Halifaxtiger

So it should, because its nothing less than a bloody disgrace . Workington had their fixtures and dates approved by the BSPA and they aren't being told to change 'a few' but all of them, regardless of the arrangements they and their riders have made and whether their stadium is available on other days. What makes it even worse is that the very promoters who are responsible for this action now will not co-operate and bring their teams to Derwent Park when asked, and the icing on the cake is that this is almost entirely at the behest of one promoter who agreed with it and then changed his mind when he couldn't get guests for injured riders. An appalling example of just how badly speedway promotions are motivated entirely by self interest without any regard for the needs of others or the best interests of the sport as a whole.

It would be difficult to tell given that they aren't stand alone. Their gates are comparable with most NL sides, I'd say. Thing is if they didn't think the price was right they'd charge more - most NL tracks are 20-30% dearer.

Belle Vue Colts is £10.

I think you are hearing exactly the same as me. It seems that the number of clubs in the planned league is less than that currently in existence so a few have to go, which suggests to me that the annulment of racing licences is less motivated by a determination that speedway clubs pay their debts (which has scarcely been a major issue in the past) than ensuring that future plans can be realised. I have heard that the promoter of one of the clubs you have mentioned (and it doesn't take the genius of an Einstein to work out which one) is about as popular as a lion at a zebra birthday party. He'd be the one to get hit, but they'd have to find a reason for it.

It can't be his fault entirely. Even if the idea to change was his - which is possible, if not likely - he can't carry it through on his own. Others must have supported it, so they are equally culpable. In addition, lets not forget that Workington have been struggling to survive for a number of seasons. Even if fixtures hadn't been changed, there's no guarantee that they would come to the tapes in 2019. Having said that, this ridiculous and selfish action unquestionably makes things more difficult for Laura Morgan. I know how much she cares about Workington Speedway but there will be limits. This could help push her towards thinking she really has had enough

As far as I can see, that's just one Friday. In addition, my suspicion is that Peterborough's difficulties with stadium availability are far worse than those of either Lakeside or Workington. Having said that, to tell a club that its arranged fixtures must change half way through the season when they have been agreed is farcical. Word I got was that there was no issue until a certain club lost a couple of riders to injury and couldn't get guests which, frankly, makes sense. I think it was clear from the outset that rider availability could be a problem if all the teams in the league were riding on one night (in which case one or two should have been refused permission to do so) but it seems that this decision has been dictated by self interest (there's a surprise ). What makes the situation even worse is I have also heard that teams have refused to come next week and on 27/28 July. In the circumstances, they shouldn't have a choice.

I have heard that too and I'd certainly think hard about it. 6 would be OK - after all, its hardly unusual - but 5 would be difficult to stomach.

Lot of dust to start with but after a few heats watering got rid of most of it. Usual very decent Derwent Park meeting, my highlight Bewley's last to first in one lap in heat 14. Berwick were poor and Workington will face much tougher tests but take nothing away from the Comets, they were impressive. All done in just over 90 minutes. Anyone missing the interval ?

I don't know, my friend. Phil Rising's comment that it is the worst he has known in 50 years - and he's been involved for at least that long - was scary. I can only hope there will be a resurgence, but can't see how. One thing though, I have no doubt that speedway - of some kind - will survive.

In your case, they are worth listening to because there's a chance you'll come back. But what is the point of listening to someone who doesn't go, doesn't watch it on television, never says a good word about it and wouldn't go if it was free ?

He is, WK. My point is why he would want to do so and why he seems to believe that others would find them credible. In addition, he's not just a disillusioned ex supporter. He's someone who doesn't go and has absolutely no intention of ever going or watching speedway again. That means his posts are overwhelmingly negative without a good word to be said and as bad as things might be, speedway can still be a hugely entertaining sport. You yourself were a disillusioned former supporter (thankfully, not any more ), but there is no comparison between your previous position and his.

If you have no time for speedway, don't go and have no intention of going and won't watch it on television, what on earth are you doing on a speedway forum ?

They certainly don't do the sport any favours and Tsunami is right, they are despised by the paying fan. With regard to the BSPA, if you are referring to the management committee alone that is harsh. Individual promotions must take some of the blame, because it is they who are responsible for what happens at their tracks. The problem I have with Moxey's posts is that he is someone who is fully aware of speedway but doesn't go, wouldn't go if it was free and doesn't even watch it on a cable channel that he is paying for. Given that he has no intention of going at all and has no idea whether it is good value or not why on earth should we consider that his opinion has any degree of credibility whatsoever ?

He's the vice chairman of the BSPA. Are you suggesting that he bears no responsibility at all ? This is an absolute shambles. If there was going to be a problem with Workington, Lakeside and Peterborough riding Fridays they should have been told that at the start of the season, not half way through when all arrangements had been made. After all, its not as though it couldn't be seen at that time. I wonder if Scunthorpe and Sheffield - both of whom are promoted by management committee members - are being totally accommodating to Workington's requests for rearranged fixtures given that it is those promoters who decided that race days must change. If not, it simply adds insult to injury.

You're right about this thread (like many others) degenerating into a personal abuse session but a discussion about the way a promotion has treated a fan is both fully justifiable and highly relevant. The simple fact is that far too often promotions treat their paying customers as simpletons, ignoramuses or fools and then have the gall to complain about poor attendances seemingly without any consideration that the two might actually be linked.

And yet when I went at the beginning of last season the place was packed. Literally thousands were there. Its none of those things that has done Rye House, its the switch of race nights.

I have said before that scurrilous, vicious and unfounded allegations cannot and should not be made but, you're right, on occasion they most certainly are. Further, you are also right about the fact that no-one shouldn't have to put up with such remarks - I think I have said in the past that criticism should be tempered by the knowledge that speedway tracks are loss making and continual and unjustifiable attacks could result in closure. Having said that, that doesn't justify replies couched in the same language or draconian actions against a paying customer. I would maintain that a public response to any form of criticism (however nasty, spiteful or untrue) can be put in terms that are reasonable to most people and, if they are, they reflect favourably on the promotion concerned. The simple truth in my experience is that far too often fans are either ignored or treated with contempt and even abuse - I have named two instances on here and could easily state several more. That's not good enough and, indeed, it is one of the sport's worst failings.

The thing was the young man in question absolutely loved his team and his speedway. He had some very good friends that he saw every week, so it wasn't even just about the racing. Understandably, he really did not want to get banned. He was treated disgracefully, both by the clown that had a go at him in the first place and the promotion (to be fair, one of the co-promoters dealt with the matter to the satisfaction of all concerned in the end). I think they should engage with fans at every opportunity. They have to be careful what they say, but simply ignoring comment or responding angrily just isn't on and will rebound on them. Interestingly I was putting this view to Laura Morgan at Workington last weekend

Perhaps I should first say that I am a huge fan of Workington Speedway. To me, though, its a question of how you respond and, in this case, I think it has been unnecessarily heavy handed. Surely a chat and a warning would have been more appropriate if the comments were considered to be unreasonable ? It is easy for me to say but you just cannot allow the pressure that you are under to affect how you treat your paying customers. You can't do everything for them and its a case of sorting the wheat from the chaff, but I don't think that the consequences of how you reply can be underestimated - be that for good or bad. I have stated the following example many times and apologise for doing so again, but it sums up my position in a nutshell and it is based upon personal experience. I went to one track, saw an awful meeting on a dreadful, ridiculously dusty track (the meeting itself was eventually abandoned) and took to this forum to state my opinion in no uncertain terms. As a paying customer I believe I am entitled to do that. A co-promoter at that track sought me out and gave me 15 minutes of aggressive abuse. I went to another, Isle of Wight. Same dusty track, same response from me. I then got a truly remarkable - for speedway - reply from their promoter, Barry Bishop. It was : 'We're sorry about the dust,. We are new and learning and we will try to make sure it doesn't happen again. We really hope you come back and see us again and, if you do, we'll take you on a pits tour and the centre green'. It perhaps says a lot that I couldn't believe my eyes. Same problem, same criticism, entirely different responses. One track I have not been back to since, the other has become a huge favourite for whom I bang the drum on every occasion.

Completely agree. Scunny has always been one of my favourite tracks but last night was poor stuff on a track that looked patchy to say the least. The sight of Auty desperately trying to pass summed it up. Sublime performance from Schlein backed up by big contributions from Allen and the impressive Berge saw Scunny through. Equally impressive was Nicol, thoroughly deserving an extra ride. Best wishes to Danny Philips, that was a nasty one.

That doesn't mean that we are free to make scurrilous, vicious and unfounded attacks on individuals. There must be some sense of rationality, truth and fairness in what we post. Having said that, I have never had cause to think that Jenga's contributions would fall within the above description. In these days where every paying fan is like gold dust, you have to be very careful and very certain about taking such an action. To do so utterly without warning - and it seems that that is the case - is far too heavy handed for my liking and will attract the bad publicity that it has. I have a huge amount of time for Workington Speedway but this is an own goal that will do their credibility no good whatsoever. A good friend of mine once posted some strong criticism of his team's track surface - completely justifiably, and he wasn't the only one - on here. The person responsible for the track sought him out, verbally abused him and attempted to persuade the promotion to issue him with a ban (and he has been a long term and passionate supporter). The promotion then insisted that he apologise and he did so, out of fear that he would not be able to attend again. I was appalled that a genuine fan was treated in such a way. I would suggest that there was only one person who should have been shown the door, and it wasn't him. One of speedway's worst failings is the way it treats its paying customers and sometimes I think they will never learn. Engage, not confront.

Sadly, and from every source I have ever heard, its fact.

Which of us doesn't have an issue with a track that has a meeting abandoned due to the state of the surface, has13fallers in 10 heats and sends three riders home injured and then calls off their next scheduled meeting due to the track ? Every single speedway fan puts rider safety first, so every single one will have an issue. Do you ? I am concerned about one club - and it is just one - doing their job properly and ensuring riders are as safe as they can. What you are saying is that this isn't Stoke's fault at all - because you still haven't condemned them in anyway and almost certainly will not, regardless of what happened - and that Saturday night was down to riders and bikes. It wasn't, for the simple reason that it hasn't happened anywhere else to that degree. If the bikes are so bad, why were there just two fallers at Belle Vue on Friday ? Your solution to what happened is to have every rider in the country change all their equipment to suit the needs of promoters who simply can't be bothered to put the time and effort in to prepare a track properly. Mine is to make those who think they can get away with that accountable when riders are injured.

What sticks in my craw is that you are attempting to say that this is down to riders, not the track and I'd say that it is difficult to see how that is not a defence of Stoke (as is quoting that rider). You're certainly not condemning a club that had a meeting abandoned due to the surface and who then cancelled their next meeting 24 hours before hand for the same reason and without any adverse weather (unlike everyone else on this thread). Care to do so now? I think we can both agree that as bad a position as speedway is in it would be far worse if such circumstances were a regular occurrence. The rider quote I saw in respect of this meeting described Stoke as a 'sh*thole' (his words, not mine), I know Isle of Wight asked for the track inspection because they did not want to send their riders out and its clear the referee thought the meeting had to be abandoned. That (taking also into account the number of falls and injuries) sounds like the track was not merely rough, but dangerous. There's a difference.

I don't think anyone that went to Workington last night or Belle Vue on Friday would say that the product is poor. Mixed is perhaps a better description. Otherwise, I agree .