Structure

[TonyM 0]

Speedway is improved when there is a close proximiting between the standard of riders competing.  Therefore any structure must seek to maximise competition levels whilst also allowing for development of new talent.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

TOTALLY agree

 

 

All interested parties must work in harmony.  By continually making life difficult for each other nothing will ever be achieved.  Therefore any structure must seek to minimise any conflicts.  And yes the gp series should contribute towards rider development as without new talent coming through it could never prosper.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Don't get me started, I'm in enough trouble with Tsunami already

 

I assume domestic speedway will benefit from a higher profile gp series but at the same time realise that this is not a given and therefore feel any domestic structure must be able to exist within it's means.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Hopefully, but history would suggest otherwise

 

 

Enotian, some good ideas but perhaps a little too drastic and unworkable for the foreseeable future

 

Whilst a European league works well in some sports, football and rugby have almost reached this point, these are sports with large player bases to draw from and where there are strong domestic league structures. Speedway both nationally and internationally has a much greater ability gap spread over far fewer participants. In reality a sixteen team league with 7-10 man squads would require 112-160 riders and IMO the gap between a rider ranked in the top 20 is massive to a rider ranked in the 80-100 range let alone 150+

 

I would encourage / accommodate the top riders to ride in all the top leagues throughout the speedway world and have sensible structures underneath these leagues to develop national talent. If we look at ‘rider pools’ rather than any existing structure IMO the UK should have a top league with about 6 teams – these could justifiably be termed Elite, made up of the GP riders, ‘top’ overseas riders and doubling up riders from the next tier down. 6 teams needs 42-60 riders and with this number most riders would be competitive

 

I would follow this structure down which would look something like this:

 

Division 1 – 6 teams – 42-60 riders, GP riders, overseas riders and riders doubling up from div 2

 

Division 2 – 10 teams – 49-70 riders, no GP riders, top riders to double up into division 1 sides, lower order riders doubling down with division 3 sides

 

Division 3 – 10 teams – 49-70 riders, top riders to double up with division 2 clubs lower order riders doubling down with division 4 sides

 

Division 4 – however many sides (hopefully 20+) split regionally with a national playoff system at the end of season

 

The reason divisions 1 and 2 can both live with 10 clubs is that riders would probably ride in more than one national league (as with the current EL) whereas division 2 sides would probably have more national based (though not exclusively British) riders. Division 4 would have a British only focus similar to the current CL

 

IMO the above structure (and reduced fixtures for any individual side) should encourage more tracks to run multiple sides to get a similar number of fixtures in a season whilst those clubs that rent stadiums may say fewer more evenly matched meetings are what they are looking for

 

Riders would ‘have’ to double up to get their required number of fixtures and this would allow riders to move up the scale in a less risky fashion than at present

[enotian 565]

I still also think there would be a lot of mismatches in the regional leagues, as there were the last time there was one big league.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The last time there was one big league it contained all the top (now known as gp) riders and matched them against young 16 year only novices.

 

With a domestic league pitched at Premier League level I'd imagine the top riders would be the likes of Joe Screen, Gary Havelock who although still great riders are no longer at the level of the big gp stars and you couldn't fit them all into one team. Plus an amalgamated promoting company would see no merit in tracking sides which couldn't compete.

 

 

 

 

I'd argue that a league competition has more potential. Football is the most widely watched sport in the world, and that's entirely based around team competition.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yes but there is a football team in every town around the world more or less. It's a bit extreme in the North East but the Diamonds would find it very difficult to attract non speedway fans from Sunderland (it's only 10 miles away) as they just wouldn't want to support a Newcastle team.

 

That's the limitation of domestic leagues in terms of attracting a new audience. Even in football there are maybe less than 10 clubs which have global brands meaning they attract supporters from different geographical areas.

 

I see markets such as Italy and Spain and Asia as key development areas. They all seem to have a healthy interest in motorsports so why not speedway. As I keep saying it's the best one!

 

But with all the will in the world how are you going to sell Eastbourne vs Peterborough the Japanese public? You'd even struggle with Wroclaw v Luxo Stars it just doesn't mean as much to a wider audience.

 

Sure an expanded gp series wouldn't feature a Malaysian or even Spanish rider but whose to say it wouldn't in the future. Speedway does not appear to be as expensive to get into compared to many other motorsports and it's something the gp organisers should try to develop. I'm sure they'd love to focus alot more on Antonio Lindback's Brazilian heritage to give the sport a higher profile in South America.

 

An important point is that we all now live in a global market place like it or not. All the big companies have to expand globally to grow otherwise they get chewed up by overseas competitors. It's this global market place that the majority the big sponsorship deals go to events shown around the world.

 

At the moment speedway will find it hard to find attract global companies because it only reaches Poland, Scandanavia and Britain.

 

Anyway don't worry cos it'll never happen. There's nobody with the vision or expertise to market the sport to the level it deserves.

 

I suppose well just carry on conceeding that whoever makes the gate wins and be happy to be the poor relations of motorsport because the others have better PR and image rights to obscure their failings.

 

 

e

[enotian 565]

In reality a sixteen team league with 7-10 man squads would require 112-160 riders and IMO the gap between a rider ranked in the top 20 is massive to a rider ranked in the 80-100 range let alone 150+

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Part of my idea would be to run the euroleague in a four team tournament format meaning the minimum number of riders required would be 64. (16 teams 4 riders per team). These would be the feature riders anyway. Obviously there'd have to be squads to cover at reserve and the inevitable injuries to avoid having the dreaded guest facility. Say 3 more per squad although I wouldn't put a limit on it but based on average you'd be unlucky to have more than two riders injured at one time. It's hard to say but if we do say another 3*16 riders that takes you up to 112.

 

The current Elite league has possibly 90 riders in comparison so on that basis yes there might be a wider range of abilities and the euroleague might even have a lower standard but remember you'd be picking from a larger pool of riders. The likes of Gollob, Hampel & Holta would be involved not sure about Rickardsson. Plus some riders like Walaszek are genuine star men in there home countries despite never hitting the heights in Britain. And I'm sure the Polish teams at least would make up there squads with young talents like Kolodeij who haven't yet arrived in British speedway (except a spell at Reading I think?). Perhaps you could have a bit of fun allocating actual riders to euroleague teams just to illustrate the standard of the lower ends.

 

I do feel that smaller leagues do lack a degree of variety but yes it is a trade off between the two.

 

I also feel the 4 team format for the euroleague would allow a greater chance of blanket TV coverage. A total of 80 matches across say 8 countries. I'm sure Sky could cover all 20 matches held on British soil while other TV companies would hold the rights in the other countries meaning each match could be covered or at least recorded if not shown live. There'd be an archieve of all matches so in the event of a live match being abandoned a recently recorded fixture which hadn't been shown live in this country but may feature a British team could be shown in its place.

 

And you could also package together a highlights show to keep the viewers right up to date with the league positions which I believe is being discussed on another thread.

[Kevin Meynell 2]

Whilst a European league works well in some sports, football and rugby have almost reached this point, these are sports with large player bases to draw from and where there are strong domestic league structures.

 

I think that speedway is arguably better suited to a European League than many other sports. Riders are already paid to travel across the continent to different competitions each week, so it shouldn't be much of a step from that to an organised league.

 

In reality a sixteen team league with 7-10 man squads would require 112-160 riders and IMO the gap between a rider ranked in the top 20 is massive to a rider ranked in the 80-100 range let alone 150+

 

I don't think a 16-team league could be supported at the moment, but a 12-team league should certainly be possible. If you add-up the numbers in the BEL, Polish Extra League and Swedish Elite League, then it comes to about 100 riders.

 

IMO the UK should have a top league with about 6 teams

 

The problem is that it's too few teams to form a viable league unless you have an unacceptable level of repetition. Some have suggested that some tracks run a handful of fixtures in an 'elite' league, and then make-up the rest of the fixtures in a lower-level league.

 

Unfortunately, I think such an approach would be disasterous because it would create a perceived inferior level of competition. Casual fans would simply focus on the 'elite' meetings and ignore the rest.

 

IMO the above structure (and reduced fixtures for any individual side) should encourage more tracks to run multiple sides

 

I don't think that tracks running multiple teams is a viable model in the long-term. If you run the majority of fixtures at a particular level, you create continuity and fans will tend to turn-up most weeks. As soon as you start running at different levels, fans will just start to pick and choose their meetings.

 

Whilst the commitment of some BEL and BPL tracks to running BCL teams should be applauded, I suspect it's financially disasterous in most cases. That's why so many tracks are dropping their second teams.

[Kevin Meynell 2]

It's a bit extreme in the North East but the Diamonds would find it very difficult to attract non speedway fans from Sunderland (it's only 10 miles away) as they just wouldn't want to support a Newcastle team.

 

Okay, but that's a somewhat unique situation to the North-East. There are many Man Utd and (nowadays) Chelsea fans who are not local to those teams.

 

I'd agree that speedway doesn't tend to have any 'glamour' sides that fans from the other side of the country will support, but some teams do have regional support. For example, Oxford gets support from Buckinghamshire and West London.

 

At the same time, I think most interest in the SGP is because fans identify with riders from their teams. I personally find it very hard to identify with any individual sport unless the participants have some sort of local connection.

 

I see markets such as Italy and Spain and Asia as key development areas.

 

Why on earth is there this obsession with trying to break into markets that have no history of speedway (with the possible exception of Italy)? I'd rather focus efforts on raising the profile of the sport in its core markets, or at least the countries where there's some supporters to start with. When the sport is No.1 or No.2 in these countries, that's the time to try and expand.

 

At the moment speedway will find it hard to find attract global companies because it only reaches Poland, Scandanavia and Britain.

 

These countries still collectively represent a big market (125 million). Global companies don't want anything to do with the sport because it's run so amateurishly, and also because it's perceived as somewhat 'down-at-heel'.

 

Rugby League is essentially only played in two counties of England, and a couple of Australian states, yet it does much better than speedway in terms of television and sponsorship money. It's far more that speedway needs to get its act together, than a lack of a market.

Edited November 4, 2005 by Kevin Meynell

[Kevin Meynell 2]

Part of my idea would be to run the euroleague in a four team tournament format

 

Again, I like the idea of a European League, but I feel that teams need to run it exclusively, or not at all. It comes back to my earlier point about how fans would perceive the different levels of competition.

 

With respect to the actual league format, 4TTs are fine for the odd cup competition, but they're unsuitable for an extended league programme. The fact that teams only ride 25% of their matches at home would be disasterous for cash flow, unless of course the leagues were funded through television or sponsorship.

[AndyM 1]

Why on earth is there this obsession with trying to break into markets that have no history of speedway (with the possible exception of Italy)? I'd rather focus efforts on raising the profile of the sport in its core markets, or at least the countries where there's some supporters to start with.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The two are not mutually exclusive. If there is interest in other countries, it should be encouraged by the wider speedway fraternity. But it's still the job of the BSPA to get its own house in order in the UK, SVEMO in Sweden etc.

 

Or did you think the BSPA might move to expand its own territories by admitting clubs from elsewhere - how about Ireland, France and Italy so we can emulate RU!!

[Trees 2,814]

I wonder if SKY would be interested in televising a six match European Champions tournament between the winners of the three main leagues, of course the trouble starts when the same riders ride for each team! Would it capture the fans imaginations? Were the three teams equal in strength?

[TonyM 0]

The problem is that it's too few teams to form a viable league unless you have an unacceptable level of repetition. Some have suggested that some tracks run a handful of fixtures in an 'elite' league, and then make-up the rest of the fixtures in a lower-level league.

 

Unfortunately, I think such an approach would be disasterous because it would create a perceived inferior level of competition. Casual fans would simply focus on the 'elite' meetings and ignore the rest.

 

I don't think that tracks running multiple teams is a viable model in the long-term. If you run the majority of fixtures at a particular level, you create continuity and fans will tend to turn-up most weeks. As soon as you start running at different levels, fans will just start to pick and choose their meetings.

 

Whilst the commitment of some BEL and BPL tracks to running BCL teams should be applauded, I suspect it's financially disasterous in most cases. That's why so many tracks are dropping their second teams.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Sorry Kevin but I didnt foresee any repetition for the top league - just 5 home league fixtures (and personally no cup competition either). This would allow those with 'other' committments to fully commit to this short but hopefully intense competition

 

Fair point about teams tracking two different grade sides but I would take the opposite view, a fan base is a fickle thing and I would suggest there are a number of tracks where 'casual' fans already 'pick and choose' their meetings particularly in the PL which has way too many fixtures. If there are fewer meetings at the higher level I would think a viable number would support the lower level (with lower cost base) side as well and the higher level would be the 'flagship' level to get casual fans into the sport

 

If the balance of the lower leagues is set right there should be just as much competitive racing down the structure for those less casual fans (dont want to open the whole EL vs PL vs CL debate but good speedway meetings tend to be more of a result of equally matched riders than of their respective grades)

[Kevin Meynell 2]

The two are not mutually exclusive.

 

I completely agree, but expansionist plans can be distracting and can divert resources from where they should be spent. These days, so many companies over-expand and end-up neglecting their core business.

 

Or did you think the BSPA might move to expand its own territories by admitting clubs from elsewhere - how about Ireland, France and Italy so we can emulate RU!!

 

If I were the BSPA, I'd form a European-wide body with the Polish and Swedish clubs (possibly also the Danish clubs) along the lines of the G14. This should initially coordinate the national league systems to avoid fixture clashes and double-booked riders, but it should also collectively promote speedway. In the longer-term, it could perhaps run its own competitions (e.g. a European League or Cup).

 

However, the main reason for forming such a body (let's call it the G3) would be to put pressure on the FIM. I don't necessarily advocate a split from the FIM, but the countries that employ most of the riders in the sport should have far more say over how it's run. I'd envisage a situation like F1 where the teams got almost total control over the World Championship, albeit nominally still under the banner of the FIA. In particular, it's somewhat scandalous how the SGP was practically given away to a private company, with the national leagues deriving little or no benefit from it.

 

I appreciate the national promoting bodies probably lack the wherewithal to actually run the SGP themselves, but that's what should be happening. BSI have something like an 18-year contract which complicates things, but if the G3 collectively refused to employ any SGP riders, the SGP would effectively cease to exist. If the FIM still failed to see reason, then the G3 should consider breaking away from the FIM and run their own world championship.

 

Incidentally, it's not just about the SGP, but also all the other mickey mouse competitions (e.g. European championships) that keep being created.

Edited November 4, 2005 by Kevin Meynell

[AndyM 1]

Wholly in favour. It would add interest to the domestic programme, which in the case of EL is verging on boring when you're up against the same teams and riders repeatedly, without excessive disruption. If successful, it couild be expanded and hopefully we'll eventually reach the stage where there is a genuine European superleague. As for the economic viability, with riders travelling around Europe already it wouldn't necessarily make that much difference - if organised effectively. Much more productive to have the leagues collaborating than in virtual competition and conflict, as we currently have.

[Kevin Meynell 2]

I would suggest there are a number of tracks where 'casual' fans already 'pick and choose' their meetings particularly in the PL which has way too many fixtures.

 

I'd agree there are far too many fixtures at BPL level. The CS was arguably a competition too far in the BEL as well, although it was good from Oxford's perspective!

 

I was looking at some old yearbooks, and National League tracks used to only ride about 30-34 meetings per season, whereas British League tracks rode close to 40-50 on average. Now it's almost the opposite!

 

If the balance of the lower leagues is set right there should be just as much competitive racing down the structure for those less casual fans

 

I completely agree, although I think three tiers would be more than enough. There are around 27-28 tracks now, so that's an average of 9 standalone teams per level. If you went the Euroleague route, I'd anticipate 4 or 5 British tracks riding in that, so a two-tier approach (2 x 12 teams) would be appropriate for the remaining teams.

 

I can also envisage an additional competition for second teams run in a second-half format, but I wouldn't really consider this to be a true fourth tier.

[AndyM 1]

Just thinking ahead - this might help force the UK to adopt squad system and more home grown riders in reserve positions. After all, it might be embarrassing for the system if a rider was scheduled to ride for two teams in the same competition, but we only had guest or RR facilities to substititute!

[Kevin Meynell 2]

Much more productive to have the leagues collaborating than in virtual competition and conflict, as we currently have.

 

Much historical context can be drawn from the conflicts between the major baseball leagues in the early-20th century. Their initial approach was to directly compete with each other for players, and against each other within cities. This proved to be ruinous all round, so they sensibly came-up with a cooperative agreement which still governs the sport (including the minor league system) today.

Edited November 4, 2005 by Kevin Meynell

[enotian 565]

Again, I like the idea of a European League, but I feel that teams need to run it exclusively, or not at all. It comes back to my earlier point about how fans would perceive the different levels of competition.

 

With respect to the actual league format, 4TTs are fine for the odd cup competition, but they're unsuitable for an extended league programme. The fact that teams only ride 25% of their matches at home would be disasterous for cash flow, unless of course the leagues were funded through television or sponsorship.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

How would it be disasterous for cash flow?

 

Say you're the euroleague promoter for Wolverhampton. You'd arrange to hire Monmore Green on 5 dates. You wouldn't need a season long lease with the landlord because you only want to run 5 meetings. (You might even only need to deal with the domestic league promoters depending on their lease)

 

Whoever you contract with it will be additional revenue for use of their asset so I'm sure they'd be willing to allow the lions share of the rent to be paid after each meeting.

 

Then you'd have ticket sales and race night payments being made at roughly the same time.

 

I'm confident those 3 main cash flows would be manageable.

 

I don't think there'd be any other major payments required.

 

It's just like running a club night. You agree to hire a club pay a deposit arrange for dj's who you pay on the night when you've received your money at the door then settle up with the venue owner. It's quite simple really, that's how bits of kids manage to do it all over the country. Of course you need to promote it aswell but speedway is really good at th....... nevermind.

 

 

e