Gambo

Slightly off topic, but relevant to Barry, I would like to thank him for his 'attendance' at last week's Nuneaton SSC talk in. Barry was due to appear in person but had a late change of plans with a business trip to Thailand (or Phillipines?), but still took part via a video link/facetime despite the fact that it was 3:00 am in Asia. He was on-line for quite a while and gave quite detailed responses to questions and didn't seem in a hurry to get some shuteye! Thanks Barry.

Probably with a pen?

I don't, who are they then?

It's quite simple really.....the Referee would start the timer with the tapes button and the transponder would stop the timing when it crosses the line.

It's first past the post, not who did the fastest time, although logically in most cases, that is the same person. Otherwise you could have a rider deliberately missing the gate by a few second to give himself a free run around at the back in a faster time than the rider who crosses the line first?

There is a Regulation that states a minimum time period (1 I/2 seconds?) between the Green Light and Tapes up. There is also a Regulation that the riders must remain still at the start. So if Referee sees a rider moving/rolling he has every right to delay the start until all 4 are stationary.

Heats 1-42 are technically just qualifiers for the Final. 2nd and 3rd placed teams (After 42 Heats) race off in Heat 43 to see who faces 1st placed team in Heat 44 for the Title. If Heat 43 is a draw (3-3) riders finishing 2nd and 3rd go through to the Final.

The new regulations are:- If the Grand Final heat 44 ends in a 3-3 then there will be a Run off with one rider from each nation nominated by the team manager to race off for the SoN world championship.

Ah, so Free Practice becomes a slow bicycle race!

The considered opinion is that Rev Limiters only have any effect at the start. Back in my days as a 17 year old owner of a Triumph Tiger Cub, we had a rev limiter! Only it was just called a throttle in those days!

A brilliant tactical point, but.... Zmarzlik would have to make sure he has next pick to be sure to get the better gate. With timing down to hundredths of a second, how will he know what time to beat, and to achieve? What if his run is before Tai's?

Only the Rider drawn at No.1 gets 5 starts after the track grade, but he does get two starts off the I/S gate.

League matches only for Green Sheets.

He needs one more Home League match. BV first Home League match is 29th April, and with the cut off being 23rd April, I don’t think his average would actually change until 6th May. He would do 3 away League matches prior to 6th May.

Maybe it was better than naming them just Group A and Group B?

Agreed, and/or the Start Marshall. But the referee just applied the rules.

Jobsworth? Or a referee consistent in applying the rules?

I'm sure that using UK version last year in an FIM QR abroad, cost Dan Bewley a race win?

Be careful what you wish for! There are thousands of Coventry, Workington, Rye House etc, fans who wish that this rider switching saga was all they had to worry about at this time.

I doubt that the present owners would still be the owners if (and hopefully when) their lucrative plans were rejected. I believe that here have already been offers from motor sports oriented people to purchase the stadium, which would still give the current owners a substantial profit on their 'investment'.

The Save Coventry campaign has had promises from a large number of people/companies/tradespeople to help restore the stadium, as well as financial support for the work involved.

January Update: OUR first meeting of 2019 saw members of the Campaign Group back at Rugby Council offices on January 9.Attending the meeting were the Leader of Rugby Council Michael Stokes; the new Head of Growth and Investment Stephanie Chettle-Gibrat; the Development and Enforcement Manager Nick Freer; and the Principal Planning Officer dealing with the Brandon Estates application, Erica Buchanan.One of the main reasons for the meeting was to take the officers through our latest document to be submitted.Given the volume of material which has been generated over the last two years, and especially since the planning application, we have pulled much of it together – and also included new information – into a single document summarising the errors and untruths contained within the planning material submitted by Framptons. Unsurprisingly, this is once again a hefty document!Those who were present at our Public Meeting last November will recall Cllr Stokes’ announcement that an independent consultant was to be appointed, at considerable expense to the Council, in order to go through the material from all sides and provide an informed response from within the sporting sector.We warmly welcomed that news as we are 100 per cent confident that the information we have submitted, which is accompanied by clear and indisputable evidence rather than vague jargon, will stand up to examination.Supporters are reminded that Framptons/Brandon Estates are attempting to make the case that Brandon Stadium closed down due to the non-viability of running speedway and stock cars (which had successfully run together for over 60 years); and that sufficient alternative venues exist elsewhere in the Midlands to ensure there is no ongoing need for either a return to Brandon or for an alternative site to be provided in the Coventry/Rugby area.We believe their application and follow-up material are totally non-compliant with National Planning Policy Framework regarding open space, sport and recreation facilities, and we welcome the fact that they will be subject to outside scrutiny.The independent consultant has now been appointed, and we already have a meeting scheduled with him for later this month.As to the question of when the planning application will go to committee, we can say that it is not currently imminent for two reasons.Firstly, it clearly cannot happen until the independent consultant has completed his report, and although this extends the time period we see the appointment as a positive step and proof of how seriously the Council take the matter.Secondly, the final Local Plan report from the Government Inspector had not been received as of last Wednesday, and another pledge from Cllr Stokes at the Public Meeting was that the application would not be heard until this has been completed.So although we do appreciate the frustration that this process has so far taken nearly a year from the submission of the application, we urge supporters to be patient – and we can assure them that we have options in mind to react to several potential scenarios in future.Once again our thanks are due to the senior members of the Council for making the time to meet with us, and fully engaging with what we had to say.As ever, we will endeavour to update supporters whenever possible as matters develop over the coming weeks and months.

GP Riders have had the opportunity to test rev-limiters for some time now, although I believe only a few have been bothered to test them.

THE Save Coventry Speedway & Stox Campaign Group send their compliments of the festive season to all supporters. As we head towards a third year in which our sports will be absent from their rightful place, we want to assure everyone that our determination to see them return remains as high as ever. There have been few formal developments since the Public Meeting in early November, but we have remained active and can confirm Rugby Council are now in receipt of even more information to counter the statements made by Framptons on behalf of Brandon Estates. The Planning Application for Brandon Stadium was submitted in January 2018 but a date has still yet to be set for it to be taken to committee. This will not take place until the completion of the government Inspector’s Report into the Rugby Local Plan (which we believe is imminent), or until the Council have received specialist sporting advice regarding the application itself and the myriad of responses opposing it. We remain totally convinced that the Planning Application is intrinsically flawed as it fails to satisfy the criteria required for the development of established sporting venues under National Planning Policy Framework. Framptons were required to submit further information making the case that there is no ongoing need for the two sports to be operating at Brandon (or in the immediate area). This was finally submitted after a five-month delay, and we made our views very clear both in our response to the Council and in our presentation at the Public Meeting. Since then, it has been confirmed that there will be no Coventry Speedway team competing next season, giving a final answer to the ludicrous claims that the club was perfectly well accommodated at Leicester. The stock car analysis was equally controversial, and we have submitted aerial photographs of all of the venues which Framptons claim could be alternatives to Brandon, which totally disproves their ‘desk-top analysis’ which contains very little in the way of actual evidence. Additionally, if you were at the Public Meeting you will remember the case of Perry Barr, which is listed in Framptons’ covering letter to their Needs Analysis as a possible alternative venue, on the basis that it stages “similar kinds of uses.” That statement is incredible enough if you know Perry Barr, but even more extraordinarily the stadium is then included in a list of current, active stock car venues during the content of the Needs Analysis, leading to a completely inaccurate mathematical exercise over the total number of venues. In addition to the responses which had already been submitted pointing out the fallacies of these statements, we have now been able to submit the actual planning documentation from Birmingham City Council granting permission for speedway to be staged at the stadium from 2007. This makes it quite clear that no motorsport with the exception of speedway can be staged at the venue. In our view it is totally unacceptable that a Planning Application and associated documents seeking to destroy an iconic, successful and viable sporting venue, where there is a clear case of ongoing need, can be so disgracefully deficient. There have been numerous other responses to the Needs Assessment, including from both the speedway (BSPA) and stock car (BRISCA and BSCDA) governing bodies, all of which highlight the inaccuracies and untruths contained within, and stress the importance of Brandon to their sports. Framptons have also been forced to withdraw a section of the report relating to Coventry Racing Club and the negotiations which did or did not take place in 2016, and this also has an impact on the Turley (viability) report submitted in January which made the same incorrect assertion. It is the belief of the Campaign Group that both the original Planning Application and the subsequent Needs Assessment documents are absolutely riddled with inaccurate, misleading and untruthful statements, and we have therefore considered making a formal complaint to the Royal Town Planning Institute under Sections 11 (Accuracy) and 12 (Errors and mis-statements) of their Ethics and Professional Standards Advice document. We have decided however, as Rugby Council have committed to the appointment of an independent body to look into the various claims and our response to those claims, we will defer a decision until the independent body completes their investigation. We already have meetings confirmed for the early part of the New Year where we will be seeking assurances over the exact process going forward. We will be ready for any situation and can assure Framptons and Brandon Estates that our opposition will only increase until they do the right thing and agree that the sports should be allowed to return. We do ask all supporters to stay as positive as possible – we have a huge amount of firm evidence in our favour, and we will keep fighting for as long as it takes. The Campaign Group wishes you all a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year, and please be assured we will update you as soon as there is further news. *FOLLOWING the news that Coventry Bees would not be racing in 2019, we were asked by the Coventry Telegraph on December 4 to provide a statement. As only half of that statement was printed, we now reproduce it in full: We stated when the Bees were accepted into the National League, running at Leicester, that we could only offer our full support if we could be convinced that this was part of a genuine plan for the club to eventually return to its rightful location. It is patently obvious from the most recent planning documentation that the developers were happy to regard Leicester as an appropriate long-term solution, in an attempt to absolve them of any responsibility to provide an alternative in the Coventry/Rugby area should they receive permission to build on Brandon. Although the club has issued no statement, the Bees have not been included in the list of National League starters for 2019, which will be largely down to the poor attendances and associated losses suffered this year – none of which comes as any surprise, and does not lessen the demand for speedway or stock car racing in the area. This totally invalidates the representations of Framptons, who argued in their initial application in January that Leicester was “better suited to its use as a speedway stadium for a number of reasons including its accessibility...” and their subsequent remarks claiming that alternative provision for the previous speedway use at Brandon had been satisfactorily made, along with their inaccurate analysis of alternative stadia for both sports. The failure of the Coventry Bees project at Leicester merely highlights the totally unsatisfactory nature of that solution, and the clear ongoing need for the club to be operating in the Coventry/Rugby area. The Planning Application continues to directly contradict the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework with regard to sports facilities, and the developers must not be permitted to proceed on that basis. The absence of Coventry from competition in 2019 in no way changes that position. ENDS

I presume you mean Brandon Estates?