Halifaxtiger

Rubbish. Its a case of balancing the need of training young riders against the financial viability of a business. If a team like Mildenhall put out a similar side they would close within weeks, because people simply won't pay £10-£12 (or maybe slightly less) to watch an MDL meeting. Waco's point that the Stags team could have a serious effect on attendances at other clubs is entirely valid. Why do think Rob Godfrey has arranged nearly all Stags meetings as double headers with the Scorpions ? The answer is because he knows that if they ran as stand alone meetings no-one would go (or certainly not enough to make them financially viable). He is able to do that; Mildenhall can't. What sticks in my craw here is 'the win at all costs' comment. Mildenhall have one rider who might not be termed as developing (Danny Halsey) as do Scunthorpe. Cradley, too, have one (Steve Worrall is younger than Arron Mogridge). What both the Fen Tigers and Heathens have done is put out sides that are competitive and will satisfy their customers but at the same time gives track time and competition to teams full of young talented riders.

Good meeting Compton, Stead and Roynon all very impressive, with Adam denied a maximum by a shocking refereeing decision in heat 6.

That's the bit that caught my eye. An excellent, objective, no punches pulled article of the kind for which Speedway Star used to be renowned. Great stuff

The problem with Stoke Speedway threads is that some of the comments are entirely subjective and made by those with axes to grind against the promotion. If Stoke swept the board in the NL this season and then announced a major stadium upgrade and their return to the PL, there would still be those who were critical and a few more whose silence would be thunderous.

I think the thing is this isn't just about speedway or even motor sports - its about almost anything. An MUFC fan might find it amusing until he was advised that Old Trafford could, at least potentially, be shut down by one person. The judgement and the law on which it is based is, in my opinion, perverse. How can someone who creates a problem bear no responsibility for it ? I have signed but I will circulate it to people who have no interest in speedway because they could just as easily be affected by this ridiculous decision.

Can I claim compensation for my injuries ? Just thawed out, bloody freezing. Good meeting in front of the biggest crowd I have seen at Brough for a long time. Barring mishap, I think both sides will be in the play offs come September.

And for those who don't.............. http://speedwayupdates.proboards.com/thread/13069/workington-newcastle-7pm-thomas-shield?page=1&scrollTo=234328

If you will recognise someone at Brough its him, believe me.

I second that. This person is to be avoided at all costs.

Same place as you go to, I expect See you Sunday, mate.

Mildenhall and Dudley. Make Glasgow and Edinburgh look like best buddies.

That's much appreciated, thanks.

That's netweather I think. None of them are infallible, I just think they are the most reliable on advanced forecasts. We'll see.

Me too, taking in the return on Sunday. I have been watching the forecast for the last couple of days and its been a bit up and down. Currently XC weather says snow overnight and dry in the morning followed by a couple of light showers in the afternoon and dry again in the evening. Fingers crossed they are right.

I'd say you are right, which is the one reason all meetings are doubled up. It'll depend on just how competitive they are. If they are very weak, proud panther has a point. There's every possibility that people will overlook the development side and see them as nothing but an MDL team in the NL, unable to provide entertainment or value for money. Established riders ? The two teams that have been criticised here are Dudley & Mildenhall. I'd say Dudley have two riders who might be seen as established, Mildenhall have one. As do Scunthorpe. It is ridiculous to even hint that Scunthorpe have a monopoly on developing riders because quite clearly they don't. Ask Rob Godfrey what happened to his gates when his CL team were humping teams week in, week out. I also think there's a great deal of difference between hammering competitive opposition and hammering a team of rookies. As I say, it depends just how good they are. There's no question that attractive opposition pull in bigger gates than those who are unattractive. If they are very weak, there's every chance people simply will not go.

Its a bit of a long shot, but if there is another Tai in there (or something like) people will be queuing up to see them. If there isn't, they could be a burden to the rest of the league. The way I see it Rob Godfrey considers it far too much of a financial risk to put them on their own, so nearly all their meetings are fixed up as double headers. As such, he won't suffer a hit at the turnstiles but there's a very real possibility that every other club will.

The thing is that it is not financially possible for the other clubs to all do it - they rely on the income generated at the gate. Look through the Stags home fixtures and you will find that just one isn't a double header with the Scorpions. That's almost certainly deliberate because of the standard of the Stags team and it means that you pay for the NL meeting whether you want to or not. Ask yourself how many people would £10 or £12 to go along to watch the kind of team they have put out at a stand alone club like Mildenhall. There's no doubt in my mind that people would see it as nothing less than a training session and rather than watch that they would go elsewhere, with the result that the club would fold. With their policy of double headers that isn't a problem for Scunthorpe. I'm certainly not knocking what Scunny are doing, that's up to them. But to suggest that all the other NL clubs follow the same route would see the stand alones close in no time. The trick is to combine youth development with being attractive enough to pull in the crowds, and Mildenhall are excellent example of that. Jacobs, Bates & Halsey are a top heat leader trio at and then there's Coles, Kingston - who could be a real puller this season - and Mountain. Its hard to say that isn't a development side.

Yes, it puzzles me too - particularly when the current owners said near enough the same things and that the parting of ways was down to 'different directions', whatever that may mean. You have to ask whether it was about the running of the club or simply because his face didn't fit for some reason. In the petty, spiteful, backstabbing world of speedway the latter is, after all, entirely possible.

I'd never deny that I count Hoggy as a friend, but I can say for sure that I would have made the same comments even if I had never met him. The fact that you can't even give him credit for being a major player in the continued existence of Sheffield Speedway suggests that your opinion is far more subjective than mine. I agree. After all, you wouldn't want a drug baron or someone like Plymouth's ex promoter involved. Other than that, though, I think Spinny is right. What has happened with Hoggy is shabby to say the least (and hopefully not a sign of things to come) but what matters most is that the Tigers will come to the tapes this season and that they have an attractive line up.

I think that any speedway is better than no speedway. But I don't believe that it ever needs to be a case of any speedway, and that is really the point.

How bloody ungrateful can you get I think its fair to say that Dave Hoggart did not single handedly save Sheffield Speedway, but he did play a major part in it. He kept things going while there was the uncertainty about a takeover, signed riders regardless of that, put the consortium in place , dealt with all the issues surrounding their purchase and was the front man until recently. To say nothing less than 'good riddance' is appalling. The talk of a third party 'pulling the strings' is interesting, because Whisperer is usually correct. As Elephantman says, if there is such a person then the only reason they are hidden is because they have something to hide. To return to Hoggy, I would say that showing someone of his knowledge, contacts, experience, capability and passion the door could well be Sheffield's loss (please, please tell me that we won't have that clown on the mic who knows nothing about speedway instead) and, just possibly, someone else's gain.

I don't agree, Rob. I think the reason for the animosity against Poole and their promoter is jealousy, and its of the kind that has seen many take great glee in the (apparent) downfall of Manchester United. There's no question that Poole are the most successful speedway club in the country on track, and one of the most successful off it. That's the kind of success that inspires envy. Throwing races isn't new. I can certainly remember Cradley being accused of it in the 1980's, and saw Somerset do it at Rye House last year in a (successful) attempt to get a match point. Great club they might be, but they aren't averse to taking such dubious actions and they aren't by any stretch the only ones. One man's manipulation is another man's skilled management. Remember when Coventry did it to keep Pawlicki at reserve ? Again, they aren't alone. The situation at Belle Vue illustrates the point even more, because I really don't see how any blame might be attached to Poole. Belle Vue were the ones (grossly) at fault that day. The fact that they have supporters whose inane comments annoy everyone is also something that isn't exclusive to Poole by a long chalk.

Read Vog's post, Matt. Take it from me, there are few as passionate about Stoke Speedway as he is (or I should say was). If he is giving up going, that means he has lost interest to the extent that if it does close he won't miss it that much.

The thing is Ray is that if you are granted planning permission to run speedway, stock cars etc and you do so within that planning permission (and there is nothing to suggest that the stadium owners did otherwise) you would imagine that you are OK. Clearly not, and the planning permission therefore counts for nothing. So basically if you break the terms of the planning permission you are in trouble and if you don't.....you are still (at least potentially) in trouble. I think Rick makes fair point. For a start, you have to remember where Mildenhall Speedway is. No track in the country (Buxton excepted) is more isolated. Furthermore, the noise at 2am wasn't enough to disturb me, and I was in the stadium compound about 20 yards from the track. Is it right that established procedures are abandoned at the behest of just 2 people ? I think that you not only have to look at what the stadium owners wanted, but also what the householder wanted. If memory serves me correctly, on the basis of the original decision the restrictions they proposed would probably have Mildenhall Stadium uneconomic. Being reasonable rubs both ways. What really sticks in my craw is the ruling that coming to an area is to be brushed aside as invalid. In essence, the person that created the problem here (because the noise issue did not exist -at least to the degree it does now- until the householder moved in) bears no responsibility for it. While we might debate this issue backwards and forwards (in truth, I don't think there is a great deal of disagreement) I feel pretty certain that there is no-one who has contributed to this thread who believes that the fact that these people moved into a house next to the stadium is not a most important and relevant issue in the determination of this case.

'Accordingly, it appears clear to me that it is no defence for a defendant who is sued in nuisance to contend that the claimant came to the nuisance' Taken from the court judgement in this case (to be fair, it is backed up by a raft of other cases). In my view, that's bloody ridiculous. 'Quite apart from this, it seems wrong in principle that, through the grant of a planning permission, a planning authority should be able to deprive a property-owner of a right to object to what would otherwise be a nuisance', Basically, planning permission is pretty much irrelevant.