1 valve

When a rider "agreed" to become an asset of a club, he received a form of compensation/payment. The terms of this payment reach beyond a riding contract. This approach does not restrict the rider from signing for whoever he likes. However, It does prevent a club from signing whoever they want if a fee is due to the asset owner.

The rising star concept is carried over year to year meaning the obligation remains for a rider to ride with the club he was riding for at the end of last season if he wishes to continue to ride as rising star. He can come off the list at any time, but would be required to ride on a true handicap in the main body or at 6. This latter aspect is likely to lessen the riders appeal to team managers.

Yes the club picks the rider they want to sign. No, the rider doesn't have to sign for the club unless he was there at the end of last season.

Done so the rising star once signed recognises the contractual obligation he is under to the club who has chosen to take him on. That said, If the club releases the rising star, then the rider can sign for another club.

The 5th average rider will need to be lower than 7 as currently (if my calcs are correct) there are 19.14 points remaining to cover the three unannounced spots i.e 6.95 per rider. If the Lions bring in a 7.5 rider that will leave 5.82 for each of the other two. However, maths and the understand of the average allocation are not my strongest points, so I'm happy to be corrected.

Its not. BE included the pavilion & 3G pitch as a sporting amenity providing open space and physical activity on their development which was missing from earlier considerations.

Actually, Jonathan Chapman said at the time he would not object to speedway returning to Norwich at the showground but would not agree to the name "Stars" returning to Norwich. The showground did say at the time that racing would only be allowed on Saturdays with practice possible on Wednesdays. After that it al seemed to go very quiet.

Hopefully, but what are his qualifications and experience in such matters?

Although not what speedway fans would like to acknowledge. The case presented by BE lawyer did appear to be quite solid in many aspects. By contrast, the SCS evidence presented was somewhat "hearsay" with little or no data provided to support the verbal statements given. The BE lawyer latched onto this in his summary, especially relating to attendance figures, the costs involved to revive the Brandon site, and the viability of running a speedway promotion. Not to mention that the "new team" intimated by Phil Morris has failed to materialise (though I don't recall Mr. Goatley referencing this). On the upside, The RBC case was sound in defending their decision to reject the proposed plans on the grounds they did so, especially the need to protect open spaces and the avoidance of urban sprawl. It will, more than likely be the RBC case that wins the day (if it does) re the appeal being rejected. If the appeal is rejected, rather than going quietly, Brandon Estates will either draw up revised plans for the site taking into account the guidance expressed by the planning inspector or, given that Goatley referenced case law for the inspector to consider which if not suitably accommodated in a decision to reject the appeal, then BE may feel they have reason to challenge the decision in the High Court on the grounds that the Planning Inspectorate made a legal mistake.

The chair is not responsible for "digging deeper" only to listen & take on board what is said. The representatives of each side are the ones who establish credibility or otherwise of those giving evidence.

The Voice representative

Phil Morris, will not be prepared to allow clubs "yes people" to continue for very long as a Voice representative if all they do is say "everything is great at my club" nor will he tolerate folk who see this as a forum to moan, complain about everything being rotten to the core as far as Premiership speedway is concerned. He will be looking to work with representatives who take a balanced view to the current situation and can provide feedback on current topics and potential additional concepts for the near and far future. This is a great idea and should be applauded not shot at.

Although it would be absolutely fantastic news for a new speedway site to be developed, the concept of announcing "a site has been found" but we are not releasing details of where it is until outline planning as been established smacks of they haven't actually found a potential site at all, and in due course will be able to say "unfortunately we were unable to gain outline planning permission to build a speedway facility on the site after all - but we remain committed to finding one". The reason for doing this, not so much to keep the license on ice (its worthless without a place to hold meetings) but to show compliance with the terms of developing the Abbey allowing the continuation of housing to be built. Whilst its horrible to adopt such a negative, naysayer view regrettably, it is closer to the truth than TR's current diatribe - but lets hope he proves me wrong!

Basketball, televised on sky and crowds larger than uk Speedway. Patchy fixture list replaced by regular meetings. - not archaic, habit forming.

If somebody plans an action with the intention of killing somebody then the charge of murder is applicable. if the action wasn’t planned to cause death but does so, then the “lesser” charge of manslaughter would apply. No sport or person taking part in sport is exempt from common law. That said, circumstances exist in full contact sports such as boxing where both participants agree to a set of rules to play to which could result in a participants death. However, an action by a boxer outside of the rules of the sport causing permanent injury or death could result in criminal charges being made.

William Cairns - wolves Junior and 250cc European junior rider?

It is irrelevant where the AGM is held. some folk seem to be of the opinion that the money they pay to attend meetings is somehow being wasted on an AGM instead of investing it on tracks/riders or any other similar direct aspect of a meeting. In reality, the promoters are investing their time and money in attending the AGM to discuss their business interests - if, in future years anybody on this forum wishes to influence where the AGM is held - they should buy a speedway team/promoters license and after running their chosen venue for a season or two they might welcome spending a little more of their cash to spend three days enjoying a bit of winter sun with fellow promoters finalising plans for the following season. Meanwhile, lets hope the outcome of this AGM provides 2024 with some entertaining/exciting meetings beneficial to both spectator and promoter alike.

Is that as in Roger Cearns of Sittingbourne? if not who is Mr. Cairns?

Who is?

What is the point of this post? If the riders are known then list them. If you don't want to list them because you're leaving it to the club to do, then why dangle the (meaningless) carrot.

Genuine question. Has Osborn ever actually developed a new stadium anywhere or has it always been a case of “acquiring” clubs & winding them down over time whilst failing to find alternative sites for the sport in question?

Its called "offsetting" and been available for many, many years. You get tax relief by offsetting the loss against your other gains or profits of your business in the same accounting period. You can also choose to carry the loss back, if you do not it will be carried forward to another accounting period. The purpose being to help business owners through poor times or to "offset" losses made by one to reduce the tax burden and keep the none-profitable company potentially. Any tax accountant will be fully versed in this subject. Promoters often have business interests beyond speedway, The offsetting practice enables them to reduce the cost (loss) of running the club not withstanding that some promotions actually do make profit and pay tax accordingly.

No. The cost of testing is not the cost of the kits but the infrastructure required to run an accredited testing agency to include but not limited to, staff, travel, buildings, testing materials and equipment not forgetting the need to make profit to be reinvested in developing improvements of testing technology to make it easier to catch the drug cheats.

Circa £350.00 plus vat for each test is not to most people a “small” amount.

So your proposal is that all riders pay for their own drugs test at all meetings. The reserves and similar lower end earners are going to love that suggestion, especially those that cant afford or do drugs!