Hunty 189 Posted April 17, 2014 I do feel a tad sorry for Cradley fans though.. their support is tremendous, they deserve better. For the good of speedway, the sooner they can move up a league (or two) the better. As I stated before, the club is running well in the NL. We have good support because I think the price we charge is value for money at £11. However if we make a step up to the PL then you would see a nearly all British side as the club wont want to pay the flight fees and they would keep the costs down in everyway possible. It would be intresting to see how if our finances are as healthy as we all think and where the money were making is actually going if we are making any at all. Id sooner ride in the NL untill we get our own track and even then our first season in a new stadium should also be in the NL. Big steps lead to big mistakes! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mike.Butler 601 Posted April 17, 2014 Fully respect that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
June 203 Posted April 17, 2014 I am sorry you cannot count Birks and the Worralls as development riders. They were all established bike riders/ racers although not speedway but they knew there way around racing and bikes well before Scunthorpe. Could be Scunthorpe was used as a stepping stone because it is also a practise track. Scunthorpe have had many a good rider but what confuses me is They Don't Stay Don't know why you should be confused... Most riders, if not all riders will go to the club that offers the most money. SIMPLE! and yes your right the Worralls and Ashley were good on their bikes when they started at Scunny but hell they've had some track time to become experienced speedway riders!......Thats why they come to Scunny for unlimited practice. Speedway will miss out if ever Scunny stop the training sessions. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Halifaxtiger 5,318 Posted April 20, 2014 (edited) HT, read the press release in Post 7, and you'll see the Scunny promotion are not trying to claim anything other than that. As you say, if the by-product is that British Speedway benefits, then that's absoutely great, but the principle motivation is to provide riders for the Scorpions and Pirates in the future. Scunny have been running double-headers since 2008, it's the best way to run two teams at the EWR. Personally, it's what got me up there on a regular basis. It works - why change it? As for affecting others attendances, it depends what most fans are after. I think most are happy as long as their (main) team wins. You, I and other who take the time out to post on here are the exception, rather than the rule. All the best Rob There's been a lot of interesting stuff on this thread, sadly your posts are the exception. As soon as you starting throwing pointless insults, you lose the argument by default. All the best Rob Once again, Rob, my problem is not with Scunthorpe are doing but with what some of their supporters (and indeed others) are saying that the other NL clubs should (or should not) be doing. It was stated that Ford, Godfrey & Chapman have the 'greater good' of British speedway at heart; at least you have set the record straight (which I never doubted anyway). I should say good luck to Scunny & Poole because, again, I have no issue with that at all. I also have no problem with Scunny running double headers (I have been to two so far, enjoyed the PL meetings in particular enormously and will be back next Sunday). Its the comments about clubs running the same standard of riders while utterly disregarding the financial implications of the likes of Mildenhall doing so (Adz has very eloquently made the relevant point earlier) that I object to. Only on your third point would I say that you are definitely wrong, because that implies that the quality of the opposition makes no difference to attendances. It does. As to your final comment, well said indeed. You and I might cross swords on this subject occasionally but there's never been one single word of personal abuse and there's no need for it at all. If teams don't like what Scunny are doing they could always move up a League, instead of buying this League. The difference to my mind is, the likes of Godfrey, Chapman, have the greater good of British Speedway at heart. Winning things at that level is not the main priorty. Other teams at this level have a different agenda. Ok, Lynn aint gonna produce 3 riders like Rose, Kerr and Lambert every season, the same goes for Scunny, But at least you can see what they are trying to acheive as a bigger picture. I am not sure the same could be said for certain other clubs at this level. Halifax to quote you, that is nonsense....Actually no its not its just a different opinion to the one that you hold. Or maybe you think people do not have the right to post on here something that doesnt fit in with your thoughts ? Just a question you understand. If we take Scunny as an example. How many riders have they produced for the general good of British Speedway. Woofy, Birks, Worrells x 2 to name just a few. Lynn have also produced the 3 in their current line-up which will hopefully be for the great good of British Speedway. Its not because I disagree with your point of view that I have described your views as nonsense (although I won't deny that I do disagree with them) its because I regard them as precisely that. First you state that if teams disagree with Scunny's team they could always move up. Buster Chapman apparently does, so your view is that the Young Stars should think about going into the PL. Then you say that Godfrey and Chapman have the 'greater good' of British Speedway at heart, suggesting that their primary motivation for blooding youngsters is for our country's future prospects. As Rob has confirmed, in Scunny's case that's just not true and I'd say it most definitely isn't in King's Lynn's either. As I have said, Rob and I have crossed swords on this subject (although, as I have also said, my problem isn't really with Scunthorpe at all) and we have disagreed on occasion. I nevertheless have a healthy respect (for the most part) for the position he has taken and have indeed acknowledged that. Nothing against them whatsoever but history shows that sides repeatedly winning leagues at levels other than the top one isn't sustainable.. (ie Eastbourne in the late 70's) That, too, is nonsense. Eastbourne, in fact, were extremely successful at NL both on and off track and it was only when they went up a level in 1979 (due to the closure of White City) that the club fell apart. When they returned to the NL in the mid 1980's they were again extremely successful both on and off track. Good post I dont give a rats ass what Dudley pay or how they attract riders to them,good look to them ,thats the way of the world,if they can afford it then so be it,and fair play to the 7 riders they have,,no problem Just dont moan when you rack up a huge wage bill in the process,that their problem not Scunnys, Lynns or Mildenhalls---alot of teams will get a right tonking at Monmore this year,i guess CVS/Patchett wont be able to shove a Grand in their back pockets on a Tuesday night much this year Word I got is that they pay the riders out of the programme sales............. I am sorry you cannot count Birks and the Worralls as development riders. They were all established bike riders/ racers although not speedway but they knew there way around racing and bikes well before Scunthorpe. Could be Scunthorpe was used as a stepping stone because it is also a practise track. Scunthorpe have had many a good rider but what confuses me is They Don't Stay In my view, the way to judge it is if the rider was heard of before they came into NL speedway. Auty, Lambert & Haines are examples that were. Birks and the Worralls were not, neither was Scunthorpe's biggest success, a certain Mr Woffinden. Whatever anyone's view of what Scunny are doing this season, their success at bringing into speedway talented young riders is unquestionable. I don't blame Cradley (or Mildenhall or Kent)..given their support they have to build a strong team. Likewise, I don't blame Scunny either, its in their interest to build a team with development as the main aim. The other teams may have to take a different direction. That's what makes it such a diverse league, ten teams with perhaps ten different agenda's... I say we have to live with it, stop moaning and let them get on with it. I think this is spot on and exactly how all fans should look at the NL. There has to be an acceptance that the different type of teams (ie stand alone or double up) have different agenda's, that those differing agendas will lead to different approaches, values and intentions, it is perfectly reasonable that that is the case and that there has to be a degree of compromise if the league is to grow and prosper. Personally, and unlike some, I have absolutely no problem with what Scunthorpe or Cradley are doing and indeed have done in the past. Edited April 20, 2014 by Halifaxtiger Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
