Clerk Of The Course Report From The Opening Night At The Nss

[Grand Central 2,654]

Let's say the meeting had gone ahead and was completed. Belle vue tell the council there are issues with the track. The contractor says "what do you mean issues? You've successfully held a meeting, in line with the agreed schedule,our obligations are completed." Would belle vue have been able to successfully get the council to arrange the extensive remedial work, or would council have sided with the contractor and any further track work needing to be funded by the aces promotion?

 

Interesting.

 

The Morton/Gordon plan of trying to convince the riders to ride (very carefully) with Meredith and his team of rollers coming out after every race to keep the show on the road just enough to get through the full meeting could have ended even more badly,

 

Had **** not first come up with the novel idea of not racing it would have been really rather more difficult to say that the major reconstructive work was necessary at all.

And we may never have got to see the track in perfect shape like we eventually did.

Edited January 26, 2017 by Grand Central

[ouch 1,191]

I cant remember who the 16 riders were.

Can someone enlighten me please.

 

Jason Doyle; Nicki Pedersen; Tai Woffinden; Matej Zagar; Max Fricke; Scott Nicholls; Richie Worrall; Craig Cook; Chris Harris; Niels-Kristian Iversen; Danny King; Peter Kildemand;

Hans Andersen; Andreas Jonsson; Krzysztof Buczkowski; Maciej Janowski.

[keepturningleft 588]

I was in the south stand overlooking the entrance to turn 3.

At the pre meet practice, riders appeared to be going into that corner at full speed with no obvious concerns or hesitation whatsoever.

Curious.

[PHILIPRISING 7,298]

I was in the south stand overlooking the entrance to turn 3.

At the pre meet practice, riders appeared to be going into that corner at full speed with no obvious concerns or hesitation whatsoever.

Curious.

AS the temperature dropped (it was very cold, bit like Warsaw and Gelsenkirchen), moisture rose to the surface due to the contaminated material used as the sub-base on bends three and four and the surface got progressively softer and was deemed unsafe.

 

Would like to say more but as mentioned elsewhere Speedway Star's hands are currently shackled by the threat of legal action by Manchester City Council who are challenging the accuracy of an article we have ready for publication.

Edited January 27, 2017 by PHILIPRISING

[OveFundinFan 4,138]

We would like you to say more, as well Phil, but I, and hopefully others, respect that you cannot at the moment - we wait patiently......

 

OK, so the meeting was called off because the track was unfit for purpose..... at a great disappointment to the fans who had turned up, AND NO DOUBT AT GREAT EXPENSE TO BV WHO, PRESUMABLY, WOULD HAVE TO PAY EXPENSES TO RIDERS, adding greatly to BV's financial situation. That surely means the council/contractor has an obligation to cough up some recompense due to "faulty goods" (or whatever legal terminology), yet it appears they hav'nt and that is probably why BV refused to pay any rent.

So either way, 1) run the meeting and risk council/contractor saying it must have been ok 2) cancel the meeting, loose a lot of money, and the council/contractor dont recompense for "loss of earnings" (or whatever). Sounds like BV was in a lose/lose situation, yet many are judging (without knowing all the facts) that Gordon/Morton were bad promoters. Strange.

[Grand Central 2,654]

AS the temperature dropped (it was very cold, bit like Warsaw and Gelsenkirchen), moisture rose to the surface due to the contaminated material used as the sub-base on bends three and four and the surface got progressively softer and was deemed unsafe.

 

Once more I am mystified.

 

That is such a simple, straightforward statement of fact that explains so much, so easily.

And MUST be demonstratable by eyewitness, documentary, photographic and scientific evidence that would make it incontravertible.

 

So why has no one made it before.

 

I have looked back to everyone's comments in the contemporary reports of the night; and the Morton/Gordon statements subsequently and listened to their Fans Forum ahead of the British Final. Plus the CofC report here.

 

And there is no mention of this version of events that is now being put forth.

 

" The track appeared safe and in good shape at lunchtime; and was still looked in decent enough shape to let the fans in to the Stadium.

BUT by 7.30 it was totally different and the track had changed so much due to the drop in temeprature that it was now completely unsafe. "

 

Well done, for the Scoop, PR !

Edited January 27, 2017 by Grand Central

[mikebv 10,243]

The track must have been unsafe as it took about a month of digging it up and re-laying it to get it to standard..

 

Ultimately that would have needed to be done, even if the meeting had gone ahead, as there was obviously a major long term inherent problem..

 

I was as p1ssed off like lots of others at the time, but I got my money back, the track is now superb and we didnt find out the track wasnt 'fit for purpose' by riders getting injured on it (or worse)...

 

Hopefully DG and Mort will get recompense for the costs incurred of the work not being up to the required level and the subsequent impact to their business...

 

It would be a bit 'silly' to blame ***** (whoever he is), as he didnt stop the others competing and subsequently given the weeks of repair work done, he has been proved correct...

Edited January 27, 2017 by mikebv

[PHILIPRISING 7,298]

That is such a simple, straightforward statement of fact that explains so much, so easily.

And MUST be demonstratable by eyewitness, documentary, photographic and scientific evidence that would make it incontravertible.

 

So why has no one made it before.

 

 

 

Once more I am mystified.

 

That is such a simple, straightforward statement of fact that explains so much, so easily.

And MUST be demonstratable by eyewitness, documentary, photographic and scientific evidence that would make it incontravertible.

 

So why has no one made it before.

 

I have looked back to everyone's comments in the contemporary reports of the night; and the Morton/Gordon statements subsequently and listened to their Fans Forum ahead of the British Final. Plus the CofC report here.

 

And there is no mention of this version of events that is now being put forth.

 

" The track appeared safe and in good shape at lunchtime; and was still looked in decent enough shape to let the fans in to the Stadium.

BUT by 7.30 it was totally different and the track had changed so much due to the drop in temeprature that it was now completely unsafe. "

 

Well done, for the Scoop, PR !

 

Speedway Star has documental evidence of the materials used on turns three and four which were completely different to the rest of the track and backed up by various civil engineering reports, which undoubtedly caused the problems on opening night and subsquently had to be rectified. Surely there can be little doubt that had the track been perfect from day one and the meeting gone ahead the rest of the sorry BV/NSS saga which not have materialised as it has.

 

But, I repeat, Manchester City Council are challenge statements made to us by David Gordon, effectively calling him a liar, despite all the paperwork that we have in our possession.

 

 

At present our own legal advice is to hold fire. DG believes he is 100 per cent correct but MCC, while threatening legal action against him and us, have so far not given us details of which items in the proposed article they actually disagree with.

[Grand Central 2,654]

AS the temperature dropped (it was very cold, bit like Warsaw and Gelsenkirchen), moisture rose to the surface due to the contaminated material used as the sub-base on bends three and four and the surface got progressively softer and was deemed unsafe.

 

The inference here is that it was the drop in temperature on the day of the meeting resulted in a visible material change to the track on the day.

 

ie. It became softer from (say) 3pm to 8pm as it got colder and it was that change that made it too unsafe.

 

That was the statement I had not seen made before by anyone.

Edited January 27, 2017 by Grand Central

[PHILIPRISING 7,298]

 

The inference here is that it was the drop in temperature on the day of the meeting resulted in a visible material change to the track on the day.

 

ie. It became softer from (say) 3pm to 8pm as it got colder and it was that change that made it too unsafe.

 

That was the statement I had not seen made before by anyone.

It was only late afternoon, early evening that Colin Meredith felt that the track surface was changing, getting softer in that one area. He couldn't understand why only that part of the track was affected but we now know why.

 

All sorts of odds and sods were used to form the sub-base of bends three and four rather than the specified material, as used elsewhere, and the old hockey pitch under the turns had not been broken up either. It was a disaster waiting to happen ... and, sadly, it did.

 

Of course, as soon as bends three and four were dug up it was plain to see what had occurred. And we have the document to prove it.

[colin wood 249]

Surely MCC should take this up with the contractors and demand they pay up for cost of rectifying the problem.DG is no fool and its been well documented he had proof that bends three and four weren't built to spec.Think MCC are not handling this well at all.

[Vince 9,454]

Perhaps MCC are in dispute with the contractor that may require legal action to resolve and that is why they want to keep things in house at the moment.

 

In fairness if the statement at the time had said "for some reason as the temperature dropped turn 3 reacted differently to the rest of the track for some unknown reason" the promotion would have been ridiculed and accused of making excuses.

[Shale Searcher 1,264]

Condensation ingress, coupled with poor drainage, and moisture being "wicked" up to the track surface..

[OveFundinFan 4,138]

Condensation ingress, coupled with poor drainage, and moisture being "wicked" up to the track surface..

Sounds very plausable, but easy to understand now in hindsight knowing what the result of turn 3-4 being totally dug up following the cancelled PC Mem meeting uncovered. This was not the knowledge at the time though.

 

What was known there was some sort of problem, but not bad enough to call the meeting off - the track had been raced on couple days before the Saturday, no serious problem. On #19 Keepturningleft said he was in the south stand and riders in pre-meeting practice appeared to be going into that corner at full speed with no obvious concerns nor hesitations. At one point those same 15 riders had no concerns. Hopefully we will hear what really went on.

[Humphrey Appleby 13,943]

 

Would like to say more but as mentioned elsewhere Speedway Star's hands are currently shackled by the threat of legal action by Manchester City Council who are challenging the accuracy of an article we have ready for publication.

If you're confident of the facts, then why are you not publishing? Call their bluff...