Crump99

Well something needs to change sooner rather than later because the club needs a voice now. Clearly that is not Chapman who is just treading water now and will not be involved next year or beyond if we survive. It's a shame that Rathbone is persona non grata with the sport's cartel administrators because he'd be ideal to try to save the club in the short and long term. MT & CJ would need more experience with them like Mick Bratley who knows how to play the game and is as local as you can get. If MT would need to learn one thing bloody quickly then it's not rock the BSPL boat, no matter how stupid a decision may appear. So yes your dart may have just smacked in to the wall (s*** flights) but who knows?

Worrall perhaps although he isn't, and never will be, up to that standard. Andersen & Iversen have been there, done it and got the t-shirt that I doubt Tarasenko will ever get? So I don't think they'll be too fussed. What's embarrassing is a track where Iversen made the effort to go round someone coming off bend four only to lose 10 yards because apart from the odd occasion that once profitable outside line has disappeared on both bends.

I know that you're a big fan This one is one from him: "A problem shared is a problem halved, so is your problem really yours or just half of someone else’s?"

And therein lies the problem. The fight has to come from the top but the top allegedly wants out but only under his terms which are unlikely to be met. The club has been run for survival without ambition. Somehow the crowds have held up well, apart from last night, but I only see fans being supportive of any management effort but not being pro-active or otherwise kicking up a fuss. If someone does want the gig then Chapman should negotiate and think himself lucky. Surely something for the pension pot (with 5% interest) is better than nothing? Unless....

The whole quote sounds like it comes from the David Brent manual on effective management. I think that we should adopt this one: " If you want the rainbow, you’ve got to put up with the rain. Do you know which ‘philosopher’ said that? Dolly Parton. And people say she’s just a pair of ****.

The bulldozers will not be turning up because the Peterborough Speedway infrastructure will be perfect working order after the last race of 2023 and AEPG have to act upon LP30 before they get a sniff of approval of their yet to be seen planning application. Any attempt to make the track or facilities unfit for purpose will hopefully be noted and subsequently given the reaction such damage would deserve by PCC. I could see new owners getting a 3 year deal until the new Local Plan (with LP30 removed) is agreed in 2026 with that then potentially being the last season unless the track is incorporated into the new facility and planning application.

Don't know whether I agreed that before with you or somebody else? That is the conundrum isn't it? There is no future under the current ownership irrespective of how things play out at the EoES. I doubt that a 2024 season would be received with the same enthusiasm as it was when Chapman announced that he'd secured a 2023.

Given that we haven't seen the AEPG planning application, Peterborough developments are hitting snags and the local plan is going for an early review/consultation (in which they could probably lose LP30 after agreement/negotiation) which will take a few years then I wouldn't put money on the proposed closure.

"If" is doing all of the heavy lifting here though. Chapman has the track record on such matters whereas Tomlin probably thought that he was entering a professional sport with sensible businessmen who play by conventional rules? Like many before him, and much sooner than usually happens, reality of the shark infested custard clown show soon hit home, so until the real truth is known and these sources come out of the woodwork then Chris probably speaks for the majority, which isn't surprising as it's a Peterborough thread.

Seeing Zmarzlik fly into the corner last night running Madsen up to the airfence and deep stuff reminded me of Andersen and Crump in their prime regularly doing the same. Go mid track or try the Sullivan run these days and you'll generally go backwards 10 yards unless it's Frick, Doyle, Sayfutdinov, Bewley etc who've missed the start against slower lesser riders.

It's not to hard to think about it really. Someone wanting out and allegedly wanting to take a back seat always seems to throw a spanner in the works for unconfirmed reasons just when it appears that someone is doing a good job for the club and its supporters, outside of just running and making up the numbers, which is a worthy achievement in itself requiring credit none the less.

They've outed all such events now so that would free up dates, which would be a positive, so no real effect IMO, although I guess the only potential concerning issue would be the site owners losing income from the site and their administrators wanting silly rent from Peterborough Speedway (although rumour is that it's silly enough as it is?). That's all a bit of a side issue though at the moment.

Problem being that we're rudderless as a club and Chapman wants out whilst Johnson seemingly waves the white flag in any press on the subject. We should be making noises now (perhaps we are, or someone is behind the scenes but I doubt it). Local developments are hitting snags all over the place but for us that requires a club/fan reaction in our case and I'm not seeing any. I agree that nothing much will happen in development terms but someone needs to keep an eye on the speedway infrastructure so that they don't try to make it unfit for purpose after the season ends, although I guess that we'd have had to declare our intention by then? I agree that nothing will happen short term and I think that 2024 and beyond isn't out of the question but that probably does need the current owner, at the very least, to move on pdq if he doesn't want that fight.

It wasn't a particular guest, it was an appropriate guest. You know, a number one that wins at least 3 races on his home (or for that evening at least) track. Strange concept I know but a useful objective all the same. Whether or not the facility should or should not be available is a different issue.

Just sign a decent no1. That's all that's needed. As it stands everyone is under unnecessary pressure to cover the the likes of cack like MPT at 1. If we'd had Bewley as guest again we'd had won easily, not been 4 points down after one race and Fricke wouldn't have looked like the superstar that he isn't.

That's the conundrum isn't it? Great news if true but then the other side of that scenario snaps back and hits you in the face on its return.

Always has been our best hope and likely scenario. Nothing much is going to happen quickly at the EoES regarding any development. I could see us still being there for a while until the local plan review is completed in a few years with the exclusion of LP30.

If you've nothing to say then say nothing. As you started, whatever they say gets the rumour mill in overdrive. We know what the situation is with a team: under the current ownership we have a budget team to make up the numbers, nothing exciting is going to happen. As for the club's future: what more can be said? " In terms of the future, as things stand at present, very sadly this will be our last year. We have a contract with the Showground until the end of October, and at this stage it is highly unlikely that this will be renewed." & Johnson said: "Everyone knows the situation at the Showground and we are not big enough to stop a £50 million development from going ahead, things are very sensitive with the Showground contract and who knows what happens after October this year." Think that we're all sick of it, including some of the management and sponsors no doubt, but don't see much changing unless someone pulls a rabbit out of the hat at some point?

Is their planning application on the PCC website yet? You know more than most that we have an excellent working relationship with the EoES and logic/common sense has never seemingly been at the forefront of decision making where Peterborough Speedway is concerned. One assumes that they've booked the EoES for a week Mon-Mon/Tues-Tues (although where is the surprise if the speedway date was agreed?) for the Jeremy Vine nutjob crew: https://www.visitpeterborough.com/whats-on/tour-of-cambridgeshire-2022-p1675461

Not known for my sheep like qualities or supportive nature regarding club management but I've seen it all before as it comes from both sides. He wasn't having a go at those fans and made it quite clear " We as a promotion appreciate everyone that turns up week in and week out to watch and pay with their hard earned money and again without them we wouldn’t have a club." They all kick back when poked. Here's some for you - assume that you'd say the same to them but you get the picture? ALL Coventry supporters are invited to a special Fans Forum in the Under-stand bar at Brandon with promoter Mick Horton THIS FRIDAY at 7.30pm. Mick said: "This is a chance for all Coventry supporters to have their say - and that includes the so-called fans who hide behind keyboards on forums. "I am aware that this may be tough after our results this season, especially on Monday, but I will answer the questions and I want to put all fans' unrest to bed once and for all." (Perhaps he's not the best example ) RICK FROST labelled some of the club’s biggest critics ‘worthless’. Attacking the fans who slaughter the club on the forum section of Panthers’ official website, he said: “The ‘keyboard warriors’ are sad people with big mouths and empty pockets. They are worthless. “We have fantastic supporters on the whole but the keyboard warriors just criticise us at every opportunity yet none of them were prepared to come to a fans’ forum and discuss things face-to-face. “We try to be honest with the fans and we’re prepared to listen to constructive criticism but I’ve no time for them.” I simply can't understand why so many speedway supporters and especially the keyboard Internet warriors, appear to be so negative about our sport and our clubs. Bratters Panthers programme introduction April 16 2009 - And that's Bratters being nice. You wouldn't want the PM you'd get in response to your post! "Us Peterborough fans know you (Ged Rathbone) and Trevor are doing you're upmost to keep Panthers going and we all appreciate it very much ......Ignore the saddo's Ged you are doing a great job" "Don't read the forums Ged, I got involved in a row with someone last year on it, true panthers fans will support you guys and know that you're doing all you can. The forums are full of muppets who don't know what they're talking about!" - - : Gerard Rathbone said: "They are entitled to their opinion just wish they would come and help us I'm happy to listen to all ideas" "Everyone can have an opinion I just find it quite aggressive sometimes, if they came to the forum they could have had their say then..." What always leads here though is lack of "clarity and communication" speedway's longstanding problem! - on that I think that we can all agree.

That says more about you than it does about him tbh

True, but at least it's out in the open and we have something to work with to make AEPG/PCC work for it. The immediate concern would be k. The facility is demonstrably no longer fit for purpose and the site is not viable to be redeveloped for a new community facility; Peterborough Speedway will be left in perfect working order after the last meeting of the 2023 season, as it is every year before it's readied in 6 months or so for the following season, so if anything happens to make it unfit for purpose then that would require some serious questions, unless the yet to be seen planning application is favourable to us.

So given that sight of the AEPG planning application is imminent, if it's not already out there? Then you're not holding out much hope on PCC sticking by the EoES provisions within their own live local plan? LP30: Existing Culture, Leisure, Tourism and Community Facilities The loss, via redevelopment, of an existing culture, leisure, tourism or community facility will only be permitted if it is demonstrated that: k. The facility is demonstrably no longer fit for purpose and the site is not viable to be redeveloped for a new community facility; or l. The service provided by the facility is met by alternative provision that exists within reasonable proximity: what is deemed as reasonable proximity will depend on the nature of the facility and its associated catchment area; or m. The proposal includes the provision of a new facility of a similar nature and of a similar or greater size in a suitable on or off-site location. I would think that the work/costs is the responsibility of the developers, not new owners, and local councillors have said that the plans will not be approved without LP30 being adhered to. I wouldn't hang my hat on what councillors say but would ask on what basis LP30 has been ignored, if that's how it works out.

by guys you mean 2 or 3 on here? Hardly representative!

Thought that I'd covered all of that?