Humphrey Appleby

That was their choice when they wanted to go off and establish their own citizenship. The difference between the EU and Australia etc.. is there's reciprocity between us and other EU countries, whereas UK citizens also have to jump through hoops if we want to work in Australia. I suspect many of here generally advocate immigration controls anyway. Well this is the reality. BTW - Australians were never citizens of the British Isles. They were British Subjects until 1948 when they decided to do their own thing.

Well it must have been known that Aussie Rules (pre-)season starts in early-March which would curtail use of most of the major stadiums. However, if BSI is prepared to go to that 'stadium' in Riga, then there must be all manner of ovals in Sydney, Melbourne or Adelaide that could be pressed into use if the determination was there. I think more likely down to a lack of local financial support.

Might not be around in NZ next year...

There's nothing wrong with sport being a business venture, but there has to be a fair distribution of the proceeds amongst all the interested parties. In many sports this is generally the case, even if actual percentages are argued about, but the complex administration of motorcycle sport means speedway sees very little of the revenue generated by the sport's premier competition. BSI also make twice as much in profits.

Call it what you will, but I suspect many outside of the UK would be hard placed to locate it on a map, or name any significant feature. That's why the Welsh government is spending significant sums on trying to promote the city. [bTW - I go to Cardiff quite often and feel it's an underrated destination, but it's hardly on the list of 'must do before I die' sort of places. ]

Not comparable at all. Most F1 GPs are staged by consortia or national governments who do it for touristic reasons or to otherwise increase exposure for their countries. Even if they lose money on the actual events, there's a fair bit of analysis to demonstrate they make bigger returns indirectly. In addition, GP hosts are not expected to ship all the cars, drivers and teams to their tracks. That's taken care of by Formula One Management, and what's more, 50% of the F1 revenue (maybe around $500 million) also goes to the teams. [This compares to about 6% of revenue being paid as prize money in the SGP which comes out of the 15% or so paid to the FIM.] I'd guess the Welsh government sees the ~4 pound per spectator subsidy it pays BSI to stage the GP in Cardiff as being worthwhile in bringing business into the Welsh capital (and they may be right), but Cardiff is effectively a regional city that otherwise wouldn't be at the forefront of most peoples' minds in planning a visit. Cardiff is also promoted by BSI so presumably all the gate and programme money accrues to them. By contrast, neither Auckland City Council nor the NZ government/tourist board seems to see speedway as being worthy of subsidy, so any local promoter has the double whammy of transport costs and staging fees to take into account. It isn't just about whether speedway fans might go to the Stones concert. All media attention will be on the Stones in the lead-up, and I'd think the chances of speedway getting much in the way of publicity will be virtually zero.

Would look to be paying a fair whack for the privilege, given how BSI's revenue in the region has jumped substantially. Sums up the wider problems in speedway really. Affluent businessmen in flights of fancy doing a wedge on a team or GP, but never considering the bigger picture of where the money is going.

Nothing wrong with philanthropy, but no matter how much money I could throw away, I wouldn't be throwing it in the direction of a commercial company with little interest in the sport I liked. On the contrary, I'd be making approaches to other GP organisers with a view to running the show for the collective good of the sport. In fairness, New Zealand is as deserving of a GP as some countries in the series, and the series does need some non-European GPs if it's to be taken seriously as a World Championship. It's indeed not ideal that it can't be organised outside of the European season, but there are 11 others that also fall into this category so it would be a unfair to single New Zealand out.

I think you're reading too much into it being a personal criticism of PC, which was certainly not the intention. I did think the original article provided little insight into how to address the current problems in the sport, and it did convey an air of 'things were better in the old days', but equally I pointed out that might be down to the way it was editorialised. I then made a general point that competitors are not necessarily better placed than anyone else to know how to run their sports, but that was certainly not PC specific and was in response to other comments that riders must surely know best.

Of course no-one forces them, but it amazes me how otherwise successful businessmen are prepared to run what are very likely to be loss-masking events on such unfavourable terms. Yes, entrepreneurs need to take risks in business, but with the odd exceptions, sport rarely makes any money for its proprietors so needs to be run differently to most commercial enterprises. BSI may not of course care that much as they can always replace NZ with yet another round in Poland, but ultimately burning promoters around the world is not good for the wider sport. Speedway needs to be run on a much more mutually cooperative basis if it's going to survive, and whilst no-one is going to continually underwrite loss-making events however the sport is run, the difference between loss and profit will be less. No doubt, but losses are still losses however creative the accounting.

I find it hard to imagine these sorts of GPs can even expect to break even without some sort of subsidy, and I'd guess that was always the key with the NZ GP. A shame as NZ is the sort of place that GPs should be held. Interesting that the attendances seem to be revised downwards from what was originally reported. Why on earth did the FIM/BSI/local organisers pick the same date, or at least not move the date once the Rolling Stones were known to be playing? Two years ago his praises were being sung - 'right man for the job', 'can get things done', 'in it for the long-term' and so on... Now he seems to be being set up for a fall, so the plug can be quietly pulled on the NZ GP and BSI can move onto the next promoter with more money than sense.

Don't be ridiculous. I've nothing but admiration for PC as a rider, and if he was responsible for keeping Belle Vue going for a year then that deserves immense credit too. The rest of my points still stand though.

Well post 161 was where the question was asked. As for 1988, well that was the first year of the 'new' Belle Vue, right? So presumably that was the start of PC's involvement on the promotional front which was still more than 10 years before the advent of 'playoffs' and double points etc..

Like I said, I originally asked what his involvement at Belle Vue was, but people preferred to respond with silly comments. My recollection was he was part of a consortium at Belle Vue, but fine if he was actively promoting rather than being a figurehead then it gives more weight to his opinions. This said, he ultimately didn't stay promoting, and wider sport still continued its decline after 1988 even though there was still a KOC and no 'playoffs' for many years afterwards.

No-one is questioning PC's record (or greatness) as a rider, but I ask again, what promotional or administrative success does he have that raises his views of how the sport should be run above those of anyone else? Would you equally think Wayne Rooney is qualified to run the Premier League because he's good at scoring goals in it? British football stadiums were/are generally not conducive to speedway. Football stadiums tended to evolve in an ad-hoc way, crammed into whatever space was available in towns, which did not lend itself to spacious oval layouts which are in any case poor for viewing field based sports. To get a track around a football pitch generally means it's going to be in the order of 400 metres which isn't ideal for racing or viewing. I suspect football didn't really need speedway anyway.

He's been there and done it as a rider, but I don't think as a promoter or administrator which is what counts in this case. I seem to remember he was briefly involved at Belle Vue and Buxton, but whether that was just a 'star' name to help attract investment I don't know. Certainly didn't have the promotional longevity of the likes of John Louis who has done it on both sides of the fence, and who survived in the game as others came and went. I actually do think there are some lessons that can be learned from the past, but competition formats and trivial rules are not really going to make a difference.

I think he'd have still needed a permit unless he could prove patriality. Can only think it was something to do with the assessed average.

Thought the PC article was pretty vapid to be honest - whether it was the raw material or editorialised that way. In general, I've found competitors to be last who should be asked about how to run their sport. With the odd exception, they've very little grasp of promotional and administrational complexities, and even more so for those at the top end of their profession. If it were so easy in speedway, then why don't riders put their money where their mouths are and show everyone how things should be done, but the reality is very few will. PC is entitled to his opinion - probably more so than some - but I seriously doubt speedway would be in much better shape if things revered back to the way they were in his day. There's been a whole host of social and economic changes in the past 30 years that have done for the sport, and whether or not there's a KOC or not is not going to change that. Reminiscences about the 'good old days' no doubt appeal to many of those buying the Star, but are not really any blueprint for the future. There are undoubtedly some things in the past that did work better, but the sport still went into decline before 'playoffs', tactical rides and all sorts of other paraphernalia were thought of.

I suppose it really depends on what Sky are paying (or not).

The whole show has become a bit of an embarrassment really, as shown by the number of competitors who couldn't be bothered to turn-up in person. The audience hardly seems to have changed in years, and whilst you probably couldn't argue with Murray and the British Lions, the rest seemed to be scraping the barrel.

Disappointed that Roy Keane wasn't there to give Alex Ferguson his award... LOL

I doubt you did see the 'f' word as this forum automatically censors such words. I also don't know what young people have to do with it. Their parents should be supervising their Internet use, but I'm sure they hear far worse in the school playground...

I think these are precisely the questions the 'speedway media' should be asking of the authorities and it would happen in other sports. Indeed, I'd try to speak to all involved parties in the matter to get their perspective, which is what journalists used to do. Of course the CCP Coordinator or the FIM Communications Department should be prepared to deal with enquiries from the media, and should have an explanation as to why certain actions were taken. They may be perfectly reasonable reasons behind a particular course of action, but in the modern world a professional executive should expect to be accountable to its membership and to some extent the trade media. I can't believe this would take a lot of effort in the age of e-mail, Facebook and Twitter. They must be very sensitive indeed, and it's lucky that speedway doesn't have any sort of public profile as I don't know they'd cope if the likes of Andrew Jennings ever got interested in the sport. I've very rarely read anything but the mildest of criticism in the journal of record, nor anything that takes a contrary line to the official version of events. I accept that given the nature of the sport you have to tread a bit of fine line on what can be said, but you're now much less reliant on track sales and things can much more easily be found out through Internet channels if the powers-that-be take umbrage. Well yes, but do we really believe that BSI have no influence with the FIM given what they pay them?

What did they expect in the age of modern telecommunications? It would only take one promoter to mention it to his mate, and it'll be around the Internet before you know it.

I'd guess the administrivia is the responsibility of the FIM Secretariat which is the 'professional' arm of the organisation. That function may be somewhat removed from Armando Castagna, who may in fact have little power in this respect. Maybe the Secretariat just had a work experience placement in that week...