Halifaxtiger

While this thread maybe full of aggression, the forum as a whole is packed with ideas from long standing, thinking and committed fans about how to improve the sport. Some are ridiculous, some are unworkable and some require the injection of unfeasibly huge amounts of cash. Some, however, might just be worth a try. Problem is, with the exception of Barry Bishop, Neil Watson, Jayne Moss & Laurence Rogers not one single promoter or team manager engages with fans on this forum. Indeed, most of them treat it with utter contempt and even loathing. I should point out that Barry attracts 4 likes for every post he makes, a truly remarkable reflection of just how much his contribution is valued. Even if paying customers make constructive comment or suggestion, then, they aren't even read. Its also indicative of just how those who run the sport view the fan who pays every week. The number of accounts of the quite dreadful way paying customers are treated is damning - I know, I have had some of that. I'd say that much of the vilification is deserved. For me, the worst is the cheating, one-upmanship and culture of favours and corruption at the heart of the sport that leaves fans totally disillusioned. Its a bit of a long shot to say that without the decision to prevent Workington riding on Fridays last season the Comets might have survived - a decision motivated by the most appalling self interest - but it certainly didn't do them any favours. I could probably name half a dozen occasions when rulings have been made that were completely contrary to the rules of the sport at the behest of one promoter or another. The BSPA can legitimately blame the weather, landlords, riders, the press and heaven knows who else for the problems that the sport faces. But they can't get away from that one and I don't think the damage it has done can be overestimated.

Sadly, I think you're right. Another example of how the sport is being run for the benefit of its paid employees rather than its paying customers.

I'd say its more down to preparation. If a track like Swindon has one line, that's the fault of the curator (although he maybe under orders). Size and shape is crucial (that's why the NSS is as good as it is) but its not the be all and end all. The way I see it, if Scunthorpe can be good for racing there's no reason why Swindon - and others - can't be.

I don't agree. I'd say that racing today is no better or worse than it has always been. I think its fair to say that neither Sheffield nor King's Lynn are as good as they used to be, but Workington, Peterborough and Plymouth are better. Berwick remains the same, and I think there are few that would dispute that even the superlative Hyde Road is matched by the NSS. No track today has the appalling standard of preparation of places like Nelson & Doncaster, and there is surely none that has the notorious gaters paradise reputation that Coventry had. I saw good meetings and bad meetings then and I see them now.

I'll be surprised if you have actually seen him. I saw him a couple of times last season and he was just superb - the most talented youngster I have seen since Woffinden. The first was riding for Mildenhall at the NSS - never the easiest place for visiting NL riders. After a couple of seconds he really got the hang of the place and his last to first in heat 15 was just sublime. The second was for Ipswich against Scunthorpe in what was probably the most impressive individual performance I saw anywhere in 2018. Paid 14 from 5 starts against Championship opposition tells its own story. If he can stay clear of injury, he should easily put at least 2 points on that staring average.

That's a matter of debate. Lets face it, people want to see a winning side and, rightly or wrongly, for most that matters more than the quality of the entertainment. If your starting line up is 'uninspiring' and/or you start losing your home meetings, they won't go in the first place or will then desert the team in droves. As such, cutting costs on your team can actually be equally or more disastrous than spending too much. A good example of this was Sheffield in 2011/12. A very attractive team in 2011(heat leaders Parker, Auty & Ashworth) finished second in the league but ran up a loss. The decision was taken the following season to cut costs on riders (heat leaders Hall, Franc & Wells), with the result that in 2012 they finished second bottom. Word I got was that the losses more than doubled. I'd say its a balancing act and, sadly, I am not sure Birmingham have got it right.

I think you are absolutely right about the part time status for riders. At the moment it seems to me that the sport is being run for their benefit and that just has to stop. Having said that, Hull, Bradford & Long Eaton all closed due to the loss of their stadiums rather than financial difficulties. I also think that sports teams are different to running a commercial business, and that is reflected right across the spectrum. Whereas a business just has to make money, many sports teams these days are more of a private hobby for wealthy individuals. Rugby Union's premiership, for example, loses tens of millions a year and the majority of clubs are supported by private backers. The problem isn't losing money so much as the scale of the losses. If Laura Morgan had been blowing £5,000 a year rather than £50,000 a year supporting the Comets I think its highly likely they would still be in operation.

South stand...………….unless its been there so long it is no longer temporary !!

Thanks for making the position clear. While Campton is an exception, it is extremely difficult not have a great deal of sympathy for him and it is possible that he will have to give up racing. I can only hope that sanity prevails and that he is allowed to stay anyway given the almost unique circumstances.

Ian Thomas apparently told Tim Stone - in respect of the Queensway Stadium, Newport - that you don't own a corner shop and open it one day a week. He's right. The trick for the NSS is to make maximum use of the facility and not be tied to speedway alone. I'll be very surprised if that isn't part of the plan and, indeed, will have been the whole time. There's no doubt that it is a fantastic for speedway but that just isn't enough. I am aware that Isle of Wight use Smallbrook for other events - a pop concert has been held there for the last two years, and its nothing like the size of the NSS - while Somerset use their car parking area for all sorts of other activities including auctions and car boot sales. There's no reason why any other club that owns their facility can't do the same. The fact that the stadium still has temporary toilets and temporary terracing (which apparently costs a packet) suggests the council haven't covered their end. Given their apparent determination to impose non disclosure agreements and suppress documentation the one thing they are most certainly trying to cover is their back. It can be argued that the quality of racing isn't enough, and I'd agree. To counter that, just imagine how many would be there if it was rubbish.

Whether Tungate makes them stronger or not, he'll be bloody good value. He's going to be missed at the NSS this season because I can't see his replacements putting in some of the amazing rides he did. The only thing is I think he won't fancy riding at no 1 at all. He's improved for sure, but he hit the rails riding there for Somerset.

One of the reasons for my view is precisely because I know how hard you would get hit if anything happened to Sheffield.

What you say is true, but if someone promised to help and then reneged on it I don't think that should merely be swept under the carpet. Based upon what BB has said - and he is usually right - the entire scenario of Workington coming to the tapes in 2019 and riders being signed could have been avoided. That's no small matter and broken promises regarding sponsorship have hit speedway hard over the years. Having said that, the criticism should be kept in context and with 2020 in mind. When a track closes, riders generally move on to another club. Of the Lakeside team from 2018, all are competing in 2019. Lets face it, riders losing their team place - often through no fault of their own - is hardly unusual. In this case, it is the timing of Workington's closure that has hit hard. I must admit I haven't read any article, but I find it most surprising that one team folding means that a riding career is finished. I can't recall another rider like that. On the other hand, it is entirely possible that should the Comets not come to the tapes in 2020 or for years after, many of those who attended in 2018 will never go to speedway again. The overwhelming majority of fans simply do not switch from one club to another - some of the Workington faithful will having been going for 20 years - and that's why a track closure hits them harder.

On the Isle of Wight facebook page, Jason Pipe has said they will be released this week.

I'm not a diehard, but I am gutted about the Comets closing. I live about 150 miles away from Workington and attended more meetings because of my friendship with announcer Dave Hoggart. I went about every other Saturday, and that consisted of travelling over to Dave's and then a superb run over the North Pennines and the Lake District (this included much debate, laughing and piss taking ) . Into the Henry Bessemer for a pint or 3 and a huge mixed grill, then on to the track. The racing was usually pretty good and then there was another pint and a natter with the locals in the bar afterwards. It was almost always a belter of day and while it was usually £50 a pop, I'll miss it hugely.

I would say that the credibility of your post is affected by the fact that you no longer go and hence have little jdea what the modern speedway fan thinks or wants. Furthermore, I'd also say that your view is largely contradicted by the opinions expressed on this forum (which are those of a small minority of those who actually attend) Ask anyone who has seen Danny Ayres perform whether characters are still around. Between 1981 and 1990 around 20 riders were granted testimonials for riding 10 years for the same team. That's 2 per year, so its incorrect to even suggest that the same riders rode for the same clubs year in, year out. In 1980, for example, the then Cradley promoter Dan McCormick savagely denounced the points limit for tearing apart the team he had put together. It is more prevalent today, but the simple fact is that the main reason for team changes - the points limit - existed then and exists now so such changes were inevitable, and of course in those days there was no competing pressure from Poland or Sweden. I could make a very strong case that freshening up a line up season after season actually provides an impetus for fans to go. Craig Cook was Belle Vue's longest serving rider, but many are quite content to see him leave because they think he has gone stale. Personally, I disagree but I can see their point. You seem to be making out that the modern day speedway fan has no attachment to their team whatsoever, and merely turns up for the sake of something better to do. That is complete nonsense. Do you seriously believe that the majority of current fans couldn't care less who wins a race ? The simple truth is the number of neutrals like me is minimal compared with those who go week in, week out to watch their team (you only have to see how many say they no longer go when their club closes or read the comments of gutted Workington fans to realise just how much the team matters) and are passionate with how that team performs . That is evidenced by the majority of posts on this forum : criticise a team and expect to receive a backlash from its supporters. I'd say speedway's decline is little to do with the make up of individual teams. True, fans do get upset when a favourite leaves but its rare that there is significant anger about a riders departure - I am struggling to think of the last time there was major criticism of someone being left out. It is, as far as I am concerned, more to do with Falcace's point that it hasn't evolved to meet the demands of the modern public than anything else.

The NL boys - and despite what you might read, it is impossible to make a living from NL speedway - manage it. Chris Widman, for example, has his own butcher's shop. Tom Perry works in a bank, and Ben Morley is a pipe fitter. Dean Felton was (and is) a courier, and Tim Webster a wagon driver. There are hundreds (if not thousands) of professional sportsmen across the country who manage to combine their playing with their jobs. Not easy, maybe, but anything but impossible.

Its not necessarily the case that cutting costs cuts the quality. A business can reduce a significant chunk of operating expenditure (ie staff wages) without affecting the quality of their product. Its simply a case of employees having less take home pay, and that's precisely the point that TMC is making. I accept your view regarding the reduction in standards but I would question what the alternative is. After all, it is very easy to be critical but far more difficult to propose solutions. If you are opposed to cutting costs, presumably you advocate maintaining or increasing them. There's no doubt that that would be a massive financial gamble, and I have yet to see any one offer to put their own money up to fund it. That means they are risking others finances at no danger to themselves, and that is also very easy to do. I think focussing on existing customers alone would be mistaken, but part of speedway's problem is that it has, to a degree, taken them for granted. Riders were travelling from Eastbourne to Glasgow in the 1970's. In addition, in 1975 they would have been doing Workington, Crewe and Paisley as well. Stories of long distance travel were numerous : Mike Sampson (Exeter-Barrow) Graham Jones (Lowestoft-Berwick) Rob Maxfield (Manchester-Exeter). They were for home meetings !! Don't get me wrong, I don't think for a single minute that the riders don't deserve their pay, whatever that might be. But the simple truth is that speedway can't afford it andthat issue just cannot be off the table. What is also undoubtedly true is that speedway has never been a full time occupation for the overwhelming majority of riders, yet some today think that it is or should be. Where I very much agree is that it can't just be a case of cutting costs while ignoring further revenue streams or ways to attract further spectators.

Up to a point, I agree. In 1978 (when British speedway had a remarkable 38 teams) Tony Davey took to the press to state that to buy a new engine he had to sell his car. At the time, Davey was a 9.5 heat leader in the British League and an England international, so its fair to say he was a top rider if not in the world class category. To my knowledge, at the time he and his brother ran a garage.Tom Owen, the unquestioned NL star during the late 1970's, ran a plant hire business during his racing days. I could name 4 or 5 other similar examples here. How many current riders(NL excepted) have other employment during the season ? Truth is speedway has never been a full time occupation for the overwhelming majority of riders, with only the really top boys managing that. These days, however, it seems to me that that is precisely their expectation and it is why we have the blight on British Speedway called uncontrolled doubling up. It also seems to me that the only thing that is off the table when considering the future of the sport is riders wages. Given the proportion of overall expenses that that accounts for, it must surely be considered although it can reasonably be argued that that is as much the fault of promotions who pay far more than they can afford. Make no mistake, I have every sympathy for Kyle Bickley and make no criticism of his view. He stayed loyal to Workington, only to lose his team place with no hope in the short term of getting another. That, however, shouldn't be allowed to cloud an issue - ie riders making a living from speedway - that is, as you have said, right at the heart of the sport's problems.

Statement this morning that the Comets will not run in 2019. I am deeply saddened by this news. Although I did not attend every week I loved coming up on Saturdays - a terrific run, some tea and a couple in the Henry Bessemer, some great company and almost always a good meeting. A real shame, but I am not totally surprised as attendances simply weren't good enough.

I find that those who wish to knock the sport paint a picture of those who attempt to defend it as blind optimists, utterly refusing to accept its minority status and living in cloud cuckoo land regarding the deep problems that it has. It is no coincidence that many of those no longer attend and my suspicion is that they do so in an attempt to justify their own decision not to go any more. In actual fact - and I attend meetings right across the country regularly - nothing could be further from the truth and I know of no-one like that. Every single current fan accepts that speedway is minority and they are all deeply concerned about its future prospects for survival, its declining attendances and revenue creation and the appalling self interests at the heart of the sport. The scale and range of critical comment on this forum is evidence of that. Even in its hey day, speedway never got the media attention its size and attendances deserved. It would say that that was partly but not totally the fault of those within the sport. It would also be very wrong to insist that those who advocate Woffinden's inclusion do so simply because of their own bias towards speedway, rather than on an at least a partly balanced basis given other nominees. Truth is being a competitor in a minority sport - or an 'irrelevance' - has never been a handicap where the BBC's nominations are concerned. If it were, Lizzy Yarnold would surely not be there (as you said yourself, only 2 out of more than 60 recognised her and on University Challenge recently none did). Yet as the greatest ever British Winter Olympian her nomination, to me, is absolutely correct. By virtue of his three world titles, Woffinden can reasonably be stated to be the greatest British speedway rider of all time (or the most 'decorated' one, using the BBC's own term). As such, he isn't just a World Champion. I would say that their achievements are almost identical. Clearly, they both represent minority sports. My view, therefore, is that they should be treated equally. Your view (because you have stated no criticism of or opposition to her nomination) is that they should be treated entirely differently. Which one of us is biased ?

I think that it is more to do with how the media have been treated on occasion - Phil Rising has mentioned a few horror stories in his time. Having said that, I would say that even in its hey day speedway never attracted the media coverage that it deserved.

Perhaps the irony is that the choice of Lizzy Yarnold has not been criticised or opposed by anyone. As such, it seems to me that everyone is entirely in favour of nomination of a British sportsman whose achievement is unprecedented even if the sport is a tiny minority one (Me included, I would say). Unless that sport is called speedway, when it isn't even worth a mention

If Lizzy Yarnold does have more recognition it's not much more given that only 2 out of more than 60 knew of her, and that's with the benefit of mainstream media coverage that would dwarf Woffinden's. Is it an indictment of speedway or of the media coverage of it ? As I have pointed out, Woffinden isn't just a World Champion he's the only British rider ever to achieve 3 titles and it's therefore a matter of unprecedented success. While I take Sydney's point, it is fair argument that he is the greatest exponent of a sport that Britain has ever produced (ironically, Lizzy Yarnold is the same). I actually think that is worth more than a mere mention.

Its possible that there have been many British World Champions, gold medallists or other record breakers in 2018. Woffinden isn't just a World Champion, though. By virtue of his three titles, he can be said to be the greatest British speedway rider of all time. Certainly his achievement is unique. With the possible exception of the truly remarkable Lizzy Yarnold - whose inclusion shows getting within the chosen names is absolutely nothing to do with the size of the sport you represent - none of the other nominees and few other sportsmen could claim that. To me, that means that the complaints of undeniably biased speedway fans that he did not even get a mention are entirely justified.