. You are not being very gracious... Well yes but in reality it wasn't about getting speedway on TV, that was pretty much a certainty at the time, it was more a case of maximising its benefit to the sport. Did Terry Russell achieve that? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ABS 231 Posted October 21, 2013 WHICH begs the question: why didn't they? It was Terry, then Chairman or President (cannot remember which) of the BSPA who got off his backside and secured a TV deal when none looked likely. Credit where it is due... So Terry had an official role within the BSPA at the time, did he? If so, he surely should have been working on behalf of the BSPA during the negotiations and not on behalf of his company. The phrase "conflict of interests" springs to mind. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Agrotron 955 Posted October 21, 2013 Rumor has it BT Sport are looking into the possibility of showing EL next year Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
