Bryce 349 Posted July 23, 2011 would Hackney fans see Rye House as a Home would there have been a element of Hackney support which may not have bothered because they couldnt conceivably consider Rye House as a home track or vice verse and if you can only bring yourself to support half of the home meetings then whats the point. Speaking as one of those Hawks fans, I could just about cope with Lakeside as being a "home" meeting. Rye House just isn't. I've no animosity towards the place, it's just nowhere near East London. It's a trip to the countryside for us. It will never feel like a home track for Hackney. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TMW 533 Posted July 23, 2011 Speaking as one of those Hawks fans, I could just about cope with Lakeside as being a "home" meeting. Rye House just isn't. I've no animosity towards the place, it's just nowhere near East London. It's a trip to the countryside for us. It will never feel like a home track for Hackney. On that note would it have been better for all the 'home' meetings to have been run at Lakeside?. However I do agree with the rest of the posters on here good on them for giving it a go it's just a shame they couldnt have given it a little longer Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ben91 1,743 Posted July 23, 2011 From a realistic view, this was never going to work and it wasn't a way of re-creating the Dudley model either. It was a way for Rye to lose a few fixtures to ease congestion and for Lakeside to add a few to keep a steady flow of weekly speedway. The way the Sheffield/Scunthorpe team have been named is silly IMO, however it is better than trying to bring fans in from a track which has no real link to either track, with the the exception of Len Silver promoting at Rye. There were no plans to get Hackney back in to Hackney itself and this is probably what kept a lot of people away, the Dudley fans are a rare breed, there were lots at Rye tonight for the British Under 19 Final, if the meeting wasn't at Rye, I wouldn't have attended, so it shows their commitment. There was no Hackney merchandise either and programmes were not even Hackney programmes, little things like that just add to the mickey mouse approach this was unfortunately given. If it was approached the right way, things could have been a great success and the partnership between Rye and Lakeside would have blossomed with riders being able to progress from the NL to the EL without having to club hop. I doubt this will signal the end of NL at Rye from next season, however I'd love to see the Raiders name brought back, Raiders meetings always used to draw decent crowds and having sides with riders such as Boxall, Allen, Bowen, Mear, Burchatt, Betson, Halsey and Powell, all who have gone on to PL at least helped get the fans excited. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhilK 150 Posted July 24, 2011 There was in any case - I believe - only one more due: Scunny, who (again as I understand it...) were being difficult because they didn't want to come on a Friday.. Low crowds..? Well, there were actually only three 'stand-alone' Hawks fixtures at AE.. The first was Dudley, so - fair play as ever to the superb Heathens hordes! - that was well attended. The IoW match was blighted by one of the worst nights for traffic in East London/west Essex for years and then there was Buxton... As an experiment it does appear to have been abandoned but I'd personally NOT call it a failure... The voices of doom and gloom on here will doubtless say they were right; but frankly if you're pessimistic and down-beat about things you will often end up being right... It's those who take a leap of faith as Cookie did for a bit here, who make things actually happen so fair play to all who tried... Sure I heard it announced last night that the Scunny/Sheff meeting wil be a double header with a PL meeting at Rye House! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shadders 4,135 Posted July 24, 2011 Sure I heard it announced last night that the Scunny/Sheff meeting wil be a double header with a PL meeting at Rye House! At no extra cost I believe... £16 for a PL/NL double header is not to be sniffed at! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
25yearfan 476 Posted July 24, 2011 (edited) From a realistic view, this was never going to work and it wasn't a way of re-creating the Dudley model either. It was a way for Rye to lose a few fixtures to ease congestion and for Lakeside to add a few to keep a steady flow of weekly speedway. The way the Sheffield/Scunthorpe team have been named is silly IMO, however it is better than trying to bring fans in from a track which has no real link to either track, with the the exception of Len Silver promoting at Rye. There were no plans to get Hackney back in to Hackney itself and this is probably what kept a lot of people away, the Dudley fans are a rare breed, there were lots at Rye tonight for the British Under 19 Final, if the meeting wasn't at Rye, I wouldn't have attended, so it shows their commitment. There was no Hackney merchandise either and programmes were not even Hackney programmes, little things like that just add to the mickey mouse approach this was unfortunately given. If it was approached the right way, things could have been a great success and the partnership between Rye and Lakeside would have blossomed with riders being able to progress from the NL to the EL without having to club hop. I doubt this will signal the end of NL at Rye from next season, however I'd love to see the Raiders name brought back, Raiders meetings always used to draw decent crowds and having sides with riders such as Boxall, Allen, Bowen, Mear, Burchatt, Betson, Halsey and Powell, all who have gone on to PL at least helped get the fans excited. You've largely hit the nail on the head! This seasons Hackney experiment at Lakeside and Rye House has been a half hearted affair aimed at drawing a former teams support by using the Hackney for a team that are really Rye Houses NL team. Hackney wern't ever supported very well not even in the 60's and 70's compared to other tracks. Indeed Len Silver got out in 1983 when he'd had enough of struggling to keep it going. Without Crayford also closing at the end of the 1983 season, its possible Hackney speedway wouldn't have survived after 1983. The 1987 move back into the top flight was an expensive low supported project aborted after just one year. Hackney Hawks last ran in 1991 when they had to close due to poor crowds. Thats now 20 years ago. The 1996 London Lions venture also only lasted one year, wasn't well supported and thats now 15 years ago. With no serious attempt being made to get a new track in the Hackney area combined with Hackney not having many fans anyhow, especially after all these years added to the half hearted nature of ressurrecting the Hackney name and fans of the tracks senior teams only being able to afford and/or want to watch the senior team, the likelihood of Hackney meetings getting viable crowds at Lakeside and Rye House were very minimal. Rye House 3rd tier meetings have been poorly attended for years anyway and apart from Dudley who are a different case to any other team ( a massively well supported team who closed because of redevelopment, reopening at an existing venue 8-10 miles down the road) no 3rd tier running at an EL or PL venue has ever regularly got viable crowds. The NL has been much more productive than what the old reserve Leagues ever were in producing riders and many current tracks would of probably not opened or like Rye House reopened without the intervention of the 3rd tier in its different forms since 1994. Thats why funding has to be given to encourage tracks to run 2nd teams in the NL. Edited July 25, 2011 by 25yearfan Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Parsloes 1928 nearly 495 Posted July 24, 2011 On that note would it have been better for all the 'home' meetings to have been run at Lakeside?. However I do agree with the rest of the posters on here good on them for giving it a go it's just a shame they couldnt have given it a little longer Yes, I think the Hackney idea had far more attraction and viability if just at Arena Essex.. And remember the Lakeside promotion did brand the Hawks as a separate club with an excellent programme in (retro) Hackney stylings for example. It was - strangely, considering his impeccable Hackney background - Uncle Len who let the experiment down by making literally no effort to style as a stand-alone third tier club.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waco 1,026 Posted July 24, 2011 Yes, I think the Hackney idea had far more attraction and viability if just at Arena Essex.. And remember the Lakeside promotion did brand the Hawks as a separate club with an excellent programme in (retro) Hackney stylings for example. It was - strangely, considering his impeccable Hackney background - Uncle Len who let the experiment down by making literally no effort to style as a stand-alone third tier club.. It is not Len who has pulled the plug on the Hawks at lakeside and the sooner the team moves back to Rye the better..This was never going to work as in the case of cradley with its huge enthusiastic following It has allienated some fans and there were few enough to start with ..to recover the situation i feel the admission must be reduced to get fans back at Rye..We all have to hope Len can carry on ,and lets get back to Rye House Raiders as soon as possible..I have heard a double header is planed,,with a great value admission..Hope that is true,,could kick start the interest again..This is my personal view and i dont wish to get into any arguments about it....As i respect Parsloes view of the situation as well... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ben91 1,743 Posted July 24, 2011 Yes, I think the Hackney idea had far more attraction and viability if just at Arena Essex.. And remember the Lakeside promotion did brand the Hawks as a separate club with an excellent programme in (retro) Hackney stylings for example. It was - strangely, considering his impeccable Hackney background - Uncle Len who let the experiment down by making literally no effort to style as a stand-alone third tier club.. How you can call the short comings of both promotions Len Silvers fault is beyond me. How people can suggest the Hawks racing solely at Lakeside would have made them successful is also a lot of rubbish (stronger word should be used but it's a family forum ). Hopwood (Who is now a Rye asset) and Freemantle aside, all the Hawks had previous Rye connections. Whilst Owen and Hazelden are both Hammers assets, if there wasn't the Hawks they would both be Rye NL riders this season anyway. It is a real shame the venture hasn't worked, it could have been fantastic for both parties if promoted properly, the message to both promotions should really be, you only get out what you put in. I hope Rye will continue to track a NL team, in the form of the Raiders (Not Cobras, such a poor team nickname) from 2012 onwards and carry on bringing through the young Brits. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cityrebel 2,960 Posted July 25, 2011 You've largely hit the nail on the head! This seasons Hackney experiment at Lakeside and Rye House has been a half hearted affair aimed at drawing a former teams support by using the Hackney for a team that are really Rye Houses NL team. Hackney wern't ever supported very well not even in the 60's and 70's compared to other tracks. Indeed Len Silver got out in 1983 when he'd had enough of struggling to keep it going. Without Crayford also closing at the end of the 1983 season, its possible Hackney speedway wouldn't have survived after 1983. The 1987 move back into the top flight was an expensive low supported project aborted after just one year. Hackney Hawks last ran in 1991 when they had to close due to poor crowds. Thats now 20 years ago. The 1996 London Lions venture also only lasted one year, wasn't well supported and thats now 15 years ago. With no serious attempt being made to get a new track in the Hackney area combined with Hackney not having many fans anyhow, especially after all these years added to the half hearted nature of ressurrecting the Hackney name and fans of the tracks senior team only being able to afford and/or want to watch the senior team, the likelihood of Hackney meetings getting viable crowds at Lakeside and Rye House were very minimal. Rye House 3rd tier meetings have been poorly attended for years anyway and apart from Dudley who are a different case to any other team ( a massively well supported team who closed because of redevelopment reopening at an existing venue 8-10 miles down the road) no 3rd tier running at an EL or PL venue has ever regularly got viable crowds. The NL has been much more productive than what the old reserve Leagues ever were in producing riders and many current tracks would of probably not opened or like Rye House reopened without the intervention of the 3rd tier in its different forms since 1994. Thats why funding has to be given to encourage tracks to run 2nd teams in the NL. a good post that just about sums it up for me! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
June 203 Posted July 25, 2011 When 2 teams merge it changes things. Its like putting Man City and Man united together and supporters told this is now your team. I admire Scunny for their youth developement, but no way will I travel to Sheffield to watch a home meeting. But I will always turn up at Scunny to watch the mighty SAINTS! I agree with rocket Ben - Rye house go back to "Raiders" and for someone to get Hackney started up in an area where the genuine fans are. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cityrebel 2,960 Posted July 25, 2011 the problem with trying to ressurect any form of speedway in london is the lack of intrest in the capital city. the population has changed so much in recent years and those of us ex london teams fans still following the sport have already migrated to lakeside or rye house to get our regular speedway fix. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
THE DEAN MACHINE 4,756 Posted July 25, 2011 i said this at the begining of the season ,dudley works for a different reasons ,if you live there you would understand ,it is an area that dosent have sports teams to follow and is very proud of its industrial history and its history in general ,i dont think there is another ex track that can realisticly be sucessfull at another track ,but also wolves is a short car/bus even walk to get to from dudley all these factors are what make dudley work and hackney or any other team not really work .i really dont think teams riding at other tracks is the way forward for speedway ,although i fully support people tryng to resurect their ex teams ,on a tuesday night at wolves it is not all the wolves fans plus a few cradley fans that have come back to the sport ,it is all cradley fans and most of the wolves fans dont go, i really hope that dudley get a new stadium cause the heathens back in the top flight speedway riding against wolves really is what speedway is all about, i was at lakeside last friday and the crowd didnt look to bad for a national league meeting ,just another quick point, as big as dudleys crowds are i know of some cradley fans that wont go to watch dudley cause they think that dudley have pinched the heathens name , i hope the hackney name is not lost to the sport but i dont see it working any where else except at hackney Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
keef 105 Posted July 25, 2011 (edited) the problem with trying to ressurect any form of speedway in london is the lack of intrest in the capital city. the population has changed so much in recent years and those of us ex london teams fans still following the sport have already migrated to lakeside or rye house to get our regular speedway fix. True cityrebel, we moved out of south-east London in the 60s, along with about a million other inner-Londoners, to the overspill town of Swindon, after following New Cross, then Wimbledon. Luckily Swindon had a speedway team, otherwise we would have probably stopped following the sport. Most Londoners now probably live in places such as Essex, Kent, Herts, Surrey, Sussex, Berks, Bucks, plus the new/expanded towns throughout the country, like Swindon, Milton Keynes, Northampton, Peterborough, Basingstoke, Andover, Crawley, Banbury, Basildon, Aylesbury, Kings Lynn, Emel Empstead, Welwyn Garden City, Hatfield, Mildenhall, Hastings, Corby, Bracknell, Stevenage, Arlow etc., etc., I suppose sadly that the once massive London clubs such as West Am, Wembley, New Cross, Wimbledon, Ackney, White City would struggle to make a capital comeback. Edited July 25, 2011 by keef Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
25yearfan 476 Posted July 25, 2011 True cityrebel, we moved out of south-east London in the 60s, along with about a million other inner-Londoners, to the overspill town of Swindon, after following New Cross, then Wimbledon. Luckily Swindon had a speedway team, otherwise we would have probably stopped following the sport. Most Londoners now probably live in places such as Essex, Kent, Herts, Surrey, Sussex, Berks, Bucks, plus the new/expanded towns throughout the country, like Swindon, Milton Keynes, Northampton, Peterborough, Basingstoke, Andover, Crawley, Banbury, Basildon, Aylesbury, Kings Lynn, Emel Empstead, Welwyn Garden City, Hatfield, Mildenhall, Hastings, Corby, Bracknell, Stevenage, Arlow etc., etc., I suppose sadly that the once massive London clubs such as West Am, Wembley, New Cross, Wimbledon, Ackney, White City would struggle to make a capital comeback. I think Wimbledon could still be a viable track in either the EL or PL with the right track and right promotion, the 2002-05 CL era proved that the Dons still had the support. I also think one other London track in the North could be viable - Romford Bombers (yes its Essex, but virtually London!)if the owners of the Greyhound track could be persuaded and planning permission given. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
