wjm

Thanks, that post has done more to validate what an eejit you are than any of mine have managed to….what a twit.

Just out of interest….where does this grand idea of yours re people having to fill in programmes sit with your “friend” who referenced speedway fan as geeks and idiots because they spend most their time burrowed in a programme filling it out, hardly a revolutionary idea to drag the sport kicking and screaming into the modern era…. in fact, it entirely goes against that... I don’t need to bother with gifs and images, saved me with the hassle, with that picture of a tosser.

Neither wonder people are “aggressive” with you, you come across like an absolute wa nker , and the above post probably explains why "some" don't bother reading your posts, what a load of bumptious tripe and still to dense (yip, you don't come over too bright yourself on here) to get your head around the idea that people would have to fill out the entire programme that was in the star - which was the point someone made, but you are to pig ignorant to take that on board because your "idea" which has a couple of likes is seemingly universally accepted.....expect it isn't, it is an idea that will never come to fruition, because it is a bag of scrap, it was made to sound pathetic and complicated, because it kind of is pathetic grand job....

I am “on about” you calling a poster (me) stupid – for no reason – if there was a reason, it seems to because I dared take the time to debate the point with you and point out the flaw in your idea of scrapping programmes (as others did) something you then later went against yourself (scrapping programmes, which you then wanted to bring back again - easy to see why some, not just me, were left a bit confused by your thought process) – that was all I engaged in, nothing more, nothing less…that resulted in you, who had complained of “aggressive” posters referring to a poster (me) as “stupid” but claimed it to be “banter”..why you chose that terminology I do not know, as there was no logical reason to do so, it wasn't merited given the general tone of the conversation...you just got a bit uppity when it was pointed out to you people could pretty much already do what you were suggesting, your "3 ideas". I then pulled you on this "stupid/banter" thing, made comparable comment re you being, a bit of an arse - just to show easy it is to illogically slag and abuse people and claimed it as “banter” and since then you have shown yourself as a brass necked hypocrite ….it just makes you look a bit, well.... stupid. At least you have set a precedent though...fair game for people to call you whatever they wish, it is "banter" after all I am sure you will reply, you need the last word on everything ya bumptious wa nk

Yes, I meant to , because no one, not one person could surely get so giddy over a like on a forum – but it turns out that person does actually exist… I don't have my "knickers in a twist" it is "banter" remember.... remember... you call people stupid because they have a differing opinion from you on a public form, forums where people debate and disagree...or in your case, get to call each other "stupid" etc and just say it's "banter"....remember, your words...."stupid".

My mistake - I didn't realise this was all just a plea to be liked and to feel wanted, "we're" and "likes"....go on then, I will give you a like as well, since it is the festive season. you can brag about that one as well!!

Christ sake, another "banter bomb" I take it, because no one could actually take such a thing seriously

See I never knew it was "banter, well if that is the case -why don't you wind your neck in and stop talking a load of guff you utter eejit. “banter”

If there are exceptions why generalise? I doubt anyone does think there is thousands of people willing and wanting to start attending irrespective of their age, probably validated given no one has said they expect them to start attending in their thousands, nor does it look like there needs to be given the sport probably doesn’t need that market in order to subsidize it as it is pitching at what it does attract (smart) and has done for a number of years now (again though thousands more would be nice and no one would turn them away). I tend not to count people in attendance or dwell on such things as it is not why I would attend a meeting, or even would I begin to attempt to place the reason people are there, there is literally little way of knowing people have been dragged to speedway unless they are asked, I don’t understand why that narrative has to be written or placed? There are several narratives written in your post that I am not even sure ring true, re survival etc and the crowds the sport should attract and needs to attract, these are positions placed on the sport by individuals that they then use as an opposition, it is an opposition that doesn’t even exist. You mean the halcyon days of 2016 when thousands packed the National Stadium to watch the controversial multiple time British World Champion booed and goaded all meeting before turning in a victorious ride much to the disgruntlement of the home crowd which then spilled over and led to home hero Craig Cook fighting with Swedish GP Star Freddie Lindgren. Or the 2016 World Champion who walked out a meeting falling an allegation of race fixing. The narrative likely to be written in 20 years, when they cut out all the scrap and fat like they do in those events that took place 20 years previously, those kind of days you are talking about, trick and scrapes like that? Sure in 20 years’ time they might be a decent read.

An option that already is available. - that's the smug one.

What an incredibly sweeping verging on offensive statement to make. You do realise “youngsters” differ in mind set, mentality, outlook and attention span yes, there isn’t just a temple cookie cutter template for “young” people I would suggest speedway shouldn’t handcuff its self to a certain age demographic and for the most part seems to understand that it doesn’t rely on attendances that are significant, albeit it being able to attract significant attendances would be preferable. I would also hazard a guess that a decent % of young people might not crap on the product and refer to in the way fans do. On top of that I feel the idea young people wouldn’t attend stadia due to the state of them a slight fallacy given the utter dumps presented in other sports, although other sports position them as retro, which actually appeals to certain % young folks now a days who think of themselves as hipsters etc for showing in an interest in such things. The days of the stereotype of stroppy, uninterested gothic teenager died out about 15 years ago which shows why folks should attempt to asses, judge and speak on behalf of young people, given most who attempt to do so, and in particular on here, are not that young.

Who has a problem? Given you said the above about getting rid of programmes all together I thought your point was that you wanted to get rid of programmes all together, with the removal of programmes all together fans wouldn't have the choice to buy a programme, or at least that is my understanding of what would happen if you got rid of programmes - and thus if you don't actually want to get rid of programmes all together it seems odd to engage in a conversation about getting rid of programmes all together or making the point that you would want get rid of programmes all together, despite your point being that you actually don't want to get rid of programmes all together.... A roundabout of nonsense.

I find your logic quite flawed, it appears you wish for a bespoke service tailored entirely to what you want, and in doing so want clubs to abolish a revenue stream (programmes) for no apparent reason other than you not being a fan of them? You want the Star to include race card insert. I buy the star but have no interest in that, and I assume many others wouldn’t either? What use is it to me? (same as a programme to you and thus it is ok to poo poo it?) A bit of paper I can print out for free on the internet? That sounds like a way to intentionally dent subscriptions rather than increase them. An overhead the Star would be paying that would be of use to a minimal % of subscribers, blank paper....wow. That is before considering a lot of fans who attend speedway are probably not that fussed for the Star because they don’t support speedway as such, they support the club and track they are attending and want to support that club by buying a programme from them. If they do that the money goes to that club, unlike if they buy a speedway star for a race card, where the money doesn’t go to the club. Or are they are a new fan stuck with an A4 bit of paper with adverts and no info, or having to buy an entire magazine to get a empty race card that they have to fill out every name in, every field, of that bit of paper for an entire meeting and read about other clubs rather than the track they are attending, that is a pretty rank first time experience. I say this without a hint of aggression by the way, and I am simply saying it as part of an engaged discussion, but these ideas sound absolutely terrible, it is removing choice and variety for very little return and actually consciously cutting revenue streams

The option of all 3 being what sorry? It reads like you are saying it would be nice to have the option to buy a programme, buy a speedway star and print out an A4 race card, an option that already exists.

People don’t need a running commentary from you every time a Poole fan comments on this forum, because when you do that all you are doing is "taking over a thread" - most are capable of reading and making their opinion re what they think of posters. To talk about the actual topic of the thread though…. (Jesus Christ how many times does that have to be said on this thread) If Swindon lose B Andersen it looks grim re their Play Off chances as it hinges on him turning up and performing IMO. If he performs they will likely be a horrid team to race as sides will struggle to get away from them purely through lack of heat advantages thanks to Doyle generally winning 3/4 races a meeting and Morris, Ellis and Bellego winning 2/3 races between them a meeting, it then wouldn’t take much from B Andersen to turn tight meetings in their favour. Without them though and carrying a bottom 3, there is just a real lack points in the lower order.

No one has been even remotely aggressive with you.

Far less advertising space, no bespoke full page adverts. I would also add that while you are evidently not a fan of a programme there's clearly a market that is, and they do sell, so thus discontinuing a product that generates revenue would just be bad business sense.

Why? That doesn’t even begin to make sense, there is a market for programmes, people buy them, they generate income.

Probably about the same number of people that buy it now. I wouldn’t buy Knitting Weekly if they reduced it to 20p because I don’t care about knitting.. If clubs sell even 200 programmes a meeting at an average of £2.00, across a year that is the best part of £7,000.00 a season. I would imagine most smaller businesses would notice that as a missed revenue stream rather than meaning either a business, or speedway club is broke as a dependence on such income.

Because there looks to be an unwritten regulation/gentleman’s agreement in relation to “top riders” and the working of the points limit was the best way to freeze many of them out without breeching employment laws? While those who did or do decide to sign top riders are going to be punished for doing so – see Swindon and Doyle.

I am very much of the belief that the Somerset promotion have validated their team building ability through the years. They have credit in the bank when it comes to that particular skill set. They also have a trend of building sides that tend to surpass expectations, albeit that might be skewed slightly this season as the expectation set is likely to be lower, and naturally so given they are the new boys. That is a side that fans of the club can identify with, and that fans will afford time to due to their achievements in the season just gone – that will ultimately be more important than a Peterborough (maybe, probably, who knows) and an Ipswich fan (Poole loather) partaking in dick swinging contents and on a forum. As an aside, it humours me slightly seeing how many people still cannot get their head around the fact that next season is not the Elite League, that product is dead. I am seeing observations where Graversen is being mocked as a signing, and don’t get me wrong any other season he should be, but when the mocking is coming from sides with reserves the standard of Shanes it comes across a bit like people living in glass houses who shouldn’t be throwing stones (that is not meant as a slight on Shanes).

Many would argue the case that even when he performs Klindt is a disappointment, very bland and a betting man’s nightmare but still likely to gate his way to points. Albeit to slightly counter even my own point the watered down product doesn’t overly impact him per se – I was just about to argue the point that he will easily oust the likes of Perks, Branford, but if they lead him out the first turn they will just as likely beat Klindt as he will do the same to even the likes of Lindgren if he leads him. Klindt is a weirdo, but even he can't weird up scoring points from reserve.

A changed question this year when compared to most, average retention will be a higher reward to most sides rather than average improvement in the Elite Lea….*edit* - very few will actually improve their averages in the Premiership. The side with the most riders on averages of value looks to be Poole – Kurtz (if he signs) will become a top 5/8 average rider in the league, Klindt will score far, far more than his average suggests something that very few will do and Kasparzak looks the best big value average.

I find some of the logic applied in this post slightly off and several points are moot in relation to next season. The structure of the Glasgow side last season is obviously different to the side they will have next year, but that logic applies to every side in the league due to the drop in points limit that has watered down the product across the board, rather than just the Glasgow side. If the change made at Glasgow as a result of that watering down is Bewley out/Bach in, it has probably left them in a better position than most sides compared to their 2016 versions, that would be one point I found harsh. A second would be the reference to the scoring of Lunna and his position in the side – 2 last year, where he scored well at home last season is probably tougher than 4 next season as the majority of sides now have 2 weak reserves (in relation to the ability and talent of Lunna) rather than the 1 last year and many sides have what was previously reserve level riders in their middle order – see a side like Workington as an example of this. I would also say that Lunna irrespective of the number on his back still had to, and did, beat a lot of riders at Glasgow, there is little to suggest that will change. In previous years Glasgow’s side would have been considered to heavy (but also several points below the points limit which would have just been bad team building) but next season there bottom end is probably stronger than most bottom ends (as everyone has to work to a lower points limit) because in previous seasons other sides in the league would be considered top heavy if they had tracked the same 1-7 e.g Newcastle, but just points below the limit. The limit has changed, what is seen as strength in a side has changed as well.

Surely it is just a simple process of elimination when it comes to Skornicki? While he has had time away from the sport I don’t believe he will have regressed to a point that renders him incapable of beating riders like Kerr, Bjerre (L), Robson, Bellego, Grondal – all of whom have been signed in comparable positions to him, or have been asked to perform a similar role in their respective side – that is what Wolves will be using as the water mark surely, not how good he was 10 years ago A signing that could turn out to be inspired in the new league format.