Aces51

I don't think you've thought that one through, much like the rest of your points. When did the tickets go on sale and for how long?

It was known there were issues but what was not known was that those issues were caused by the defective base and as we know today, other issues only revealed when that base has been dug up. It is a fact that the track had been worked on and that on the Friday night came through a practice session. It still looked fine on the Saturday but unbeknown to anyone had been affected by the weather because of the hidden problems with the base. The SCB investigation even said that on the Friday the track looked as if it would come good for the Saturday. Those are the facts but you ignore them and believe whatever you want.

Congratulations to Swindon on a deserved win. I predicted we would lose without Richie and Swindon having Grajczonek as a second string and Tungate at reserve. However, the deciding factor seemsto have been good night's for Sedgman and Morris and a poor night for Cook. I wonder if Rosco is still complaining about the number of races decided from the gate. It's all part and parcel of the sport.

So you're suggesting what? I don't recall Belle Vue saying anything of the nature of some of the accusations made by you and others on here and which the facts now show to be untrue to those capable of being objective.

With no Richie, Tungate at reserve, Grajczonek as a second string and Joe in poor form so far, I now think this will be a Swindon win. Wright could be a weakness as a heat leader but Richie has been scoring well,

This is totally frustrating and must be a financial nightmare for the promoters with no income coming in. Hopefully, the full extent of the problems is now apparent and can soon be solved. At least what it does make clear is that none of what has happened has been the fault of Belle Vue. There is no way they could have been aware of the problems with the sub base and now, whatever these further defects are that have been revealed. It just proves the wisdom of waiting to find out the facts before making the sort of outrageous comments and allegations made by some after the opening meeting and the subsequent postponements

Belle Vue fans did and over many seasons in a terrible stadium. We're either mad or very loyal. Keep the faith, whatever the faults of the management this is a season when Coventry supporters have got to show to the local councils and the media that there is significant support to keep the club going after this season.

Of course they have, both Peter Craven and Peter Collins for example and although before my time, I bet Freddie Williams did. The sport was much bigger in those days and received national publicity. I can recall Peter Craven's victories having a full page spread on the back page of national Sunday papers and regular stories in the national press. Peter Collins appeared on a number of popular terrestrial TV programmes during 1976/7 in addition to lots of press coverage. Obviously, there was no social media but newspapers had many more readers in those days and TV programmes had many more viewers than today. Collins and Craven were household names. Lots of people who had never attended speedway knew who they were, you can hardly say the same about Tai. On the general topic I see no argument that Tai is British, of course he is. I have no problem with him not riding in the EL, I can understand that he had to follow the money and the higher standard of competition in Poland and Sweden. I am less happy about him missing the British final. I can see the problems of him doing the semi finals but I am sure that a behind the scenes compromise could have been reached to seed him to the final. If he truly wants to help British speedway then he must know that his absence is likely to lower the profile of the meeting and adversely affect the attendance numbers. Having said that I certainly shan't be booing him at Cardiff and whenever he is in a race with Zagar in the GP's I shall be shouting for Tai. Neither of the PC's were arrogant, they had confidence in their ability but let their performances on track speak for them, That is part of the reason why they were both extremely popular with fans everywhere.

They are anticipating that the work will be finished on Friday and obviously only if everything goes to plan will the Colts match take place on Sunday.

There's a notification on the Belle Vue website, dated 11th April, that refunds were starting to be sent out. Somebody has posted on Facebook today that they went to the stadium today and they were given a cheque. They also confirmed what Joe Hatton has guessed in his post above might be the situation, that the admin staff are hard pressed coping with the refunds and their normal duties and that it may take some time to deal with them all.

Going for an Aces win, 42-48. On balance I think Tungate at reserve and Grajczonek as a second string makes Swindon stronger, even with Wright as a heat leader but Richie and Steve Worrall are riding well and the 1-5 a are all scoring, just need for Jacobs to get racing fit. I hope Stefan Nielsen soon gets back to form, he was very popular with the Aces fans, maybe next week though. .

The sensible way to achieve that is by changing the heat format so that ftr's gain a realistic average. They then move up on merit not on the basis of a totally false average.

Roll out! !! That's a bit cruel.

I know. Unfortunately, my mother always told me not to mock the afflicted but to try to to help them.

I hadn't thought of that, sounds like more than sufficient reason for another postponement. Maybe we need to utilise that magic hole we bought from that chap from Dorset. Mind you he promised it only worked on the 1st bend but so far seems only to affect the 3rd and 4th. He looked suspicious to me, wore a jacket with flashy lapels and had coiffured hair. First time I've ever seen a chauffer driven Reliant Robin and the driver was odd, wore a cape covered in stars and the back of the Reliant was full of old copies of the Speedway Star. He was constantly asking the man in the jacket if there was anything more he could do for him, called him sir all the time and insisted on combing and lacquering his hair for him and cleaning his shoes before they got back in the Reliant. The man in the jacket totally ignored him but that didn't stop him fawning all over him. It was a bit embarrassing to be honest.

The builders have shown that if they follow the specification they are more than capable of building the track, bends 1 and 2 and both straights are the proof. I thought it was clear that bends 3 and 4 are going to be dug up, the work has started, there is clearly no other way that the base can be put right but thank you for stating the obvious. You've still not answered my previous question. Are you saying that faced with the Council understandably insisting that they alone have control of the project, Belle Vue should have said that in that case we don't want the stadium? As for the PCMM meeting see my post #1441 on this topic.

It's as if nobody has tried to explain to you that Belle Vue didn't get the contractors in. This is a local authority project funded by MCC. They gave the contract to the builders, they set the terms of that contact and they control and oversee the work. Belle Vue had a choice, they either agreed to the terms set out by the Council or the stadium didn't get built. They can't oversee the build. Are you suggesting they should have said if we can't oversee the building of the track we don't want the stadium?

I give up. What don't you understand about MCC being in control and neither Belle Vue or Colin Meredith being in a position to decide to start overseeing the contractors. As was said, I can only assume it is a deliberate act, surely nobody can be told so many times that Belle Vue are not in a position to get actively involved and still fail to understand.

You are of course entitled to your opinion. However, it does seem to be somewhat extreme to claim the whole project continues to stink of botch-job after cock-up after careless/reckless naivety. The stadium is very impressive, I'm sure you've seen it to feel able to comment on the whole project and the 1st and 2nd bends and both straights have been built following the specification and are problem free. To me that means the builders are more than capable of building a Speedway track, the problem lies not in their building skills but in a failure to follow the specification when building bends 3 and 4. I assume that your comments about the involvement of Belle Vue are intended as criticisisms of the Council, knowing as you must by now, that it was not something Belle Vue could do without being invited to do so by the Council. I apologise for my example of buying a new house. I assumed a sufficient degree of intelligence of the reader to realise I was drawing a parallel with Belle Vue's position in the stadium project. It was not intended to be that the eventual purchaser had commissioned a builder directly but that a company had commissioned a builder and that the eventual purchaser was going to buy the house from the company. It is in that instance, just as with Belle Vue, that the company is not going to allow the eventual purchaser to give instructions to the builder or to be on site throughout the build checking on the quantity and quality of the materials. Just as with Belle Vue and MCC they would insist the eventual buyer made any representations to them. To do otherwise really would be a recipe for confusion and potential disaster.

I'll try and make it simple. It's like you buying a new house and every day you turn up at the site and start telling the builders what to do and checking the materials. How long do you think you would be tolerated? This is a local authority project involving public money. There is no way that the MCC would delegate authority to a third party to control anything. The point is what does that prove when the assumptions for the prediction were wrong. It certainly doesn't prove that anyone knew beforehand, which it might have done if the assumptions on which the predictions were made were correct.

How can reasonable but wrong assumptions be correct? The fact it want raceable was for entirely didn't reasons. It's like me saying a train will be late because of leaves on the line and then claiming I was right when it is late but because of a breakdown.

As I understand it at least some of the materials for the 3rd and 4th bends were not delivered until they were required. It had been explained many, many times but to repeat it yet again, the MCC are in charge of the project. Belle Vue are not in a position to start checking deliveries there will be a Clerk of Works employed by the Council to oversee the build.

There were problems with the track and as a result a lot of work was done on the track surface culminating in the practice on the Friday when it seemed to be ok. No doubt some riders were aware of the problems but apparently not of the situation as it was on that Friday evening. Rumours did circulate but those I saw blamed the problems on the track not having had sufficient time to bed in. As we now know the problems were nothing to do with that, so the riders conclusions that it should be called off were based on reasonable but wrong assumptions. It therfore follows that the fact it was postponed but for entirely different reasons doesn't in any way indicate that someone knew beforehand what did eventually happened. It's like me saying a match at King's Lynn is going to be called of because of rain but when it is postponed because of a blown fuse, claiming I knew beforehand it would be off.

I don't think either was a con but there is another old saying about people who live in glass houses.

Instead of all of these continuing allegations perhaps some people need to consider objectively what we now know about what has happened The facts are that we now know that the problem with the track is and always has been the base on the 3rd and 4th bends, which was not constructed in accordance with the specification. We know it is a fault that was hidden under the surface and therefore not obvious to those inspecting the track and we know that the track can be ok, even after extensive practice but that cold or inclement weather can then cause problems to appear which could not be forseen or anticipated. We know this because of what happened before the Leicester meeting. On the Wednesday before the match on the Friday the track came through an extensive practice session ok but then late on the Thursday water had risen to the surface on those bends and was flowing down the track. Going back now to the PCMM meeting, the situation on the Friday prior to the meeting was that two riders tested the track and it was OK. Even the Chairman of the SCB grudgingly admitted after their investigation that on the Friday the track looked as if it would just come right for the Saturday. We know that the track looked ok on the Saturday, we know that the riders were not paying undue attention to those bends during their track inspection, which they would have done if the problems were visible and as obvious as some must believe. We also know that the SCB referee, who had control of the meeting from 2 hours before start time, did not call off the meeting, which he would have to have done if the track was visibly unsafe. This all clearly points to the fact that there was no reason to believe on the Friday and during the day on Saturday that the track was not raceable and that the meeting should be postponed. It was the cold inclement weather on the Saturday which caused the track to become unsafe,just as it did on the Thursday before the Leicester match but at that time nobody knew about the defective base. On a different aspect, I can understand why some are pointing out that Colin Meredith should have, supervised, overseen, advised, on the track build and should now do so with the repairs. As has been said many times, the MCC are in charge of this project, Belle Vue cannot insist or demand anything. The Council are aware of Colin's expertise but only they can decide if they wish to utilise his skills.