Jump to content
British Speedway Forum

SCB

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    18,652

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    357

Posts posted by SCB

  1. Posted

    Just now, bruno said:

    Fans tend to forget that for a time both Bomber and Scott came very close to joining the very top riders, it can be argued both didn't quite reach the very top but they were close. The one season in the final 5 or 6 gps Bomber was right on it finishing around joint 5th I think it was , with Hancock (I think it was) lol

    Correct, 2010 Bomber was flying in the second half of the season and actually finished on the podium 4 times that season, 3 seconds and a 3rd.

  3. Posted

    On 16/02/2018 at 2:50 PM, The Cheese said:

    The new Chris Harris? I'm sure Cook would be happy with a GP win and several more podium finishes

    Exactly, how many riders would kill to have Bombers record? We love knocking a Brit, Andy Smith used to be mocked for his GP record, a record that saw him qualify year after year. Makes Bomber and Andy better than most will ever be.

  4. Posted

    32 minutes ago, Richard Weston said:

    I thought I saw something this winter about top 3 from State finals in Oz being able to get a visa. I thought that was new.

    Maybe you should take some of the propagnada thrown about by riders and clubs with a pinch of salt and realise they're talking crap to make mugs who'll believe them feel sorry for them.

  5. Posted

    1 hour ago, A ORLOV said:

    A fair number of people drive 300 miles a day so electric power for them is no good but those just going to work or the shops can use battery power, I did mention this.

    Is it 300 miles if you drive like a granny, the way that many manufacturers claimed mpg figures in the past or 300 if you drive at 70mph or a lot of town driving with a lot of braking and accelaration, ie a London taxi.  In fact a London taxi use would be a good test for time and length of usage.  The only problem with taxis are that many are not kept in a garage or off the road overnight so recharging is not possible.

    Tesla are very good at giving real World figure, so there 300 miles can be trusted. If anything they undersell and over deliver. As for taxis, they spend a lot of time sat around waiting, so they can be charged continually throughout the day. The London Taxi Company recently released an electric version and I've been in a few London Ubers that are electric vehicles.

    As a petrol head I was very weary of electric vehicles a few years ago but they're stupidly clever bits of kit that I'm fairly certainly will save people a fortune in a few years time (maintenance is nothing compared to internal combustion engines) and is going to be a pretty good thing.

  6. Posted

    5 hours ago, A ORLOV said:

    Not true, how is anyone going to drive any journey more than about 100 - 150 miles until, probably in many many years a battery that can hold that much power might be developed, this is why any top up fuel for long distance and the majority of transport, all day or long distance lorry transport, needs the current fuel until something like hydrogen is nationally available.  This is why most cars are hybrid so you still have to have filling stations. 

    There is also a major issue with the production of all the batteries and the disposal of all those that die.

    Electricy might be ok for going to work or the shops but is no good for a great number of journeys over 100 - 150 miles  and for convenience of travel, so are people going to have two vehicles.  

    Tbf Tesla claim 300 miles in their latest car. And how many people do more than 300 miles in a single journey? In reality we all do 2-20 miles to work or the shops. Anything more than that is irregular, certainly in the U.K.

    We’ve gone from 100 miles 7-10 years ago to 300 miles today, at that rate we’ll be getting close to 1000 miles in 10 years time, better than any petrol vehicle can do!

  7. Posted

    2 hours ago, E I Addio said:

    If true all speedway fans should be fuming because it highlights once again we have a so called governing body that dosnt know whether it’s on its base or its apex and hasn’t got a clue what it’s doing. This situation would just about be acceptable if it were sorted within a week of the AGM but to dither around for three months in each case puts it beyond farce. 

    But “all speedway fans” can’t/won’t be fuming because they’ve been complaining about the injustice of a rule that’s has existed for 20 of the last 21 years being implimented!

     

  8. Posted · Edited by SCB

    If it’s true that Kennett and Nicholls are being allowed to drop down I’d be absolutely fuming if I was the Lakeside management. Stopped from signing two riders (incorrectly it turns out) but allowed to sign two others (incorrectly it turns out) and having their team totally screwed up.

  10. Posted

    10 minutes ago, Bagpuss said:

    This could be the year when Erik really flourishes, any spell at number one could be the making of him. Quite disappointed that my team didn't go for him to be honest.

    I really rate Erik, every time I’ve seen him ride he’s impressed me. I see no reason why he can be a Championship number 1 this season.

    The rest of the Edinburgh team is full of risks but could actually work if whoever is in reserve scores big points while there.

  15. Posted

    5 hours ago, scunny1 said:

    Conversely, tickets could be admission only and pie and peas preordered   as per previous evening. Why should vegetarians pay extra  for unwanted items?  

    I don’t like peas, why should I pay extra for them?

    I also didn’t ever like Martin Smolinski when he was at Coventry but sadly I couldn’t pay 6/7 of the admission cost because I didn’t like one of the riders.

    Theres a product/service being offered to you, it’s all or nothing. Maybe someone who really likes pie and peas not speedway would just like to pay for the pie and peas and not the speedway aspect?

  17. Posted

    On 04/02/2018 at 4:00 PM, arnieg said:

    And I thought you were numerate and understood statistical distributions. A very poor attempt to justify your wildly inaccurate statement.

    Sorry, I thought you were being facetious, if you're being serious I'll give you a serious reply.

    I said half of those over 65 will be dead in 10 years, you proved that half of 65 year old won't be dead. I could take 85 year olds and prove that on average they die in 6 years. Or 90 year old that die in 4.5 years on average.

     

    "50% of people in the U.K. over the age of 65 will be dead in 10 years time" as I posted is NOT "50% of people in the UK aged 65 will be dead in 10 years time" as you have proved. For the record, it's actually around about the age of 76 that you die in 10 years and half the people aged over 65 are under the age of 76 (so  half will be over 76). My statement was correct, half of people OVER the age of 65 will be dead in 10 years time. It's actually about 48.2% of people aged over 65 who will be dead in 10 years if we're being pedantic. 

     

    On 04/02/2018 at 1:11 PM, TonyE said:

    When one has reached the bottom of the hole, one should stop digging.

     

    Except I'm not wrong. 50% of people over the age of 65 will be dead in 10 years time and old people will die before young people.

  18. Posted

    1 hour ago, Baldyman said:

    Build on the green belt...why should we care about the future.  

    Because we care about now? At some point your house was there and was probably a lovely fields. Why does it matter if the trees and grass areas are in the middle of, for example, Cardiff or on the outskirts?

    Why cram more houses into what is current Cardiff thus increasing the traffic and thus the pollution and killing stuff when you could build on the outside of Cardiff and not have the traffic problems? The little birdies and the newts will still have the parks in Cardiff to live in. A house has the same footprint whether its built in park, old factory or the greenbelt, so its a crap argument that you can't build on the greenbelt.

    Obviously you can't just randomly build single houses in the middle of the greenbelt but extending existing towns, cities and villages done properly will actually result in less pollution and harm to the environment. As pointed out, over 90% of land in the UK is not built on, even if we doubled the amount of houses, parks, roads and places of work without any inefficiencies it would still only use up 16% of land in total. With modern efficiency it could be less than that. We don't even need it doubling. Just increase it by say 20% and we've still used less than 10% of available land.

    As for running out of green spaces, take a look at this....
    https://www.google.co.uk/maps/search/google+maps/@51.7510555,-2.4281219,137881m/data=!3m1!1e3
    Tell me we're running out of green space! All I can see it green!

  20. Posted

    2 hours ago, arnieg said:

    Your first sentence is plain wrong.

     

    Life expectancy at 65 is a further 17 years on average. So well over 50% of 65 year olds will still be alive.

     

    See https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/lifeexpectancies/bulletins/lifeexpectancyatbirthandatage65bylocalareasintheunitedkingdom/2014-04-16

    That stat doesn’t disprove mine. You have 4 old people, they are all aged 65. In 10 years time 2 of them have died aged 74 but the other two live until they’re 90. They have averaged 82 but half of them have not made it another 10 years.

  21. Posted

    8 hours ago, RobMcCaffery said:

    Oh dear SCB, are you still trying to defend your moronic and offensive ageism by sneering and ridicule? For the benefit of those that haven't seen this person's constant attacks on older supporters and blaming them for the ills of speedway elsewhere the worst example was "Why pander to them, they'll be dead soon?" Treat him with the contempt he deserves. 

    It's pathetic that someone who passes himself off as vaguely intelligent can make such ignorant and offensive posts and when rightly criticised tries to ridicule those who dare to do so. Truly pathetic. 

    Stick to regurgitating the rule book. 

    Anyway, welcome back to the second tier, Lakeside, you have been missed and I hope you have a superb year. Those of you old enough to be despised by the likes of SCB will at least take some reassurance that they are unlikely to have to put up with the individual concerned this year since he is far too self-important to attend Championship level speedway. 

    Despite my involvement at Rye House over the years I still have a soft spot for Arena-Essex, especially since I recorded the commentary on the first-ever meeting there in 1984.

    Oops, that shows how old I am. I should be ashamed of myself, not having died yet. ;-)

     

     

     

    It’s a cold, hard fact that 50% of people in the U.K. over the age of 65 will be dead in 10 years time.

    So what about my statement is incorrect? They will be dead soon (in the scheme of things),  certainly soberer than 15-35 year olds that the sport does its best to alienate.

  23. Posted · Edited by SCB

    On 02/02/2018 at 2:43 PM, hulvik said:

    When it comes to visas it's funny how the minority sports like speedway always have trouble when it comes to non EU residents. You never hear of an overseas footballer in the Premier league having a visa application turned down

    The premier league is the top league of 4. Professional leagues in England. Speedways Championship is the bottom half. How many Argentinians, Americans, Aussies etc are there in league 2?

    Speedway should be thankful that any Championship riders are granted work permits because the rules says that riders have to be proven at the highest level. Having to ride Championship level speedway is not exactly in keeping with that description but Premier league football is!

     

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-4634022/Watford-s-Adalberto-Penaranda-work-permit-rejected.html

    oh and that, yeah.

  24. Posted

    On 02/02/2018 at 10:36 AM, Alan_Jones said:

    It's not a new rule, it's the reintroduction of a long standing rule. The mistake was in removing it for last season which only added to the disasterous level of doubling up. According to the BSPA statement it was reintroduced to regain a measure of control, but if that was the case then it should have reverted to it's original intent of blocking all riders over 6, with or without a CL average.

    Exactly. This rule has existed since the EL/PL were formed in 1997 (except the first 2 years it was 5.00 not 6.00). It wasn't in last season rulebook because no rider had an EL/Premiership average, all riders have Championship averages. So I'm not sure why people are so confused it exists.

    Personally, years ago I'd have blocked any rider with an EL (now Premiership) average of 6 or more from doubling up.

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy

  I accept