Time To Scrap Doubling Up?

[moxey63 1,785]

Sorry if this a long post, bear with me.

 

My first meeting was Sheffield v Hull in 1974. The Sheffield team that night was Bob Valentine, Bob Paulson, Doug Wyer, Reg Wilson, Arnie Haley, Craig Pendlebury and Rod Haynes. Four of that team had come through the second halves at Sheffield, one had been a Belle Vue junior but had been at Sheffield for nearly 10 years, one was a young lad that Sheffield had taken a chance with after showing some promise in the Second Division and Bob Valentine was an Australian that the Tigers had brought over four or so years before. This was a true Sheffield team and there was a connection between the riders and the fans and vice-versa. The sport wasn't perfect by any means as Bob Valentine was taken away by 'Rider Control' and placed with Coventry the following season, but the sport had at least some credibility.

 

I know that The White Knight watched Middlesbrough for many years. They also rode on a Thursday night so I only ever had one visit to Cleveland Park which was in 1986. The Middlesbrough team that night was Steve Wilcock, Mark Courtney, Gary Havelock, Martin Dixon, Jim Burdfield, Glenn Hornby and Roland Tebbs. The construction of this team is almost identical in nature to that of Sheffield in 1974 and I remember distinctly how passionate the Middlesbrough fans were that night and how the team mattered to them. Jim Burdfield scored a maximum that night and I will always remember how this was received by the supporters.

 

I accept that there was still doubling up of sorts in those days and the likes of Joe Owen (Newcastle and Hull), Steve Weatherley (Eastbourne and White City) and Michael Lee (Boston and King's Lynn) spring to mind. However, there were often connections between the two teams and although not a perfect situation, it was more manageable and acceptable. Things now have just got stupidly out of hand and the situation now where we have Craig Cook as the captain of two teams in two leagues just makes a mockery of the sport.

 

We have to stop running the sport for average speedway riders who want to ride full time. The numbers on the terraces do not justify this and we have to try and attract back some of the fans who are becoming lost to the sport and also some new faces. The racing is good enough to make people want to come back for more but I think the average punter wants more than that, he or she wants a team to support and have that connection I felt as a young lad in 1974 or as a one off visitor in 1986.

 

There are enough riders to go around and we many have to look at some of the lesser known speedway countries like Germany, Netherlands, Austria and France to fill out the teams but look at the success of the Riss brothers as an example of what can be achieved.

 

I still think speedway can be the best sport in the world but a recent Sheffield v Ipswich meeting had 13 of the 14 riders who were either doubling up or doubling down and this surely cannot be right.

 

Can't argue with any of that.

[foamfence 2,917]

Sorry if this a long post, bear with me.

 

My first meeting was Sheffield v Hull in 1974. The Sheffield team that night was Bob Valentine, Bob Paulson, Doug Wyer, Reg Wilson, Arnie Haley, Craig Pendlebury and Rod Haynes. Four of that team had come through the second halves at Sheffield, one had been a Belle Vue junior but had been at Sheffield for nearly 10 years, one was a young lad that Sheffield had taken a chance with after showing some promise in the Second Division and Bob Valentine was an Australian that the Tigers had brought over four or so years before. This was a true Sheffield team and there was a connection between the riders and the fans and vice-versa. The sport wasn't perfect by any means as Bob Valentine was taken away by 'Rider Control' and placed with Coventry the following season, but the sport had at least some credibility.

 

I know that The White Knight watched Middlesbrough for many years. They also rode on a Thursday night so I only ever had one visit to Cleveland Park which was in 1986. The Middlesbrough team that night was Steve Wilcock, Mark Courtney, Gary Havelock, Martin Dixon, Jim Burdfield, Glenn Hornby and Roland Tebbs. The construction of this team is almost identical in nature to that of Sheffield in 1974 and I remember distinctly how passionate the Middlesbrough fans were that night and how the team mattered to them. Jim Burdfield scored a maximum that night and I will always remember how this was received by the supporters.

 

I accept that there was still doubling up of sorts in those days and the likes of Joe Owen (Newcastle and Hull), Steve Weatherley (Eastbourne and White City) and Michael Lee (Boston and King's Lynn) spring to mind. However, there were often connections between the two teams and although not a perfect situation, it was more manageable and acceptable. Things now have just got stupidly out of hand and the situation now where we have Craig Cook as the captain of two teams in two leagues just makes a mockery of the sport.

 

We have to stop running the sport for average speedway riders who want to ride full time. The numbers on the terraces do not justify this and we have to try and attract back some of the fans who are becoming lost to the sport and also some new faces. The racing is good enough to make people want to come back for more but I think the average punter wants more than that, he or she wants a team to support and have that connection I felt as a young lad in 1974 or as a one off visitor in 1986.

 

There are enough riders to go around and we many have to look at some of the lesser known speedway countries like Germany, Netherlands, Austria and France to fill out the teams but look at the success of the Riss brothers as an example of what can be achieved.

 

I still think speedway can be the best sport in the world but a recent Sheffield v Ipswich meeting had 13 of the 14 riders who were either doubling up or doubling down and this surely cannot be right.

 

**And another thing that boils my blood. Kent v Lakeside last night - both teams using guests for their number one riders. Promote the number eights and give the kids a chance for god's sake!!!! **

Absolutely right! I can't imagine that you'll find many (if any) who disagree with this, well done!

[Hacksaw Jim Duggan 199]

Sorry if this a long post, bear with me.

 

My first meeting was Sheffield v Hull in 1974. The Sheffield team that night was Bob Valentine, Bob Paulson, Doug Wyer, Reg Wilson, Arnie Haley, Craig Pendlebury and Rod Haynes. Four of that team had come through the second halves at Sheffield, one had been a Belle Vue junior but had been at Sheffield for nearly 10 years, one was a young lad that Sheffield had taken a chance with after showing some promise in the Second Division and Bob Valentine was an Australian that the Tigers had brought over four or so years before. This was a true Sheffield team and there was a connection between the riders and the fans and vice-versa. The sport wasn't perfect by any means as Bob Valentine was taken away by 'Rider Control' and placed with Coventry the following season, but the sport had at least some credibility.

 

I know that The White Knight watched Middlesbrough for many years. They also rode on a Thursday night so I only ever had one visit to Cleveland Park which was in 1986. The Middlesbrough team that night was Steve Wilcock, Mark Courtney, Gary Havelock, Martin Dixon, Jim Burdfield, Glenn Hornby and Roland Tebbs. The construction of this team is almost identical in nature to that of Sheffield in 1974 and I remember distinctly how passionate the Middlesbrough fans were that night and how the team mattered to them. Jim Burdfield scored a maximum that night and I will always remember how this was received by the supporters.

 

I accept that there was still doubling up of sorts in those days and the likes of Joe Owen (Newcastle and Hull), Steve Weatherley (Eastbourne and White City) and Michael Lee (Boston and King's Lynn) spring to mind. However, there were often connections between the two teams and although not a perfect situation, it was more manageable and acceptable. Things now have just got stupidly out of hand and the situation now where we have Craig Cook as the captain of two teams in two leagues just makes a mockery of the sport.

 

We have to stop running the sport for average speedway riders who want to ride full time. The numbers on the terraces do not justify this and we have to try and attract back some of the fans who are becoming lost to the sport and also some new faces. The racing is good enough to make people want to come back for more but I think the average punter wants more than that, he or she wants a team to support and have that connection I felt as a young lad in 1974 or as a one off visitor in 1986.

 

There are enough riders to go around and we many have to look at some of the lesser known speedway countries like Germany, Netherlands, Austria and France to fill out the teams but look at the success of the Riss brothers as an example of what can be achieved.

 

I still think speedway can be the best sport in the world but a recent Sheffield v Ipswich meeting had 13 of the 14 riders who were either doubling up or doubling down and this surely cannot be right.

 

**And another thing that boils my blood. Kent v Lakeside last night - both teams using guests for their number one riders. Promote the number eights and give the kids a chance for god's sake!!!! **

 

 

The risk, and it is a huge risk if you remove the rule is you drive away those who do attend by attempting to appease those who have consciously made the decision to no longer attend. You would do this while watering the product down AGAIN, the constant in attendance decreasing has been the watering down of the product – that is one of the few tangibles people can point at which correlates with attendances decreasing.

 

A removal of the rule now would feel like a punishment for fans who have remained loyal to the sport, it would deprive fans of the chance to watch a higher standard of rider race for their team.

 

The riders to go around you reference (where they are coming from I don’t know by the way) would be of a lower standard than that which fans at tracks currently get to watch most weeks – that creates a massive issue and would drive AN other chunk of fans further away from the sport never to return.

 

My natural assumption is Newcastle fans for example would rather watch Lambert and Worrall ride for them knowing they race for AN other team through the week over a side without them but loyal riders the standard of Mark Riss and Ben Hopwood which would be the likely alternatives when the option of Lambert and Worral was removed from their side (as they would be in world where there is no D/U rules)

 

The EPL shows that times have massively moved on, teams in that league change each year, there is little loyalty but audiences, massive audiences, that dwarf anything speedway could muster 30 years ago show that familiarity is dead per se – fans can live with change and alterations to their side if they get to see a high standard of team and a good product

Edited August 15, 2017 by Hacksaw Jim Duggan

[moxey63 1,785]

There are a number of questions that need answering. Are promoters trying to keep the fans happy that the sport appeals to right now, or are the fans that are disengaged and have drifted away from the terraces worth getting back? Maybe a return to 13 heats, the old style second halves helping reunited the sport with terrace appeal is about as justifiable as that old argument from 1988-2016 about crowds flooding back to Belle Vue, once Saturday night speedway and its own stadium was back on the bill. It didn't happen; will reintroducing aspects of the golden age alter the current climate?

 

You have what seems a growing number of fans frustrated with the way the sport is being run, and another section that are quite happy with it.

 

The old gits like me will never persuade the new fans that our day was better, so I guess promoters (laugh) are stuck in the middle.

[tigerowl 630]

I accept what you are saying Jim, but my point is that these collections of riders are not teams in the true sense of the word and that without credibility and integrity of the competition there is no 'product'.

 

Maybe we do have to take a step back to go forwards again but when I look at the clips of racing at Eastbourne, their crowds don't look much lower in the National League now than they did when they were an Elite League club on Sky. (I will obviously be open to correction on this point!!)

Edited August 15, 2017 by tigerowl

[Fromafar 10,359]

I accept what you are saying Jim, but my point is that these collections of riders are not teams in the true sense of the word and that without credibility and integrity of the competition there is no 'product'.

 

Maybe we do have to take a step back to go forwards again but when I look at the clips of racing at Eastbourne, their crowds don't look much lower in the National League now than they did when they were an Elite League club on Sky. (I will obviously be open to correction on this point!!)

Agree.

[iainb 4,999]

My assumption is such a change will only further accelerate the end of the sport as it would sky rocket costs even further. It puts the power in the riders hands as there would be such high demand for average talent in order to to fill a side let alone compete.

 

In the current rider climate where rider numbers are multiplied by the double up rule Peterborough still had to track a side with 3 riders who double up, 3 guests and rider replacement on Sunday at Newcastle. I don’t see how that situation will change with the removal of the double up rule. if anything it would only further increase/sustain the number of guests and rider replacements as riders will still pick up injuries during the course of the season and replacements will be thin on the ground.

 

It will also afford sides who struggle very little wriggle room or chance to improve as there won't be the riders their to sign replacements, strengthen or alter a side - seems incredibly unfair - that is if all sides can even track full teams in the first place, and if they can at what cost due to the demands riders would make - and some clubs would still pay the demands riders would ask - and then the travel costs involved to simply fill a 1-6 or 7 with a body for the sake of it - these things don't seems to be considered when the idea of the rule removal is floated.

 

There are two things at play here - one, is yes double up/down, guests etc are not ideal two - there isn't the rider numbers there to remove it. This isn't like other sports, there isn't endless revenues of talent and participants who can afford clubs the chance to have a team of "their own" each and every meeting.

I don't know how many riders are licensed to ride in the UK but it's obvious that there are not enough.

 

The first thing I'd do is not allow the likes of Belle Vue and King's Lynn to run National League teams... why on earth should they be running 2 teams when they don't have enough riders for 1! There's 14 riders freed up straight away (assuming they only rider for 1 NL club) I'd also place some sort of cap on who can ride in an NL team, allow 1 "experienced" rider (based on number of official matches ridden) as a coach but the rest have to be inexperienced, no more than say 100 matches unless they continue to ride for the same team

 

There are too many riders in the NL, who to be brutally honest, are never going to make it beyond the level they are currently at and ride as a hobby, these riders should not stand in the way of riders with genuine talent and ambition. It may mean an initial period of rider and pay control.

[THE DEAN MACHINE 4,738]

 

 

The risk, and it is a huge risk if you remove the rule is you drive away those who do attend by attempting to appease those who have consciously made the decision to no longer attend. You would do this while watering the product down AGAIN, the constant in attendance decreasing has been the watering down of the product that is one of the few tangibles people can point at which correlates with attendances decreasing.

 

A removal of the rule now would feel like a punishment for fans who have remained loyal to the sport, it would deprive fans of the chance to watch a higher standard of rider race for their team.

 

The riders to go around you reference (where they are coming from I dont know by the way) would be of a lower standard than that which fans at tracks currently get to watch most weeks that creates a massive issue and would drive AN other chunk of fans further away from the sport never to return.

 

My natural assumption is Newcastle fans for example would rather watch Lambert and Worrall ride for them knowing they race for AN other team through the week over a side without them but loyal riders the standard of Mark Riss and Ben Hopwood which would be the likely alternatives when the option of Lambert and Worral was removed from their side (as they would be in world where there is no D/U rules)

 

The EPL shows that times have massively moved on, teams in that league change each year, there is little loyalty but audiences, massive audiences, that dwarf anything speedway could muster 30 years ago show that familiarity is dead per se fans can live with change and alterations to their side if they get to see a high standard of team and a good product

you don't seem to understand the concept of team sports , team sports are tribel they are based on loyalty and the fans believe that the riders are theirs , there has to be a loyalty ortherwise the concept is lost and the fans don't go which is where we are close to now , there is enough riders to achieve 1 rider 1 team this has been proven by others on other threads about this subject , riders are dictating the sport at the moment and that has got to stop but as we every idea put forward there is a "it won't work, we can't do that" mentality and we plod into oblivion , you only have to look at the responses about the GTR ," it doesn't compete, it's a waste of money" while completely missing the point of in the long term this could of been a massive cut in costs while the product stays similar but no we get a short term short sighted answers , the fact is the sport is going to change but it's going to end financially painful for the riders because of the collective dismissal of any way forward

[waytogo28 2,054]

There is NO one answer. IF speedway can re-invent itself for a younger audience then it probably will edge out even quicker more of the old uns ( that's me ) and that is no bad thing but I can't see the BSPA changing dramatically the way the sport is presented or run. Slower bikes, handicap racing , lots of passing with USA style razzamtazz might build a new audience. Hopefully it will because then us old uns can decide if we still want to go. Is it really impossible for the two top leagues to run only on a single different night as that is the simplest answer to the craziness of d/u.

[Hacksaw Jim Duggan 199]

"you don't seem to understand the concept of team sports , team sports are tribel they are based on loyalty and the fans believe that the riders are theirs , there has to be a loyalty ortherwise the concept is lost and the fans don't go which is where we are close to now , there is enough riders to achieve 1 rider 1 team this has been proven by others on other threads about this subject , riders are dictating the sport at the moment and that has got to stop but as we every idea put forward there is a "it won't work, we can't do that" mentality and we plod into oblivion , you only have to look at the responses about the GTR ," it doesn't compete, it's a waste of money" while completely missing the point of in the long term this could of been a massive cut in costs while the product stays similar but no we get a short term short sighted answers , the fact is the sport is going to change but it's going to end financially painful for the riders because of the collective dismissal of any way forward "

 

 

Yes I do understand – I understand that such tribalism affords fans the ability to suspend their disbelief long enough to watch a meeting and not think about their riders representing another club. If you were to ask most fans who attend Workington each week who Craig Cook races for they wouldn’t say Belle Vue and Workington, they would say Workington.

 

The removal of the rule is what would allow riders to dictate the sport as it would hand them the power – they would be able to ask excessive demands as they would all have a higher premium than they do now, like all things that are in limited numbers yet in demand they would be more expensive.

 

As things stand there is an element of bend and flex re riders availability clubs have the option of other riders - they can move on and look at more riders as a result of the rule , they have a wider number of choices of who they can and cannot sign – the removal of the rule would seriously decrease those numbers and clubs would end up lumped with limited options having to pay over the odds simply to fill a team.

 

Currently clubs have the option to shop at Tesco, Lidl, Asda, Aldi and Marks and Spencer's - they can look at a multitude of options - if the rule was removed clubs like Belle Vue AND Workington would be fighting to sign Craig Cook they would then have to outbid each other to secure him - that doesn't help the clubs, that helps the rider.

 

I don’t know what relevance other parts of your post have – you are creating an argument to a point based on things some people have said about other things - what is said re GRT engines or whatever else doesn't apply here or to what I am saying, I don't find it an idea that is holding the sport back etc and so on and have already said the rule needs altered as it isn't without flaw......

Edited August 15, 2017 by Hacksaw Jim Duggan

[MattK 3,447]

you don't seem to understand the concept of team sports , team sports are tribel they are based on loyalty and the fans believe that the riders are theirs , there has to be a loyalty ortherwise the concept is lost and the fans don't go which is where we are close to now , there is enough riders to achieve 1 rider 1 team this has been proven by others on other threads about this subject , riders are dictating the sport at the moment and that has got to stop but as we every idea put forward there is a "it won't work, we can't do that" mentality and we plod into oblivion , you only have to look at the responses about the GTR ," it doesn't compete, it's a waste of money" while completely missing the point of in the long term this could of been a massive cut in costs while the product stays similar but no we get a short term short sighted answers , the fact is the sport is going to change but it's going to end financially painful for the riders because of the collective dismissal of any way forward

 

I don't agree. Fans don't care that a rider races for two clubs. Find me a single Swindon fan who thinks Nick Morris is less of a Swindon rider now he doubles-up for Berwick, for example.

 

What fans dislike is riders missing due to their doubling-up commitments. The solution to this isn't to ban doubling-up, it is to have better fixture planning and ideally fixed race nights.

[moxey63 1,785]

 

I don't agree. Fans don't care that a rider races for two clubs. Find me a single Swindon fan who thinks Nick Morris is less of a Swindon rider now he doubles-up for Berwick, for example.

 

What fans dislike is riders missing due to their doubling-up commitments. The solution to this isn't to ban doubling-up, it is to have better fixture planning and ideally fixed race nights.

 

But how many fans have stopped attending because the likes of Nick Morris are racing for two clubs. You won't find them, cos they ain't attending!

[THE DEAN MACHINE 4,738]

 

I don't agree. Fans don't care that a rider races for two clubs. Find me a single Swindon fan who thinks Nick Morris is less of a Swindon rider now he doubles-up for Berwick, for example.

 

What fans dislike is riders missing due to their doubling-up commitments. The solution to this isn't to ban doubling-up, it is to have better fixture planning and ideally fixed race nights.

not swindon fans but my Mrs her dad , my mum and to a point me and a few mates all don't go anymore to domestic speedway because we feel we don't have a "team" to support even though the team is still there and that is the same all over the country, riders become hero's not because of their success it's because the fans form a bond with them ,when a fan thinks back we can always think of a rider who we thought was great and they became one of our hero's when in reality the were rubbish but it didn't matter they were our rubbish ,not all fans have walked away cause of doubling up but until the terraces are packed we have got to change the sport and looking at the responses on this thread doubling up seem high on the agenda

[Fromafar 10,359]

While we all have our opinions regarding what is wrong within the sport just now.It is a fact that we are not attracting new fans which is a bigger concern .It is very hard to attract fans back to the sport it seems to be harder to attract new fans.

[waytogo28 2,054]

 

I don't agree. Fans don't care that a rider races for two clubs. Find me a single Swindon fan who thinks Nick Morris is less of a Swindon rider now he doubles-up for Berwick, for example.

 

What fans dislike is riders missing due to their doubling-up commitments. The solution to this isn't to ban doubling-up, it is to have better fixture planning and ideally fixed race nights.

That is it in a nutshell for me anyway. What the promoters are "selling" has to be more like that which fans - young or old, new or longstanding - are willing to pay for.