Humphrey Appleby

Indeed, and what about all the clamouring for less meetings so we 'can bring the top boys back'? Is reality finally hitting home?

There's nothing wrong with trying to work out an acceptable match format that addresses the problems and complaints about the current one, although there are very limited options with 6 rider teams. However, it's just tinkering like many other times in the past unless the other aspects such as value for money, riders coming-and-going and the general presentation are not addressed. Yes, it would be good to get to a situation where the leagues are approximately equal sized, or even better with more teams than now, but we're a long way from needing promotion and relegation in the sport at the moment.

So it's an excuse for another cost-cutting exercise (which probably needs to happen), but what about the likes of Poole who seem determined to win at all costs every year? I'm also not sure it's necessary to have promotion and relegation to encourage teams to move up to the 'not-so-elite' league. Just create the conditions and incentives for teams to do so.

The theory is all very fine, but you've been in the sport long enough to know the reality. There are not enough teams that want to be in the top league, so promotion and relegation is completely superfluous, not to mention detrimental to the viability of an economically marginal sport. Unless there are dramatic reductions in cost at the top level, not to mention more equalisation in terms of standard, then history is just going to repeat itself. I'd also be quite interested to know what computer program the proposed heat formula has been run through 'at least 100 times'. Not sure what it's supposed to prove anyway - it would be pretty easy to just look the heat formula and see if it's any good. Relatively more money, and until recently, more teams wanting to be in the top flight than places. Of course, the Swedish Elite League has had to be reduced in size in recent times, and the Allsvenskan is down to six teams as well. Poland has also had to revert to a two league structure, with a quite farcical arrangement where two teams don't ride away.

It didn't work before and won't work again whilst there are insufficient teams wanting to race at the top level. Promotion and relegation is only viable when more teams want to race in a league than there are available places.

I don't care for either, but they're fine in moderation. Should we also ban paracetamol because taking it too often damages your liver? Unfortunately though, people simply seem incapable of taking responsibility for their own choices and actions, or doing anything in moderation these days. Of course, it's also always someone elses' fault.

I'm sure Hancock is delighted people are raising awareness of Monster by talking about it, regardless of the annoying product placement (which I'm pretty sure wouldn't be allowed so blatantly in other sports). The best thing to do would be to ignore it and not buy it.

Nos. 5 and 6 are reserves, taking 4 programmed rides. Nos. 1-4 take 5 programmed rides. The reserves meet each other twice, and the other riders once. The Nos. 1-4 meet each other twice, and the reserves only once. The reserves have a protected heat (Heat 3), but ride against a reserve in two other heats, and both second-strings in their other heat. The second-strings also have a protected heat (Heat 12). 1: 1 & 2 v 1 & 2 2: 3 & 3 v 3 & 4 3: 5 & 6 v 5 & 6 4: 1 & 2 v 3 & 4 5: 3 & 4 v 1 & 2 6: 1 & 5 v 3 & 6 7: 2 & 4 v 1 v 5 8: 3 & 6 v 2 & 4 9: 2 & 4 v 3 & 6 10: 1 & 5 v 2 & 4 11: 3 & 6 v 1 & 5 12: 2 & 4 v 2 & 4 13: 3 & 6 v 3 & 6 14: 1 & 5 v 1 & 5 15: Nominated (optional) 16: Top Scorer (optional) Or just run the 14 heats and have second half with 4 juniors thrown-in: 15: Juniors 16: Third-highest averaged home rider, Lowest averaged home reserve, Second-highest averaged away rider, 4th Heat 15 17: Second-highest averaged home rider, 3rd Heat 15, Third-highest averaged away rider, Lowest averaged away reserve 18: Four-highest averaged home rider, Highest averaged home reserve, Highest averaged away rider, 2nd Heat 15 19: Highest averaged home rider, 1st of Heat 15, Four-highest averaged away rider, Highest averaged away reserve 20: Final - Winner of Heats 16-19 (Highest scorers in Final over the course of the season qualify for ELRC and British Championship)

Commissioners of minor sports start around 40-50K. You might get some young aspiring executive for that, although I doubt you'd keep them for very long if they were any good. Of course, the total costs would be higher than the salary as they'd have expenses and the running costs of their office.

I think most successful professional sports do have a degree of separation in terms of deciding how the sport is run, and how the rules are applied. So North American (and Australian) sports have a Commissioner or Commission without ties to any team, whilst British sports for mostly historical reasons usually separate the running of leagues which are the responsibility of the teams, from the overall governing body which usually has multiple stakeholders. There are a few private fiefdoms running professional sport - I think NASCAR and F1 are the obvious examples and the BDO effectively was one - and then the likes of professional tennis and golf are more-or-less run by the competitors themselves.

I think in reality most of them, although the owners aren't necessarily called promoters (and indeed speedway promoters are not always the owners).

Hasn't he been involved with his local track more recently, although I'd guess as one of the greatest riders of all time he possibly knows a little bit about the sport..

I said nothing of the sort, and you're also being just as denigrating as what I'm being accused of.

Got out of the wrong side of the bed this morning? I was responding to the suggestion that second halves can't be run in a reasonable timeframe, which I suggested and you've just verified is nonsense. In what way was I denigrating the efforts of those tracks who do create training opportunities if not put on actual second halves? Simple fact of the matter is though, that whereas at one time fans used to get 20 or so heats as a matter of course, this was gradually cut back over the years with the remaining heats were frequently strung-out over a longer time. Some tracks of course did and do attempt to run some extra races, but this is still largely ad-hoc and the paying punter can't guarantee exactly what they'll get. Good for you, but I do plenty in another form of motorsport which I thought was more deserving of my time.

As far as I know, curfews at tracks are often voluntary (although some are dictated by planning). However, I certainly remember meetings in the 1980s starting at 7.45 and regularly being done by 9.45 if not even earlier. I could cycle back the 3 miles from the track and be in the pub by 10.

Is the sport being run for the benefit of the riders or the (few remaining) paying punters? And tracks being incapable to run 15 heats let alone 20 inside 2.5 hours is nothing short of pathetic. Of course it can be done if there's a will as it used to be done in the past - what's changed apart from the expectation that promoters will drag out fewer heats over a longer time? Unless the show improves and offers substantially better value for money, then speedway is done.

I think 20 heats is about the right length for a meeting and would provide better value for money provided it's run properly and not unnecessarily dragged out. Seeing riders race in a different format with juniors mixed in could still be interesting if it was done properly, such as reasonable prize being put up and the second-halves linked to some sort of meaningful season-long competition. The problem with the old second halves was lack of continuity from week-to-week and increasingly diminishing points money that discouraged riders from taking them seriously. There big issue though, would be the potentially increased costs of running the second halves, although I think that could ultimately be addressed by splitting existing points money. Some riders might not like it, but that leads to the wider issue about what riders British speedway can afford anyway.

Why should speedway be any different to any other profession? Banning uncontracted riders from signing for foreign teams would be a restraint of trade in most developed countries. British speedway has failed to employ British riders because of a ridiculous system whereby transfer and loan fees have to be paid for British riders and not foreign riders who've not previously ridden in Britain. There have also been zero incentives for promotions to invest in upcoming British riders knowing their fellow promoters will penalise them through the points limit if they're successful. The one point of which we agree is that riders shouldn't be signed for British teams if they can't commit to all the fixtures.

No, but his Polish club might be. How many other employers allow you to hold down multiple jobs in multiple countries? It's not restraint of trade if you freely sign an exclusive contract with an employer. It is if you're banned from any signing any contract with a particular employer in the first place. They have to be good enough in the first place, and perhaps want their riders to sign exclusive contracts (see above).

I think it's a different thing. Great Britain rides as a team and in international competition, whereas the British Championship is an individual domestic competition that should be based on a qualifying criteria. Of course it doesn't help that the pay scales for the British Championship are likely not encouraging for the top riders, and the BSPA compounds this by scheduling rounds of what should be one of their premier competitions against major international events.

This is why they don't let fans run the sport. It would be a complete restraint of trade, EU laws or otherwise, plus be completely immoral to prevent a rider making their living where they choose. Would you think it reasonable to be told where you could practice your trade, particularly if you were made to work for less than you'd been offered somewhere else?

Marvellous, then only one rider can be out of their depth and have no protected heats to ride in. This is the trouble with shooting from the hip with half-baked ideas. And let's be honest, 'democracy' allowed the fiascos with averages and reserves moving up this season.

Woffinden is entitled to choose where and when he wishes to ride, but the British Championship should not include riders who choose not to ride in the British leagues. It's depriving places from those who do make the commitment.

In most cases the teams long predate the sponsors, or are actually vehicle or engine manufacturers themselves. There has also never really been any distinctive club structure in those sports to start with, Although I do follow F1 and to a lesser extent MotoGP, I'm largely oblivious to the sponsors. It used to be interesting when cars were mobile fag packets with 6 wheels and you had Scaletrix models of them to race yourself, but just can't excited about mobile pop cans in the same way.

John Berry was undoubtedly a great thinker about how the sport could be run, and was of course a successful promoter as well. However, I suspect his tenure in that sort of job would not have lasted long as he was obviously an abrasive character who didn't tolerate fools gladly, and would likely have alienated a significant number of people who needed to be onside. An independent commissioner needs to be wise, tough and fair, but they also need to be diplomatic if the job is going be held at the pleasure of the promoters (which ultimately it has to be).