Backless 538 Posted February 7, 2013 Not a bad thing then… not a bad thing now. Incidentally, if it did come to that and the MCF licences tracks & made regulations - but didn't run their own club - wouldn't that by default be the independent regulatory body that some on here is essential for the sport? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skodaman 192 Posted February 7, 2013 Under whose duristiction are the Flatrack meetings held. These meetings have been held at Leicester, and Scunthorpe amongst others. There have also been some MotoX meetings held at Leicester; who sanctions those? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
21st century heathen 220 Posted February 7, 2013 It may prove academic whether a circuit licence holder is prepared to take a stand against the SCB. How many riders will risk losing their license for what at the moment is just 6 meetings (actually it's only 2)? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pvm 116 Posted February 7, 2013 Under whose duristiction are the Flatrack meetings held. These meetings have been held at Leicester, and Scunthorpe amongst others. There have also been some MotoX meetings held at Leicester; who sanctions those? I was wondering the same thing. In order to ride in those events you didn't need a ACU licence, just a IOPD licence. http://www.shorttrac...egulations.html Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Backless 538 Posted February 7, 2013 It may prove academic whether a circuit licence holder is prepared to take a stand against the SCB. How many riders will risk losing their license for what at the moment is just 6 meetings (actually it's only 2)? Do you REALLY think the BSPA would rip the heart out of the PL by pulling their licences? Don't bother answering that - if you're gullible to think its only 2 because that's what's been announced, it's easy to guess your response. The BSPA is (allegedly) so full of self interest they're not going to be able to vote that through. Of the 6 announced so far, 4 of them ride for MC member owned teams & what happens to their antiquated asset system then? Back to reading your speedway a star in your bobble hat. 21st Century? Ha ha! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Humphrey Appleby 13,955 Posted February 7, 2013 Perhaps another organisation could petition the FIM if it felt the ACU didn't have the authority claimed in this statement, and/or perhaps go to court to challenge the ACU, I don't know. The FIM recognise the ACU as the organisation responsible for motorcycling in the UK, so there's no chance of them overruling the ACU with respect to a decision about the SCB. It's possible that another promoters' or club association might get recognised by the ACU if there were enough demand/lobbying, but I think the BSPA actually has some sort of observer status at the FIM. Realistically though, if a group of promoters/clubs/tracks want to run speedway under their own auspices, they'd have to run outside the ACU. Maybe this would be a good thing though, as neither the ACU or the FIM seem to do a lot for speedway other than selling the family silver... It may prove academic whether a circuit licence holder is prepared to take a stand against the SCB. How many riders will risk losing their license for what at the moment is just 6 meetings (actually it's only 2)? Nothing would happen. It's already been legally investigated by various motor sports bodies and the recommendation was that they can't ban competitors or tracks involved in unlicensed meetings. It might be frowned upon (sometimes for good reasons), but the authorities wouldn't have a leg to stand on if they were subjected to a legal challenge and I'm sure they already know it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mac101 1,201 Posted February 7, 2013 (edited) Having came from mx to speedway last year and having done. A Few red bull and dep challenge meetings I can tell you they are very well run organised unit . And very strict with every thing very well equipped with sound meters for sound checks on silencers and machine testers/ examiners with tool for checking barrel sizes which a couple of riders are chosen randomly after every race and checked most mx clubs moved over to MCF because they were a lot cheaper to run there events through with the clubs making a bit more money as the acu used to charge clubs a fortune for licences permits insurance the MCF are now working in the 21 century with everything on line rather than a stamp and cheque book can't see why they can't work together on something like this. I take it most if not all of the riders that will ride in this are British and don't ride abroad can't see any harm competion is good for business in every sport Edited February 7, 2013 by mac101 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Stan Duppcomic 100 Posted February 7, 2013 The MCF isn't under the authority of the ACU. So, unless the ACU are going to recruit Thatcher's SPG to club everyone in attendance,they can't stop the meetings from going ahead. The MCF licence the tracks, set their own standards & regulations (similar to - or maybe better than - those at present) and obtain all necessary insurances. So there's nothing in theory to prevent the meetings going ahead. If the BSPA blindly dig their heels in, they ban around 36 quality riders & 6 tracks from the PL. If that continued to its logical conclusion, there's the basis for a pretty exciting and dynamic league. And another one run by the BSPA - before consideration is given to anyone (rider or club) jumping ship. Still, in the short term, the next MC meeting should be fun: "So, Uncle Len, been doing much lately?" The point is there wouldn't be an exciting and dynamic league. The series is devised to make money from one off individual events not to suffer the pain of a Glasgow v Plymouth league match financial disaster or similar week after week 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Byker Biker 472 Posted February 7, 2013 The point is there wouldn't be an exciting and dynamic league. The series is devised to make money from one off individual events not to suffer the pain of a Glasgow v Plymouth league match financial disaster or similar week after week I suppose you're right, without the 40 or so (more with guest and double up appearances) loss making meetings PL riders get from a BSPA/SCB/ACU affiliation they probably wouldn't be in a position to agree 6 plum bookings for the MCF. Then on the othe hand if the MCF gives them all vans, mechanics, tyres, insurance, workshops, engines to sign on for 6 meetings, 50 pence a mile and £100 a point then the BSPA could save a fortune and start to make money instead of subsidising the sport to keep it alive. I wonder why the MCF didn't approach the BSPA/SCB/ACU with this great idea, you don't think it's 'cos they wanted to make money do you? Oh no of course not it's to benefit British riders! Yeah right.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Backless 538 Posted February 7, 2013 At the moment. But if 6 tracks were chucked out on their ears along with anything up to 36 riders, do you suppose they would sit around talking about t'old days? 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deano 1,318 Posted February 7, 2013 At the moment. But if 6 tracks were chucked out on their ears along with anything up to 36 riders, do you suppose they would sit around talking about t'old days? They wouldn't they have a business to run, bills to pay and a governing body that wishes to be involved. Lets hope some common sense is used. The last thing we want is a Rugby Union and Rugby League type split in speedway. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
obrien48 27 Posted February 7, 2013 It's alright slagging off the BSPA/SCB but what if next year the UK Speedway Series decides to run every Friday? Then the year after decided to run twice a week? Then it realises, hang on, we could set up our own league? The SCB have to stop it now. If they grow their promotions that quickly they'll be doing something very right considering the state of the ahem - sport in this country. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Animal 48 Posted February 7, 2013 Why is the general consensus on this thread that the series will only be staged at PL tracks? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Backless 538 Posted February 7, 2013 If they grow their promotions that quickly they'll be doing something very right considering the state of the ahem - sport in this country. They wouldn't need to "grow their promotions" - supposedly there would be 6 track &36 riders not doing anything. Why is the general consensus on this thread that the series will only be staged at PL tracks? Because from the field announced so far, it's not going to fill EL tracks - unlike their dud-foreigner filled teams do week in week out. Lets hope some common sense is used. The last thing we want is a Rugby Union and Rugby League type split in speedway. God no, we wouldn't want speedway to be in the state of Rugby League & Rugby Union, would we? It's a million miles away from happening I suppose, the BSPA will simply back down rather than lose their assets & tracks, but if it DID split the whole way, it would be more like Darts these days. One league like the PDC, vibrant & full of new ideas, the other like the BDO, cosy, retro & somewhere to take your knitting. We can but dream. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kiwi 49 Posted February 8, 2013 Use of the word Speedway, I don't see SCB would have a leg to stand on. Cycle Speedway has been around since the 1920's and it's governing body is British Cycling so surely the MCF could claim discrimination if it forced it to drop the word Speedway Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
