Halifaxtiger

It'll help because they are far more likely to put their house in order to avoid further financial penalties and because we simply cannot allow such negligence to go unpunished. Perhaps a suspended fine might be a possibility, payable only if matters do not improve. What must be the case is that our tracks are made as safe as they can be and that anyone who does not ensure that basic conditions for safety are in place - and there is no doubt that adequate lighting is one of them - is dealt with appropriately.

I am sure that we can all agree that a promotion who risk riders lives by having faulty electrics - and, lets face it, this is anything but the first time - deserves to be heavily punished. I really don't see that a club being unable to afford a fine for an act of gross negligence and irresponsibility is any reason not to impose a financial penalty. The alternative, of course, is to allow them to get away scot free and continue to behave in exactly the same way.

This is what I had to say yesterday : PS I must admit I am wondering why I bother going elsewhere when Belle Vue is the closest to my home . There was more passing in one race here than in all 30 at Workington and Berwick over the weekend. At about two-thirds full there was plenty of atmosphere in the South Stand and, at least in part due to extraordinary efforts of Belle Vue's remarkable mascot, I'd be surprised if there wasn't quite a bit in the Grandstand. I have a lot of time for your views, always have. But to refuse to go to what is, I believe, pretty much universally acknowledged as the best racing track in the country - Peter Adams was saying only yesterday how all the riders love it - simply because of H& S is plain daft and to prefer Stoke borders on insanity. Still, your choice.

I cannot believe you are being serious here. One is a world class stadium with a world class track with a management that engage with the supporters and the best presentation in British Speedway. The other is an utterly rundown dump with a dreadful track and a surly, aggressive and indeed abusive management who turn out poor quality teams year in, year out. Its little wonder that this forum is full of critical comments and I can say that it is the one track that I refuse to go to (regardless of the opposition) and I know I am anything but alone in that. Kirkmanshulme Lane wasn't much better and I very much doubt that there is a single Belle Vue - or indeed any other - speedway fan who would choose that over the NSS. Most of them would laugh at such a suggestion. I went yesterday and it had everything - except a close finish - that a speedway meeting should have. Huge crowd, wonderful weather, fantastic racing (go on youtube to see Dan Bewley's astonishing pass of Sam Masters), superb presentation and Adrian Smith (the CEO of Belle Vue Speedway) in the South Stand talking to fans.

12(6) at King's Lynn and 7+2 (4) at Poole suggest otherwise. Even taking into account a poor performance at Swindon, he's still averaging over 6 away.

Having seen all three meetings over the weekend at Workington, Berwick & Belle Vue he was disappointing at the first two. I should point out, though, that he is an inconsistent gater and there were more passes in one heat today at NSS then in 30 heats at Derwent Park & Shielfield. Such a rider will always have problems if the surface simply doesn't permit overtaking. Give him a track that he can pass on and maybe things might change. His overhauling of Sam Masters was simply brilliant (its on youtube).

Cracking meeting with Wolves playing a full part. Bewley's brilliant win in heat 6 to beat Masters was the highlight but there was some decent stuff in almost every race. Glorious day brought out a huge crowd. Word for the track staff who did a fantastic job given the weather. Star of the show was, again, .................Chase the Ace. Mascots are usually pretty mediocre but he is nothing less than magic. PS I must admit I am wondering why I bother going elsewhere when Belle Vue is the closest to my home . There was more passing in one race here than in all 30 at Workington and Berwick over the weekend.

That's the way I saw it. Its an attempt to cut out cheating where a team has no chance of getting anything more than a third in a race and one of their riders deliberately lays down to get a re-run. You can see the reasoning quite clearly and I'd be surprised if many would disagree with it. Heeps simply fell - it was only on the first bend after all - but, to be fair to Mauger 65, he could (probably) have cleared the track and may have failed to do so just because Pickering was third. Not a deliberate lay down, but still potentially attempting to gain an advantage by staying on the track and causing the race to be stopped. While I suspect that is not the precise ground for use of the rule - which is highly discretionary - thinking about it in the end there's very little difference between staying down after a fall and deliberately bailing out.

Its affected my attendance at Belle Vue. When you wake at 4.45 for work getting home at 10.30 or so isn't the best.

Highly entertaining meeting, one of the best I have seen at Newcastle. Ipswich probably should have won as the decision to handicap Pickering in heat 10 was harsh to say the least.

36-36 after 12

Think you are spot on with both posts here. The riders certainly seem to be having trouble with bend 2 in particular and that looked down to too much grip rather than not enough. It was, however, possible to pass - as both Jensen and Wilson-Dean proved. I thought the closeness of the score line kept things entertaining and there was indeed a huge amount of effort from both sides. Meeting all done in 90 minutes and no interval

Matt Marson is an Australian rider born in Australia. Under NL rules in force, he is permitted to start on a 3.00 average for Mildenhall. Apart from the fact that Marson has one British parent and this Polish lad apparently has none, I really don't see the difference yet I haven't seen anyone complaining about what the Fen Tigers have done. I am also unbiased and, to me, its simply a question of adhering to the specific letter of the law (or, more accurately, SCB Regulations).

When I have seen him I'd agree. I'd be surprised if Belle Vue took him on on the strength of his name, though, so hopefully he's improved significantly. We'll find out on Good Friday.

British passport + new to British speedway = 3.00 average. Its in the NL regulations. As to a rider taking advantage of that, cue Nick Morris.

Martin Widman & Barry Bishop did a presentation for the Nuneaton Speedway Supports Club a couple of nights ago and apparently went down a storm. Unsurprisingly

I think he's right. I went in the early 80's and the racing was no different. My Dad, who went in the early 50's, always said 'first of the gate always wins'. The only thing is gates are affected by the quality of the racing. I go to Scunthorpe and Belle Vue simply because of the entertainment and I doubt very much if I am the only one. Stadiums might not be packed because of the quality of the speedway, but its entirely possible that they'd be emptier without it.

Er ............yes.

Long trip down my friend but you should try them out. They are a truly remarkable outfit, setting a standard that shames much of the rest of the sport. Its pretty much characterised by their promoters willingness to come on here and engage with us all - not the 'utterly without credibility' stance of other teams. I'll see if I can get him to respond to you - knowing him a bit, the sky's the limit for the Warriors but this isn't a man who will pour good money after bad for one single second. Huge enthusiasm but financial accountability. There's a novelty

At the risk of being - for the second time today - uncharacteristically cynical, since when did precedent have anything to do with speedway ? I suspect, however, that on this occasion you might - and should - be right.

I too welcome the SCB's intervention in the Nicholls case but I'll await the transparency that you suggest because I am not convinced. E I Addio has pointed out that the AGM finished in mid November and the SCB resolved the matter at the end of February - after a challenge by Peterborough, a review by the BSPA and a threat of legal action from Nicholls. His description of the SCB's actions in this matter was 'appalling incompetence'. It could easily be seen as though they took no steps to correct the situation until Nicholls legal challenge, at which point they had no choice but to change the decision. The other thing is is that this is a major issue, one that affects all clubs. It is equally as important that disputes on single decisions affecting just one club are dealt with - as BCD has said - fairly, openly and subject to precedent. I have it on good authority that when Adam Roynon signed for Plymouth last season three NL clubs protested, saying that the average they were using was incorrect. Those protests were brushed aside, despite the fact that the average was indeed substantially understated (something that was later admitted, although not publicly). Matt Marson has a British passport (I stand to be corrected, but I believe his mother is British). As a British citizen and a newcomer to the sport in this country, Mildenhall put him in their team last season on a 3.00 in accordance with the SCB rulebook. Suddenly, he was graded as a 5.00, an average that doesn't even exist in that rule book. My understanding is that it took a further threat of legal action to make the BSPA adhere to their own regulations. On those (and so many other occasions) speedway fans - and even clubs - did not know who made the decision, how they made it and why they made it. That simply cannot be right, nor can it be the case that the sports own regulations are so easily broken to suit the needs of individual promoters. I have never believed that the running of speedway teams should be subject to independent control. Speedway teams are mostly loss making, so it is a case that he who calls the piper calls the tune and that initial decision making must be left to those that put their hands in the pockets every week. However, any protest must be determined by an impartial adjudicator with no interest in any speedway club. It is at that stage that currently the sport disastrously falls down and, quite clearly, if you know that any decision you make could well be subject to independent audit, you're more likely to get it right in the first place.

Isle of Wight pretty much have a meeting every week throughout the summer. After the fixture list was published, they moved swiftly to fill the gaps.

When Tungate is at his best, he is simply magic at NSS. Must be in with a shout.

The decision was not only made at the AGM, it was subsequently confirmed on 1 February 2018 - despite the fact that Peterborough challenged it. As such, they did test the decision and were refused. Three weeks (BCD has stated it was less) later - apparently after solicitors were contacted - the BSPA backed down completely. According to Phil Rising, the SCB were fully aware that the Nicholls decision was illegal and refused to ratify it. I am therefore asking myself whether the decision to retain the rule after review in early February and then reverse it a matter of weeks later was a matter of incompetence, viciousness or both. I don't regard Rathbone as the peoples champion - and I suspect those that do are motivated by their own prejudices - but I do regard him as someone who stood up to a ruling in the interests of his promotion, his team, his fans and his sponsors. That is very hard to condemn. The problem with a closed shop is that no-one is allowed to challenge it. That means however illegal, corrupt or biased their rulings are they must be adhered to. That surely cannot be right, and the answer must be not to punish dissent or dissension but not make such rulings in the first place. Decisions that are fair, open, justifiable, subject to precedent and legal are far harder to challenge. There are those who bash the BSPA at every opportunity - again, almost certainly as a result of their own prejudices. The thing is though is that the BSPA themselves have, to a degree, created such an attitude. Personally, I take pleasure that an illegal ruling has been struck down and I doubt very much that I am the only one with that view. I have made no secret of my respect and admiration for the promotion at Isle Of Wight and its clear Barry Bishop and Martin Widman have put a huge amount of time, money, effort and enthusiasm into ensuring that the Warriors are a paying success. Yet last season, time after time, rulings went against them, be that because they were turned down (despite precedents) or that others received ludicrously beneficial judgements. That undoubtedly contributed to their final league position and no doubt there were times that they would have felt utterly disillusioned by events around them. The thing is I - and I would stand on my own reputation for fairness and impartiality - can well believe that they were denied their share of discretion through simple jealousy, provoked by the remarkable (and totally justified)amount of credit and praise they have received from speedway fans across the country. Ged Rathbone was heavily fined and had his promoters licence suspended as a result of allowing Holder to ride in Poland. Two seasons ago, I went to a meeting where a promoter took part in a sit on the track during that meeting. He, one of his riders and a number of the home support sat on the track on one side of the tapes while on the other side were riders ready to race. I thought that was a grossly irresponsible act and an awful breach of health and safety regulations. To my knowledge, that promoter was never fined, punished or disciplined in anyway and, in my view, there is no question about what was the more serious offence. Any organisation that treats its members with such appalling inconsistency - and, seemingly, favouritism - can also make decisions in precisely the same way and therefore deserves at least some of the odium and criticism it gets.

I went to the notorious Leicester-King's Lynn meeting last season and while it escapes just how many guests were riding - a lot - the car park attendant told me that the speedway had been cancelled and there was a circus instead. The odd thing was that it was - thanks largely to Dan Bewley - a highly entertaining meeting.