Aces51

If you apply that test then it applies equally to the play offs. Crowd levels have certainly dropped since their introduction and the argument that the sport lost more supporters before the play offs than since their introduction is far too simplistic. There were far more to lose because you start from a much higher base. Also, once you get down to the hard core you are less likely to lose them because most will carry on supporting their team no matter how much they disagree with the rules and politics. We don't know and probably never shall whether the overall crowd levels over a whole season would be as bad as they are now if we had kept the fairer and more credible system of the team finishing top of the league being crowned champions. Everyone can put forward their opinion but that is all it is, an opinion.

https://m.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.800845563322698.1073741831.129552893785305&type=3 Click the link to see all 156 photos. The most recent are those at the bottom.

I'm obviously losing my marbles. Once I heard that one of the reserves could move up I just assumed that the the heat formula would change to that used before the draft riders were introduced or, if not, something very similar which would give them a realistic average. It never occurred to me that they would not make any changes and so create a system where a reserve could find himself a heat leader without ever having raced against one. How stupid of me not to realise the merits of such a system.

I agree. Also, as you say the setting up costs are the same whether you do 20 or 40 meetings and you can be sure that both job sharing riders will expect those costs to be covered, thus increasing costs for the clubs.

Without going back to find it I can tell you that all of the releant information has been published. Rest assured that a professionally prepared business plan was prepared and submitted to the City Council, very high profile financial backers are in place and income from the stadium will not just be from speedway meetings but many other activities.

Perhaps I'm not understanding this but why is it a problem if one team is negotiating with a no.1 for the whole season. Surely, we can have a system whereby teams can choose either to job share or not.

It's one of my faults, over estimating the intelligence of some BSF members.

You don't get it do you? I make a couple of jokey posts about the goggle incident, a couple of posters treat it more seriously so I apologise for raising a topic which has been exhausted.Somehow you see that as bait.

Oh dear. Didn't mean to start up gogglegate all over again.

The were no bids so he put them on as belonging to the Belle Vue mascot but felt guilty and withdrew them when the bids reached £100. Boxall has of course ridden for us before but didn't last out the season and doesn't have the best record for reliability but other tier one riders m not chosen by anyone are waiting in the wings.

You can see Starman getting worried after all we've only got to make up 2 points or a pair of goggles. Assuming you get to the final of course.

I can certainly see the attraction of the play offs and the finals undoubtedly attract a large number of fans. What we don't know is what effect, if any, relegating the league matches up to the play offs into a qualifying competition for those play offs, has had on the dramatic drop in attendances at all those other matches. My feeling is that it has certainly contributed and may be a major factor in the huge drop in total number of fans that attend matches over a whole season. The season is now slanted towards simply finishing in the top 4 and being the form team at the end of the season, either through getting everyone into form at the right time or, making the right team changes in time for the play offs. People argue that interest was lost in the league if there was a run away leader. That wasn't my experience. The league held my interest throughout the season, even if we weren't in contention to win it. I wanted to see how high up we could finish, I wanted to finish higher than local rivals and I wanted us to beat the teams likely to finish above us. Maybe that is just me or maybe overall attendances wouldn't be as dire as they are if we still had league champions rather than play off champions. Another hobby horse of mine is the knock out cup. Promoters tell us nobody is interested. What they forget is that they are largely responsible because of the way the competition was run in recent times. Sometimes months between qualifying rounds and finals fitted in at the end of the season, often in poor weather. It certainly have the impression that the BSPA regarded it as a fixture filler rather than a prestigious competition. I'm sure a properly organised cup competition would be attractive to fans if given a high profile, with each round to be completed in a set timescale and a final immediately before or following the play offs.

That seems to epitomise what is wrong with the attitude of some Promoters. I'm not and never have been a BSPA basher but a sport which depends so largely on gate receipts must learn that keeping supporters in the dark and treating them as if they are not valued is certainly not the way to increase attendance numbers. Any professional business would have posted a constructive reply perhaps suggesting that the new signing has lots of potential, that it is hoped that fans will give him their support and that it is hoped that the poster will reconsider and feel able to continue his much valued support of the club.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of concessions for the over 60's the reality is that they are commonly provided by those who are competing for the entertainment dollar. It is a risk taking away something many fans have enjoyed and benefited from but no doubt Coventry are hoping that most of those fans, who will be long time dedicated supporters, will grin and bear it, whatever their feelings about the way their loyalty is being repaid. My guess is that the numbers have been worked out and that the calculations are that the overall takings at the turnstiles will be increased. As for the ignorant point about the state pension being a benefit all such pensions are, for current pensioners, calculated on contributions made over a lifetime. The pension paid out is a percentage of the maximum entitlement based on the number of years you have contributed. In effect you have paid for your pension just as you do for a private pension.

Pleased to see Craig and Richie back. Some concerns have been expressed about Richie but he ended the season well and will improve his average. Craig has shown his abilities and can kick on next season to be a top rider in the EL.

No rider is bigger than a club, never mind the league.

He rode in every league match and ended with an average of 8.23. The going didn't get tough towards the end of the season, we finished bottom. Not sure what you mean by that was the last seen of him in Aces colours, he saw the season out but has not been signed by Belle Vue since, just as Anderson and Harris haven't after their spells at Belle Vue. My recollection is that he had only a couple of really poor meetings, which included an away match at Coventry. As I said in my earlier post the feeling on the Belle Vue web site seems to be that he would be welcomed back even acknowledging his tendency to occasionally lose to some relatively poor riders. Zagar had the same problem. The reservations are about his form last year.

The management have said there will be 20 EL standard meetings so why disbelieve what they say. I agree they need to let people know what these meetings are likely to be but nobody is forcing people to buy a season ticket if they want to wait until further details are published. Also, remember that the prices include a programme, that represents a significant saving against paying at the turnstiles. We have a new stadium that will help to secure the future of Belle Vue and I am certainly prepared to pay a bit more for that and for the facilities it will provide. If you don't want a programme or don't think it is value for money don't buy a season ticket. Sounds an excellent idea. The extra fans attending simply to get value from their ticket would also generate extra income for those clubs who get the proceeds from food and drink sales.

He didn't let Belle Vue down. As SCB has said he can be a world beater or get beat by reserves, that's the type of rider he is but when he was with Belle Vue there were very few poor performances. If you look at the Belle Vue web site many would have him back and think the risk is not if he will let us down but whether last year was a one off.

Without seeing the list it is difficult to know if the risk is worth taking. It must depend on what the alternatives are but having been stitched up by the ridiculous decision to use PL averages we may not have any other realistic option.

Which is probably why he wasn't picked by anyone so far. I'm sure we would have had Stefan but Swindon chose before us. However, Boxall clearly has ability and could do a good job but I agree has a worrying history.

You've put 2 and 2 together I was simply stating a fact, not laying blame, that neither Greaves or Rose progressed during their time at Swindon. Conversely, Stefan has progressed and has mentioned many times the help and guidance he has received. Rossiter has the opportunity now to continue with that guidance and I hope he does. It seems a little pathetic to single out Worrall's preformance in the final given the abysmal performances by most of the Swindon team in the semi's. The fact is that Worrall more than showed his progress over the season including that 15 point maximum at Wolverhampton.

Just hope he fares better than the last 2 tier 2 picks when they went to Swindon. I hope that Rossiter can continue the help and guidance Stefan got at Belle Vue.

Could be but didn't the rules say that any tier one not picked could then be picked as part of the tier 2 picks.

Could be be one of the tier one not picked by anyone?