Jump to content
British Speedway Forum
iannewsman

Stoke Potters Sadly, The Perennial Failures

Recommended Posts

Well, after my 'discussion' at the beginning of the season and Mr Vasey basically asking everyone to 'wait and see', so I'm here to say well, we have seen and what did we get? The same flops as before.

 

What have we seen from the Potters this season? Yet again, nothing won as a team. They finally wimped out of the NL 4s yesterday and floped in the NL. Yes, they won the pairs but that has nothing to do with the team as it is down to two riders. No management input there. 'We made it to a final' they will say. 'You got battered in that as well' I say.

 

If you leave it to the management and the promotion you just get failure after failure. They can't even post any news, let alone an apology on their website as it has been closed for almost all of the season, why?

 

If you go on the BSPA web site and look in the NL section you find the last press release from Stoke was on the 9th Serptember and prior to that it was 30th July. In the news section you have to go back to the 16th July for something about the Potters.

 

So again I say to the management and the promotion...GO! You have dragged the Stoke Potters down to the lowest level of speedway and still the acheivements are pitiful.

 

So come on Mr Vasey, what about some excuses for this season? Oh and don't bother with the 'Ben Wilson left us in the lurch' excuse as that happens to all teams and yet most seem to find replacements but Stoke never do and it has gone on like that for years.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will be interesting to read what Malcolm thinks.

At the start of the season, the Stoke Promotion did seem to be trying to provide a competitive team and a better race track. Results have been better, home fixtures have been completed plus as you post, they won the NL Pairs. So it feels like a decent season. But I agree a non functioning web site and irregular Press Releases aren't good enough. Perhaps the ultimate test is have attendances improved?

Malcolm, it's good things have improved, keep it going.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leaving aside the PR Issues Stoke did have a better season, but what amazes me was everyone highlighting the Ben Wilson leaving, in my humble opinion the rider you missed most was the one rarely mentioned the loss of James McBain was the main reason The Stoke season faded from mid season onwards.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who would you have signed to replace Ben!

 

I'm not going to pretend that everything at Stoke is perfect but The meetings were run in double quick time apart from a couple where incidents occurred to memory James being taken to Hospital and the track conditions of the Kent meeting. The track was good although dusty at times but many tracks suffered from that in the hot weather we got mid summer.

 

The original team was good I think the combination of losing Ben and James were extra factors.

The PA on the 3rd and 4th bend is difficult to hear but that could be the announcer if he talks in a whisper.

No parade at the beginning of the meeting. There was one when up against Kings Lynn I think and it added a whole new dimension to the meeting.

 

Bar and stand are cosmetic and better to have a good ridable track than fancy buildings although if they would let a few volunteers down there in the winter to tidy it up it could only enhance the product.

 

The loss of the website was sad.

 

One final thing......... The management can't ride the bikes themselves. Yes the manager should be there for tactics etc. It's up to the riders to ride the bikes and if things start to go wrong for them sometimes it's difficult to pick yourself up from a downward spiral but they never stopped trying.

 

You can lay the blame of many things at the feet of the management but performance on track is squarely the riders responsibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact remains that the Stoke Potters have never won any 'team' silverware under this promotion and management. It has been a steady decline and slide down the speedway ladder. Yes, the manager picks the team and can't ride the bikes, but they can sack the under performers and get others in. They failed to do that to any effect in the PL and it continues in the NL. Yes they won the pairs and this proves my point, take management out of the equasion and Stoke win. The pairs is all down to the riders. Put the management back in and they lose time after time.

I don't hold with all that 'this season was better' nonsense. As a team (4 and 7 rider events) they have failed again and again for years. The Stoke Potters under this promotion have won nothing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact remains that the Stoke Potters have never won any 'team' silverware under this promotion and management. It has been a steady decline and slide down the speedway ladder. Yes, the manager picks the team and can't ride the bikes, but they can sack the under performers and get others in. They failed to do that to any effect in the PL and it continues in the NL. Yes they won the pairs and this proves my point, take management out of the equasion and Stoke win. The pairs is all down to the riders. Put the management back in and they lose time after time.

I don't hold with all that 'this season was better' nonsense. As a team (4 and 7 rider events) they have failed again and again for years. The Stoke Potters under this promotion have won nothing!

No doubt there is a shortage of riders. Already short of Ben and James changing more could be difficult. I've not looked ate the averages You could have replaced Widman or Payne with Chessell I suppose or Maybe Priest but I think Priest and Chessell had already been signed by other clubs when the downturn started. I'm not sure there were many heatleaders knocking about without a job. Stokes would have always gone to KL. I can't think of anyone else.

 

You may want to explain where you think Malcolm went wrong in the 4's. Selectionwise he had no choice.

 

Maybe one of the PL supporters (unless you can) may want to inject an opinion on whether team 'strenghening' in the PL was anymore successful.

Edited by TMW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having won the NL Pairs, aren't Stoke the only team apart from Cradley likely to win anything at NL this season?

 

All the best

Rob

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will be interesting to read what Malcolm thinks.

At the start of the season, the Stoke Promotion did seem to be trying to provide a competitive team and a better race track. Results have been better, home fixtures have been completed plus as you post, they won the NL Pairs. So it feels like a decent season. But I agree a non functioning web site and irregular Press Releases aren't good enough. Perhaps the ultimate test is have attendances improved?

Malcolm, it's good things have improved, keep it going.

 

If Malcolm has any sense he won't respond to someone who never says a good word about the promotion and who was very, very quiet indeed at the start of the year when everyone was commenting about the fact that gates were up, the team looked good and the track was far, far better than it had been.

 

I am sure he will reserve his comments for the genuine fans who were disappointed with 2014, not those who positively relish that it wasn't a good year for the Potters.

 

Stoke's season was destroyed when Ben Wilson left and James McBain got injured. Up to that point, they had one of best reserves in the league and one of the most potent No 1's. I had them down as dark horses for the league and with that team almost certainties for the play offs. There's a possibility that they might have seen that Wilson would leave, but McBain's injury was something that could not be predicted.

 

I'd maintain that the track still isn't anywhere near as good as it should be - to me, its one of the best shaped in the country - but it had improved and that and the team line up at the start of the season were reflected in increased attendances at that point. Stoke at least tried to change things for the better and that's all to their credit.

Edited by Halifaxtiger
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe one of the PL supporters (unless you can) may want to inject an opinion on whether team 'strenghening' in the PL was anymore successful.

It wasn't, that was my point. It never has been.

Having won the NL Pairs, aren't Stoke the only team apart from Cradley likely to win anything at NL this season?

 

All the best

Rob

Yes and again you missed the point. Nothing won as a 'team' AGAIN! The pairs is just down to the riders efferts.

 

If Malcolm has any sense he won't respond to someone who never says a good word about the promotion and who was very, very quiet indeed at the start of the year

 

I was FAR from quite at the beginning of the season and I said the team would fail again under this mamagement and promotion. I just stopped posting so that we could see how things panned out. Now I am back on to do a bit of 'Told you so' now that Stoke has failed again, as I predicted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It wasn't, that was my point. It never has been.

Yes and again you missed the point. Nothing won as a 'team' AGAIN! The pairs is just down to the riders efferts.

 

So without being detrimental if Stoke had selected lets say, Kirby and Shuttleworth for the pairs would they have won ?.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was FAR from quite at the beginning of the season and I said the team would fail again under this mamagement and promotion. I just stopped posting so that we could see how things panned out. Now I am back on to do a bit of 'Told you so' now that Stoke has failed again, as I predicted.

 

That is true. Before the season you were pretty noisy.

 

Its was when Stoke were doing well that you shut up, because there's no way you'd give the present promotion the slightest bit of credit.

 

I bet you are really disappointed that Malcolm hasn't taken the bait and that it is you and not he who is getting all the flak.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It wasn't, that was my point. It never has been.

.

I'm not being funny but you will only gain credibility for your argument if you give constructive criticism. Your comments are too generic no specifics and no suggestions on what he did wrong Or what he should have done different.

 

I'm happy to listen to your argument but it has to be constructve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If Malcolm has any sense he won't respond to someone who never says a good word about the promotion and who was very, very quiet indeed at the start of the year when everyone was commenting about the fact that gates were up, the team looked good and the track was far, far better than it had been.

 

I am sure he will reserve his comments for the genuine fans who were disappointed with 2014, not those who positively relish that it wasn't a good year for the Potters.

 

Stoke's season was destroyed when Ben Wilson left and James McBain got injured. Up to that point, they had one of best reserves in the league and one of the most potent No 1's. I had them down as dark horses for the league and with that team almost certainties for the play offs. There's a possibility that they might have seen that Wilson would leave, but McBain's injury was something that could not be predicted.

 

I'd maintain that the track still isn't anywhere near as good as it should be - to me, its one of the best shaped in the country - but it had improved and that and the team line up at the start of the season were reflected in increased attendances at that point. Stoke at least tried to change things for the better and that's all to their credit.

HalifaxTiger, was this reply seriously addressed to me?

If it was, I suggest you reread my posting which I believe is a fair and balanced assessment of 2014 and isn't negative anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HalifaxTiger, was this reply seriously addressed to me?

If it was, I suggest you reread my posting which I believe is a fair and balanced assessment of 2014 and isn't negative anyway.

 

Certainly not.

 

It was in response to post 9 which hadn't been lined up correctly.

 

I thought your post was very fair indeed :approve:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy