2004 Permanent Wildcards Announced

[Star Lady 5,400]

I realise that Kevin but I'm an optimist. The contract option would be good too if it contracts to invisible especially if BSI are going to play god with nominating riders.

[Jeff. 2]

I'm with you too Bryn.

The World Champion is supposed to be the best rider of any particular year. That can never be said if ALL riders are not give the chance to qualify.

My thoughts are that choosing GP riders is maybe the first step to a whole GP circus with riders solely competing in that competition, well I can live in hope

 

Ever since I can remember most fans were saying how much fairer it would be to have a World Championship decided on a GP basis rather than a one off like existed at the time. Now we have the fairest possible method of deciding a Champion and people are still not happy.

 

Star Lady how do you suggest that the qualifying events and the actual competition take place over the same season? It is not possible to race a season of qualifying stages for a tournament that started 6 months ago. I am interested in which Grand Prix Champion you feel was unjust, or as you put it "not the best rider of the year". Of course one off's always produced a genuine Champ, Szackiel, Muller, Havelock to name 3.

 

Have the people who criticise BSI and Sky ever stopped to think where speedway might be today without them, 6 or 7 years ago speedway was looking dead and buried but now the slide seems to have been halted and even a marginal improvement in support seems to have occured, I suppose this is just coincidence.

[Kevin Meynell 2]

Now we have the fairest possible method of deciding a Champion and people are still not happy.

 

I don't object the GP system per se. My objections are because the SGP doesn't attempt to coexist with the national leagues who still provide the bulk of rider incomes, because I don't believe that the SGP has a sustainable financial model, and because the competitors are no longer selected on merit.

 

Have the people who criticise BSI and Sky ever stopped to think where speedway might be today without them

 

Pretty much in the same state as now, but without all the disruption. Yes, BSI have taken GPs to the odd large stadium and got a couple of 30,000 attendances (although most don't draw more than 10,000), but what does this mean for domestic competitions? How many fans has it actually added to attendances, or how much extra revenue has it generated for local tracks increased? Very little I'd suggest, and in the meantime, BSI shareholders are taking money out of the sport that's unlikely to ever find its way back.

 

Now I don't actually have anything against BSI for trying to run a profitable enterprise, but few enterprises expect to get their raw materials (i.e. riders) for nothing, be subsidised by their franchises, and still be allowed to undermine their suppliers' businesses. Of course, when the suppliers have all gone out of business and there are no longer any raw materials left, BSI can get out and move to another industry, leaving behind a dead landscape.

 

Until BSI are prepared to properly fund the SGP and become the riders' main source of income, I'm afraid the national leagues should not lay down and be ridden over roughshod. This said, if the likes of the BSPA had done their jobs properly years ago, there wouldn't have been any scope for the likes of BSI to come along and effectively hijack the sport. The likes of the SGP and SWC should be run by speedway promoters, not corporate entertainment companies.

[fatface 2,554]

You are bang on Jeff. The pros of the current format far outweigh the cons. There hasn't even been a year yet where somebody who hasn't been able to qualify for that year's GPs could realistically expect to get in the top 10, never mind win it.

 

It never ceases to amaze me the criticism Sky and BSI recieve on the forum. Even when the sport was in its heyday, live coverage was a rarity. Now we have national live coverage of all World Championship events and weekly league racing. At the start of the 90s, I reckon you would have got bloody long odds on that happening.

[Jeff. 2]

Kevin even before BSI the FIM got the riders for World Championship events for free and even if the rewards for GPs are not of Formula 1 proportions they are still better than the rewards for winning the old World Final. You say that without Sky and BSI things would be much the same anyway. Obviously it is total conjecture but I doubt that very much, In fact I would question whether there would be any form of top class speedway at all. I know of many new fans who have been attracted, or had their interest re-kindled, by speedway on TV.

[fatface 2,554]

Yes, BSI have taken GPs to the odd large stadium and got a couple of 30,000 attendances (although most don't draw more than 10,000), but what does this mean for domestic competitions? How many fans has it actually added to attendances, or how much extra revenue has it generated for local tracks increased?

 

I do think this idea that BSI, SKY and the GPs has done nothing to increase interest in Britain really ought to be put to bed. I've done some research, here's what I've come up with:

 

1994 (pre-GP/BSI/SKY)

No of clubs:

BL Div 1 - 11

BL Div 2 - 10

Others tracks (Buxton/Linlithgow) - 2

TOTAL - 23

 

2003 (incl GP/BSI/SKY)

No of clubs:

EL - 8

PL - 18

CL - 5*

Others (Weymouth) - 1

TOTAL - 32

 

*not counting clubs who also have teams in higher leagues

 

Nine extra clubs now in Britain - that's nearly 50% more - this can't be coincidence, surely?

[Star Lady 5,400]

Star Lady how do you suggest that the qualifying events and the actual competition take place over the same season?

 

I don't. All riders should have the chance to earn a place. I worded it badly, riders obviously have to qualify the year before. Riders however should have the chance to qualify even if it's only to compete for one GP place in the series. Had the GP riders been nominated by for example the Czech federation, Tomas Topinka would never get the chance simply because one member of the federation doesn't like him. The possiblity that could happen in the GP series to a rider will always exist, now please don't tell me you think that's fair.

 

Falcace like Kevin M, I have no axe to grind with BSI if they try to co-exist with British Speedway but so far I see absolutely no sign of any co-operation, do you? Think back to the Swedish GP, did they consider the effect on British clubs and all the other riders postponments of league matches would affect. No of course they didn't.

I'm still not convinced that showing league matches and GPs on Sky actually benefits British Clubs. Name me a club that has actually come out and said their attendances have improved because of Speedway on TV and if by any chance you can please explain all the postings on this and other forums by regulars at tracks who stay at home and watch in comfort and warmth when their team is on Sky! In fact how many Sky viewers actually know where British tracks are, apart from the 8 EL tracks which is all Sky ever mention. Now if Russell the Great were to persuade Sky that as they don't want to show PL or CL racing it might just benefit the sport for terrestrial TV to be allowed to show highlights (or even the occasional live meeting like the PLRC or the 4s he might just be worth the reputed large amount of money he gained from the Sky deal.

That's without even touching on the subject of GP riders "shortchanging" their clubs and fans by not turning up, only testing engines etc in League matches, see numerous other threads for confirmation

[Kevin Meynell 2]

Kevin even before BSI the FIM got the riders for World Championship events for free

 

Yes, but the FIM weren't out to make money, and after the permit fees and officials had been paid, the organisers (e.g. BSPA, SVEMO or whoever) got to keep all the proceeds.

 

Nowadays, a prospective GP promoter has to pay a staging fee of USD 50,000 to BSI, and assume the organising costs. In return, they only get the admission and programme receipts, whilst BSI keeps all the television and sponsorship income. If the a GP promoter doesn't get sufficient revenue to cover their outlay, well that's just too bad!

 

It doesn't take a genius to work out that those GPs with sub-10,000 attendances must be struggling to be profitable.

 

even if the rewards for GPs are not of Formula 1 proportions they are still better than the rewards for winning the old World Final.

 

I couldn't care less whether the riders are paid USD 1 or 10,000 for taking part. The point is that the levels of prize money are currently far too low to sustain the full-time circus that some people advocate. If BSI can raise the prize money to a level that can sustain such a competition, then I'll have no objection to them running the SGP the way they like. Until then, they need to recognise that they're effectively being subsidised by the national league competitions, and start showing some consideration towards them.

 

I would question whether there would be any form of top class speedway at all.

 

Whilst top-flight British speedway has not been particularly healthy for a number of years, it should not be forgotten that it still provides the bulk of rider earnings. The SGP needs the BEL far more than BEL needs the SGP.

 

I would personally like to see the SGP and BEL coexist, but unfortunately, BSI don't seem to be interested in that.

 

I know of many new fans who have been attracted, or had their interest re-kindled, by speedway on TV.

 

Unfortunately, I don't see this reflected in improved attendances at local tracks, even though BSI have been running the SGP for five years now. Sure, it might be creating a dedicated television audience, but unless they actually come down to a track, the sport is doomed to be mid-afternoon Eurosport fodder.

[Kevin Meynell 2]

Nine extra clubs now in Britain - that's nearly 50% more - this can't be coincidence, surely?

 

Yes, I would say it is coincidence. The reason for the decline in tracks in the late-1980s and early-1990s was an insufficient number of levels at which tracks could run. You had to run at National League level at the very least, and the problem became worse when it became the BL Division 2 and costs started spiralling out of control as certain teams pushed for promotion.

 

It was for this reason that the Conference League was started (originally known as the BL Division 3) in 1994. By creating a third tier of competition more or less outside the professional structure, it was hoped that financially-struggling tracks could run at a more affordable level, whilst new tracks wouldn't face such high-startup costs. In fact, this has been one of the few success stories in British speedway in recent years

 

Nearly all of the new or revived tracks in the last few years are in, or started in the Conference League - Buxton, Berwick, Carmarthen, Isle of Wight, Mildenhall, Rye House, Somerset, Stoke, St. Austell (Trelawny) and Wimbledon. I think only Hull and Newport have gone straight in at a higher level.

 

Another reason for the upsurge in lower-league speedway is the increasing lack of grasstrack meetings where many part-time riders used to compete. Although their number was declining anyway, the foot-and-mouth epidemic (and consequent cancellation of meetings) was a catalyst for many riders taking-up speedway instead.

 

The SGP started in 1995, but BSI didn't take over until 1999 when the number of tracks had already started to rise. I therefore don't think you can put this down to the existence of the SGP.

[fatface 2,554]

Sorry Kevin, if you think it is coincidence that there are now 9 extra clubs since SKY/BSI/GPs all got going in 94, you have your head stuck in the shale.

 

There is no way on earth that prospective promoters and former fans who have come back into the sport with clubs like Rye House, Newport and Workington have done so without having their interest at least partly re-kindled by the TV coverage provided by SKY/BSI/GPs.

 

Please don't tell me they just happen to be interested in the sport again after all these years, at exactly the same time the sport started to receive decent TV coverage. Please... :roll:

[London Witch 57]

Heading says it all!

 

but basically the wildcards are:-

 

Mark Loram Great Britain

Lukas Dryml Czech Republic

Mikael Max Sweden

Lee Richardson Great Britain

Hans Andersen Denmark

Jaroslaw Hampel Poland

 

I haven't been around all week to comment, but I can't argue with any of the selections (Andersen - not too sure of but can't think of anybody else to include). Great to see Jarek getting a chance, I don't think he'll disappoint. Mark and Lukas, to me, are obvious choices, probably the same for Max. I'm pleased to see Lee get in too, purely cos he's a Brit, lets hope we see a more professional approach from him all round in 2004.

[Kevin Meynell 2]

since SKY/BSI/GPs all got going in 94

 

No, the GP Series started in *1995*, but BSI and Sky were not involved until the *1999* season. There were already 28 tracks in 1998, and 30 at the start of 1999, so the SGP has only added a further two tracks by your rationale.

 

you have your head stuck in the shale.

 

No, I simply don't believe everything that I read in the Speedway Star (whose editor and major shareholder just happens to be the SGP Assistant Director).

 

at exactly the same time the sport started to receive decent TV coverage. Please... :roll:

 

That's a different issue - I don't have anything against television coverage of the sport. Perhaps it's escaped your notice that the BEL is shown on television more than the SGP?

[fatface 2,554]

94 or 95 - nitpick if you want. :roll: The major point is that since SKY has covered GPs (ie since the series launched in 95) there has been a huge increase in the number of operating speedway tracks in Britain from 23 to 32.

 

And since BSI's involvment, our sport now achieves a much higher profile - even the Guardian have been known to give the sport some good coverage. The sport is back in some of the world's great stadiums - that's cause for celebration surely? Cos ten years ago our showpiece event was in some German backwater called Pocking.

 

Don't get me wrong, all is not rosy and BSI and the BSPA have some issues to sort out. But whilst the BSPA has lurched from disaster to disaster over the past 20 odd years, BSI have taken the World Championship and made it something very special again in a very short space of time.

 

Like it or not, in marketing and promotion terms they leave the BSPA miles behind in their tyre tracks. If the BSPA can't keep up, that's their fault.

[Kevin Meynell 2]

The major point is that since SKY has covered GPs (ie since the series launched in 95)

 

I seem to remember that Sky didn't cover the SGP until a few years after it started. I think it was originally on other satellite channels, as was the World Final.

 

there has been a huge increase in the number of operating speedway tracks in Britain from 23 to 32.

 

Yes, and I still say that this was down to other factors beside the SGP. Unfortunately, none of us can prove it either way, so let's just agree to disagree.

 

And since BSI's involvment, our sport now achieves a much higher profile - even the Guardian have been known to give the sport some good coverage.

 

You must read the wrong papers, because the Daily Telegraph has always given the sport pretty good coverage.

 

The sport is back in some of the world's great stadiums - that's cause for celebration surely?

 

I am not for a moment suggesting that the World Championship does not have a higher profile than it did ten years, and yes it's largely held in better stadiums (although not all of them are better - Avesta, Hamar, Krsko to name but a few). Of course BSI have improved things, but you have to look at the bigger picture.

 

If you're only interested in the SGP, then what they're doing is fine. However, I think the vast majority of fans prefer league racing to which the SGP is incredibly disruptive, without actually bringing any extra fans through the turnstiles or otherwise improving revenue. Of course, you might reasonably argue that attendances would have fallen even further without the SGP, but that's something else that no-one can prove either way.

 

The real issue though, is that what you're currently seeing is a thin veneer. It is the local GP promoters that are taking all the financial risks and often losing money to allow BSI to be profitable. There is nothing wrong with BSI trying to make money, but local promoters will only be willing to take a killing for so long. That's why the Aussie GP didn't happen this season, and why there are question marks over the Slovenian, Norwegian and Polish GPs. Enjoy them while you can!

 

In the meantime, the British leagues have to put-up with all manner of disruption. For all the faults of the BSPA, it still generates most of the income in speedway, and the SGP would not be able to exist without it. A few of the very top riders could possibly survive on the Polish and Swedish leagues alone, but the middle-and-bottom order SGP riders still depend very heavily on British income.

 

I'm not suggesting to do away with the SGP, but BSI needs to recognise that no matter how badly-run the BEL is, it's own success is built on it.

 

BSI have taken the World Championship and made it something very special again in a very short space of time.

 

As far as I can see, BSI have improved two things. They have taken the competition to a handful of prestigious venues (although at least five of the venues are not an improvement), and have put the competition on television. That's great, but at the same time the series has too many mediocre riders, and a combination of crap tracks and a questionable format have turned it into a lottery. I wouldn't disagree that things are better than they were ten years ago, but I still wouldn't say the competition was in the category of 'very special' yet.

 

Like it or not, in marketing and promotion terms they leave the BSPA miles behind in their tyre tracks.

 

It is much easier to promote ten events per year, than the 600+ that the BSPA members do (with less paid staff). Even then, the organisation of the SWC was pretty pathetic, and the Scandinavian GP a complete fiasco.

[KevH 257]

The major point is that since SKY has covered GPs (ie since the series launched in 95)

 

I seem to remember that Sky didn't cover the SGP until a few years after it started. I think it was originally on other satellite channels, as was the World Final.

 

It was certainly Sky who covered the inaugral British Grand Prix from Hackney although I can't be certain for the other rounds that year.