Swc 2018

[PHILIPRISING 7,298]

SOME rather silly and cynical responses here. The fact is that the FIM, through a Press Release, the Poles via a leak (not unusual) and Armando Castagna in Speedway Star rather jumped the gun with their comments about the new competition before BSI, who never like to say anything until all contracts have been signed and sealed, were in a position to make a formal announcement.

 

It was only recently that the FIM and BSI actually reached a financial agreement over this tournament and there was much to do to have all the venues on board and a whole host of other bits and pieces tied up before presenting the details to the public. Its wasn't a question of only "telling family friends' rather, as BSI prefer, having all the answers to the questions that would and will inevitably be asked.

Edited December 8, 2017 by PHILIPRISING

[waiheke1 4,295]

So BSI are paying less for this tournament than the SWC? Can imagine that is the only reasons they would need to negotiate financials with FIM? Ditching the best speedway international event to make more cash?

Id doubt it was them negotiating rider pay rates which is I guess the alternative financial negotiation?

[Grand Central 2,654]

In a world seemingly over-populated with supposedly sensible sycophants.

I can take great pride in being tagged as 'silly and cynical'

 

And in a lifetime of Speedway watching it is an attitude that has served me well.

 

When others cannot seem to see the blatantly obvious in front of their eyes.

There is great need for some people to keep pointing out that the Emperor is 'stark-bollock naked'.

Edited December 8, 2017 by Grand Central

[PHILIPRISING 7,298]

So BSI are paying less for this tournament than the SWC? Can imagine that is the only reasons they would need to negotiate financials with FIM? Ditching the best speedway international event to make more cash?

Id doubt it was them negotiating rider pay rates which is I guess the alternative financial negotiation?

WRONG ... how did you come to that conclusion? The FIM demanded a licence fee in addition to that paid by BSI for the SWC commercial rights. So more money into the FIM coffers, not less.

 

The final go ahead was only given in Andorra last month. BSI wanted time to get new branding, a new website and much more in place before making a formal announcement, possibly alongside some of the riders likely to take part. Unprofessional they are not. It is a shame other organisations don't take a leaf out of their book.

 

Why not just take a back seat and wait until the first one is over in June and then make comments based on fact rather than supposition.

[waiheke1 4,295]

Why on earth would BSI pay more to run a new comp, in addition to paying for a competition thermy are not running? I dont see how that makes any business sense.

The reason for the supposition is because the SWC is arguably the most anticipated week in the speedway season and has now been cast aside in favour of who knows what.

As an organisation waiting to make a formal announcement when all other parties have already released information...Im not sure that necessarily comes across as professional?

[Bavarian 766]

At least it won't just be a return to the not very popular traditional Best Pairs System.

 

Reading Casatgna's comments in the Star I guess it will somehow involve junior riders (maybe a 500cc U21 and even an 250cc U16) along with the best senior riders in this Speedway of Nations.

 

I wonder if the FIM will also abandon their Junior U21 World Team Championship, which had even less nations take part than the SWC, and which was almost every year won by Poland ... and which has an equivalent in the European Junior U21 Team Championship ... which again has even less ... and is alway won by ... you know what.

[PHILIPRISING 7,298]

Why on earth would BSI pay more to run a new comp, in addition to paying for a competition thermy are not running? I dont see how that makes any business sense.

The reason for the supposition is because the SWC is arguably the most anticipated week in the speedway season and has now been cast aside in favour of who knows what.

As an organisation waiting to make a formal announcement when all other parties have already released information...Im not sure that necessarily comes across as professional?

BECAUSE as far as the FIM are concerned it is a new competition and BSI still hold the SWC rights because that certainly isn't just a thing of the past. Understand?

[moomin man 76 171]

At least it won't just be a return to the not very popular traditional Best Pairs System.

 

Reading Casatgna's comments in the Star I guess it will somehow involve junior riders (maybe a 500cc U21 and even an 250cc U16) along with the best senior riders in this Speedway of Nations.

 

I wonder if the FIM will also abandon their Junior U21 World Team Championship, which had even less nations take part than the SWC, and which was almost every year won by Poland ... and which has an equivalent in the European Junior U21 Team Championship ... which again has even less ... and is alway won by ... you know what.

If Castagna is proposing a mixture of junior riders, to be included alongside senior riders, I cannot see how it will lead to a big jump in participation levels, as there are relatively few countries that have a proper junior development programme.

[PHILIPRISING 7,298]

ONE Under 21 rider per country is the most likely scenario I believe

[moomin man 76 171]

ONE Under 21 rider per country is the most likely scenario I believe

On that basis, the following countries applied for places in the qualifiers for the World Under 21 Championship in 2017;

 

5 Poland; 5 Sweden; 4 Denmark; 4 Czech Republic; 4 Germany; 3 GB; 3 France; 2 Latvia; 2 Russia; 2 Norway; 2 Finland; 2 Australia; 2 Italy; 1 Ukraine; 1 Slovenia; 1 Argentina; 1 Slovakia; 1 New Zealand; 1 USA; 1 Austria.

 

The numbers indicate the number of places respectively allocated to each country.

[iris123 20,979]

If you are going to have a compulsory U21 rider,then we are back to square one,as Poland have a bunch and most other countries don't even have one to match........great!!!

Edited December 8, 2017 by iris123

[moomin man 76 171]

If you are going to have a compulsory U21 rider,then we are back to square one,as Poland have a bunch and most other countries don't even have one to match........great!!!

That was pretty much my own thoughts on having a mandatory Under 21 rider. They are hoping to create a system that gives more countries a chance of competing and winning at the highest level in one breadth, yet in another, they are handing Poland a significant advantage over the rest.

[Humphrey Appleby 13,955]

WRONG ... how did you come to that conclusion? The FIM demanded a licence fee in addition to that paid by BSI for the SWC commercial rights. So more money into the FIM coffers, not less.

Are you talking about the meeting licence fees, because they're different to the commercial rights fees for a competition, and as far as I'm aware are payable on any meeting that's organised.

[RPNY 608]

Humphrey I enjoy reading what you have to say on here and even if I dont agree I will appreciate - but if Phil said the sky was blue would u disagree?

[Humphrey Appleby 13,955]

Humphrey I enjoy reading what you have to say on here and even if I dont agree I will appreciate - but if Phil said the sky was blue would u disagree?

Phillipe is here to put a positive spin on things for BSI with whom he has a commercial relationship. Nothing wrong with that, but he cannot be considered a neutral party and he's either carefully wording his posts thinking we don't know the difference between commercial rights and inscription/permit fees, or he's just repeating BSI verbatim. Throwing in the term 'licence fees' just serves to further that confusion.

 

And if I were the commercial rights holder of the SWC and the FIM made a decision to suspend it and replace with another team-based competition of a very similar ilk, I'd expect that to be included in the rights or be paid some sort of compensation. Of course, if the SWC wasn't sufficient profitable for me and I had a get-out clause on that basis, both parties might wish to negotiate some revised arrangement to reduce costs but ensure that both gain something from it.

 

I think most appreciate Phillipe's participation on here, but I don't think it's unreasonable to not take everything at face value from an official source. Only a few weeks ago he was priming us for a return to a pairs format, yet now the powers-that-be seem to be discussing another format with junior riders and so on. Either someone isn't well informed, or the FIM and BSI are just making things up as they go along.