Leaderboard

On the Edinburgh Facebook, it appears Rod Godfrey has acknowledged the rule allowing discretion has never been applied since the very unfortunate Ty Proctor/Sheffield affair of 2015, and because immigration is such a major and important topic, needing the qualifying position to be clear and not varying. The discretionary rule should no longer be there (i.e. on the BSPA website) and will be removed. As I personally do not agree with discretionary rules, agree with it's removal and recognise that "clerical oversights" can occur. What is unsatisfactory is that this discretionary exemption issue was raised by both the AMA & Edinburgh at least three months ago and apparently the above explanation has only been provided now. Thus the AMA & Edinburgh could have been spared unnecessarily wasting their time over the interim period if the aforementioned explanation and the expunging of the discretionary rule from http://www.speedwaygb.co./sponsoredmigrantspolicy had been actioned when first raised. (the Section for consideration of applications for discretionary endorsements is still there btw ! ). In Edinburgh's case they could have been exploring alternative signing avenues earlier.

Low and behold he raises his ugly head phillipsr , so now you think Newcastle looks a poor side. Let’s wait and see come end of August .. I bet a lot of Newcastle fans are just really happy they have Speedway to watch this season , like Workington , worrying times for Promotions trying to keep Speedway running .. There will be 7 guys getting on their bikes and riding their hearts out for these “poor” teams as you call them , you should maybe pop yourself on a bike before you start making judgment

But it’s not going against the general perception , it’s a few snowflakes who get offended at just about everytthing and think that everybody else should give up their way of life to suit theirs , personally I hate snowflakes and believe they are not worthy of breathing the free air they are given but I don’t start a campaign to try to get them shot

Yes it is their discretion, nobody has ever said that, something you seem quite keen not to grasp. However, when at their discretion they are not going to endorse a rider they are required to give their reasons in writing as to why the reasons given for the discretionary endorsement are not sufficient. Saying he doesn't fit the original criteria, which the BSPA did (initially) is not doing that. That is stating the bleedin obvious and why the discretionary endorsement was applied for in the first place. The BSPA have had all winter to make a simple statement. "No discretionary endorsements will be considered. If you don't fit the criteria, that is it". Is that really such a hard thing for them to do? Why leave the door open, drag processes out, waste people's time when they had no intention of ever awarding an endorsement? That leaves the door open for people, with good reason given past history, to wonder if it is done so if someone in favor applies for an endorsement, one can be given. It's simply another mess they've brought upon themselves that could very easily have been avoided.

No, I can't see any holes here either. What Horton is saying here goes against what BE have said in their planning application. If he was being funded by them then they won't be happy with this. Basically saying this isnt a long term solution and we need somewhere local, two things BE don't want to hear. BE are worried about having to help finance somewhere new hence in their application they worded it like Leicester would be a long term solution. We now have the owner of the club stating it isn't a long term solution and we need to get back. Sandhu now needs to do the same regarding stox and put huge pressure on BE.

It's an easy one for me. If they are British they can ride in both divisions regardless of average. That's very easy to implement.

I haven’t anywhere suggested that. Very few on this thread have. You’re failing to grasp a very simple concept.

Well you're acting it, suggesting that the criteria which makes you apply for a discretionary endorsement is the reason used for not giving one. Seems Rob Godfrey has clarified that Becker DOES fit the criteria, but the BSPA have simply decided they aren't giving any discretionary endorsements. So again, it's having one rule and doing another thing that is the issue. If the BSPA had told Edinburgh and indeed every other club right from the beginning that there will be no discretionary endorsements given there would never have been an issue. It's this moving of the goalposts that is a fundamental issue in the governing of the sport.

Apparently now Rob Godfrey has confirmed that Luke Becker would have been entitled to a discretionary endorsement just as myself and others have described above. However the MC have decided that they will not be awarding any discretionary endorsements to anyone whether justified or not. As far as Ryan Douglas is concerned I don't think he missed the qualification meetings because of injury so it doesn't apply to him. It's harsh but not a terrible position to have and obviously many on here agree that is what the rule should be and removes any ambiguity. But when was this decision made and why was it not communicated to all teams and other impacted. Why did they just not table an amendment at the AGM and change the rule so there was no discretion clearly stated in the rules and everyone was fully informed and aware. The rule (even though many on here are ignoring the fact it exists) has been in place for several years so could easily have been changed and debated by all promoters not just the MC if required. Steve Evans has apparently been working on this appeal since September, Edinburgh appealed for the endorsement 3 times and all 3 times were only told he did not meet the rules and not told anything about no discretionary endorsements being given. So on the 4th occasion when asked informally they have been told that the rules have effectively been changed. When did the rule change? Now if I was being a cynic I could say when they received the request from Edinburgh......

reading phil lannings piece in the speedway star today about the media and speedways lack of ability to use it , this is exactly the sort of thing to get the media attention , speedway should take a stand against this BS that is parading around the news at the moment and tell the media we are going to continue to use start girls cause we believe its an important part of the show ,etc,etc ,be different kick up a fuss ,this is what the media wants to fill their dreary pages , it is a story already written for the papers ,use it

Even though he wouldn't be doubling up ?

You serious? The comments by Horton are the opposite what Brandon Estates said in their planning application. Brandon Estates made out Leicester was the long term option and Horton in this interview has said it isnt and we need to get back to the local area. He basically rubbished that whole section of the application! Don't see how that's helping BE?

I agree. So long as the women involved are happy to do the work. Personally, I don't care whether we have them or not. They now only appear at the NSS for shared BSPA events and I can't say that I think the presentation or entertainment level has suffered but that is my opinion and I wouldn't dream of imposing my opinion on others who think otherwise. I have never come across a female supporter who has ever said they feel strongly and are offended by the start line girls nor have I come across anybody who has given it as a reason not to attend any of the sports where they or, their equivalent, appear. In the present climate too many seem to be afraid of offending the snowflakes who believe they know what is right and best for the rest of us.

Swimming,diving,gymnastics,beach volleyball all in boiler suits.Tennis and hockey in long trousers.Full body beachware high neck lines skirts to the ankle etc.How far is it going to go it seems that some politically correct people will not be happy until we go back to Victorian times. If most of the population do not have a problem with something then leave it be.If the odd few over the top head case's have a problem with something then let them get over it and let the rest of us get on with life blissfully not thinking there is any problem.

for me - a highlights package would be best - 3 matches a week and keep schtum about riders riding for 2 teams! Oh and riders appearing for their rivals.

Possibly Mads Korneliussen ? The name of the sheep, I couldn't possibly comment on!!

I think I can be blamed for 'inviting' you Absolutely correct, though Its why my first two matches pencilled in this season were Redcar v Newcastle. Although I have made clear that I think Peterborough - after the huge success of the past two seasons - would be a better option, some of the comments about Redcar are simply not fair. Its way better than a 'dump' and although there were few visible signs it was clearly a different place last season after the departure of Havelock. I don't doubt it will step up again this season and, with a bit of luck, the track will get back to something near what it was like at the outset. It was one of the best then.

You should give up. You're trolling at the levels of Starman. You seem to be displaying a complete inability to understand basic English. The original criteria are IRRELEVANT. Had he fitted those criteria he wouldn't be applying for a discretionary endorsement. There is a long section that explains this in the rules if you'd bother to read it where it explicitly explains what is required for a discretionary endorsement to be given by the BSPA. That same section says that full reasoning would be given if the discretionary endorsement was turned down and why the information provided was not sufficient. Again, the original criteria at this point are IRRELEVANT. You don't seem to be able to grasp that nobody is denying the right for the BSPA to turn it down. Indeed I may even lean towards supporting them in that decision. What isn't correct is giving a reason that he doesn't fit the original criteria. That is just ridiculous. It's like being found guilty in a court of law, appealing, arriving at your appeal and the judge saying.. "You're guilty because the original jury said so" and not bothering to even look at any new evidence or the appeal. Again, had the BSPA, from the outset stated that no discretionary endorsements would be considered this whole situation would not have occutred.

This debate shouldn't be about whether two riders should or should not be allowed to ride for two teams - it should be about whether ANY riders should! The whole situation is a complete farce and has spiralled out of control. The BSPA should at the very least be taking steps to gradually reduce the scope for allowing this nonsensical situation with a view to eventually eliminating it altogether - not trying to frame rules for extending it! Those riders who bleat that they must have two clubs "to make it pay" should spare a thought for all the riders who don't have a team at all - because they have two!

The girls that do the job do it without pressure and it's their own choice. Do'gooders telling others they are offended. Tell them to clear off.

Come on Grachan, you aren't that dumb are you? That is the criteria for an automatic visa. Becker wasn't applying for an automatic visa. Becker was applying for a discretionary endorsement. An entirely different thing where you are NOT required to meet the initial criteria (you wouldn't be applying for it if you did). Saying you aren't eligible for a DISCRETIONARY ENDORSEMENT because you don't meet the criteria for an automatic visa is about as stupid as you can get. As I've already stated, all the BSPA had to say was they didn't feel Becker was of a sufficient standard or some other excuse to cover themselves. Instead, they act like idiots and alienate another bunch of fans. All could very easily have been avoided.

AUSSIE riders rarely get a good press on here, some suggesting they are parasites to British speedway, so it is well worth watching the You Tube interview between Nigel Pearson and Jason Doyle at Somerset last night.

It’s only a matter of time before the snowflakes who can’t or won’t breastfeeed try to stop other women doing it

Dave, are you putting ya name down for the 'post box' ???

How can you make that stupid statement, when you don't know which option we're taking to fill the number 1 spot. ?

Where did i say they wouldnt try there heart out? It just doesnt look a great side... Workington fans got all bent out of shape because i said i didnt see where there race winners would come from and i still dont... they breed them soft over your way dont they

Are the stox taking a bribe as well because it needs both speedway and stox just to survive with stox bringing in more money and why does he need to take a bribe he could just sit there with Coventry speedway in his back pocket sell the assets and do nothing then it would really be the end of the bees some people just can't see the forest for the trees

Good question. I, for one, don't know the answer, but he's signed for Tarnow this year, which happens to be one of those sunday polish teams.

Errr, yes, but Newcastle are still riding on a Sunday

With the way things are with speedway these days Orlov we are lucky to have a stadium let alone a new one.So look on the positive side we will both be sitting/standing in a new stadium and both of us should feel very lucky we are living in clover towards a lot of our other speedway friends who could/have lost their stadium forever. As long as we have a stadium to watch our speedway in every thing is good.

DON'T understand the silence but all the signs are that BT will cover the PL in 2018 ....

On todays St. Petersburg ladies tennis semi final Petra Kvitova and Julia Goerges were led on court by 6 ladies in bright red tennis outfits and looked very fetching. So if you ban them you would also have to ban the players as they were wearing similar outfits I wonder what the politically correct people would say about this

Our biggest and most persistent enemy at Birmingham was the University sited on the opposite side of Aldridge road. Even though the University closed at 6pm and was in total darkness by 6.30pm (an hour before the speedway started!) they still objected on the grounds that they "might" one day keep open later! The University refused to attend the noise tests conducted by both Tony Mole and the City Council, and when they did their own tests, they sited the microphone on the stadium side of Aldridge Road as close as they could get to the stadium entrance. They had no case at all, but the threat was always more about the influence the University has with members of the Council, plus the fact that the then Chairman of the Planning Committee was a former Chanceller of this University (although in all fairness, he never tried to hide this fact, and did not allow this to affect his sense of fairness.)

So is prostitution!

As has been said numerous times on this thread, the facilities will be improved and not just for the Fours. Hosting the event is not something the club took lightly and they did not accept at first, instead going away and making sure they would be able to get everything in place they would need. Parking, catering, viewing are all things that have been thought about.

Convenient? Sanctimonious tosh. boz was simply stating the fact that Redcar fans have been abused at Newcastle in the past. To suggest it is a problem just at Redcar is disingenuous on your part.

Absolutely right. Plus a ban on non-EU riders doubling up. Good to see that Mr Masters is doing the decent thing now.

Quite agree but the select few Bears fans didn't see it that way. I wear my colourful Diamonds jacket everywhere, so stuff anybody who doesn't like it.

Quite agree. Also with so many guests last year you had half a team with official race suits and half not, which really did look amateurish.

I really prefer individual race suits. Makes the riders more identifiable.

I just think they give a team much more of a united identity rather than looking like a bunch of waifs and strays. Certainly a must if the league is going to be on telly again this year.

Massive step backwards if this is true about no racesuits.

You must be deliberately missing the point, you just have to be. We all know he doesn’t meet the criteria; hence the request for discretionary consideration. Turning down that request is fine but giving “he doesn’t meet the criteria” as the reason for doing so isn’t and doesn’t make sense.

In speedway, darts or F1 - pop them all into a burka and problem solved. They will add female "glamour" with their smiles but remain modest.

I doubt that F1 girls were coerced in any way and probably made more money than SGP so why did they feel the need to do away with them? The world has gone mad after Weinstein.

Depends on exactly what he is prepared to do about it but it’s high time the BSPA were taken to task for some of the awful decisions they make. How on earth can it be right that riders like Morris, Cook, Masters, Schlein and Harris etc can ride Championship but Nicholls & Kennett cannot despite having Premiership Averages lower than the aforementioned. Either you stop riders with a Premiership Average in excess of 6.00 from riding Championship or scrap the rule entirely and allow all with the appropriate conversion.

No it doesn't show that. The Leicester situation is a temporary solution, a ONE year deal has been agreed. This is just Brandon Estates just spinning a situation to their favour which they would've done if we wasn't running too. Doesn't mention Stox at all in that section and Leicester can't run stox. Conveniently missed stox out there as it doesn't suit their argument. This also shows they are scared that the council could insist on a new facility. Edited to add that in the next paragraph it does say that CoventryStox are not running in 2018 but the point is they would run if a local venue was suitable.

Which rule were Edinburgh seeking to break? As per the rule book we applied for a discretionary approval for a visa for Becker. That was turned down (as is the discretion) however all Edinburgh are looking for is an answer and clarity as to why? The reason of to go along with UKVI rules has been blown out of the water as they confirmed to Edinburgh they were happy that Becker met their criteria.

I'm not sure what action can or will be taken Martin but I think the SCB's problem is that the track isn't licensed by them. I think that is the logic, whether we agree with it or not. We do offer plenty of amateur racing at Scunthorpe and it is certainly available at Leicester too.

I'd have thought it was obviously a ploy to demolish the current stadium then find some good reason why a new stadium can't be built on top of the smoking ruins and how they will sadly be forced into completing the housing estate instead of a new stadium. I hate to be cynical but this plan has stunk to high heaven ever since the initial proposal was to put the new stadium car park on the centre 'green'!