ImpartialOne

Evitts was a very hard rider, he took no excrement off anyone, which I liked. He doesn't suffer fools and has had plenty of fall outs with people over the years, on and off the track but equally he's quite misunderstood and is a great loyal guy if you don't cross him. I don't recall the spat with Tatum either so I can only assume it was a one-off.

Still not getting it I see. It's not about achievements. I'll say it again, it's not about achievements. You could stick an average rider on Tomasz Gollob's bikes for a season and he would improve dramatically. Proof? Steve Collins was, with all respect, a fairly poor rider most of the time. He wobbled his way around at the back and when he wasn't crashing he looked like coming off. Then one night at Cradley he borrowed Gundersen's bike and beat Kenny Carter. Yes, Kenny Carter! Now that was some achievement but does that mean he had more talent than Carter? I've already provided examples of why I think Screen was more gifted than Carter if you care to look. Whilst there are many who agree with you falcace, there are many more who won't. All you've given us is that Carter was faster than Screen. That's not what we are discussing.

Formula 1, Moto GP, Superbikes. That's just for starters. You'd be amazed how many stars of other sports are into speedway and attend when possible and if they are taking an interest, I'm sure there are fans who do, or could do in future. The reason? They take it more seriously because of the glitz and glamour image of the GPs. What Briggs in the 60s has to do with anything I don't know. You even admitted it's ancient history! In case you didn't notice, speedway's popularity has taken a massive nosedive since then and the World Finals became tired, boring affairs which hardly made the sport attractive to outsiders. The GP series has created interest outside the sport and that is indisputable.

Bloody calculator!

One of my favorite speedway tv moments, England v USA, 1984, Swindon when Shawn Moran got excluded for touching the tapes in one race, and in the next race Carter hit the tapes prompting Sigalos to signal to the referee to exclude Carter, which he did. Carter's interview was classic!

Ok, I take back the comment of Screenie being 20 times more naturally talented than Carter. I realise this was out of proportion. He was of course only 17 times more naturally talented.

Carter - most Americans Pedersen - anyone Gundersen - Nielsen was the first to come to mind. Both great riders and ultra dedicated. They had their ups and downs and I know Gundersen's injury hit Nielsen like a train. Together they were formidable and as opponents fiercely competitive. During probably their biggest rivalry in 1985 when Nielsen was left out of the Danish test team by Team Manager and Erik's mentor, Ole Olsen, they were still able to enjoy a friendly rivalry when Nielsen bet Gundersen he couldn't quit smoking. I can't remember who won or what the stake was but it showed they were still good mates behind all the problems.

I often think the same as I try to sift through the text equivalent of listening to Vicki Pollard

he was "crucified" as you put it because he was talking nonsense, for which on one particular point he apologised after being proved to be talking nonsense. The GP has improved speedway's image to the outside world and is the jewel in speedway's crown. The only problem the GP has is having too many critics who long for the good old days but they still enjoy watching it so it can't be as bad as they perceive it to be.

Are you wired up correctly? Who do you think I responded to in a post that quoted falcace? I think I'll leave you to fawn over everything he says.

Or maybe you should learn to read words and understand their meaning. He wasn't a natural on a bike, I've already explained this and he certainly wasn't in the same league as Screen in that department, but nowhere have I stated he had no talent, nor would I.

You're definitely muddled. Who said Carter had no natural talent?

I think Dave Watt has opted out for quite a few seasons and only in the last couple of years has shown an interest.

Had there been such a thing as a forum back in the 1990s, someone would have sat long enough to come up with, "What happens when Nielsen, Hamill, Ernolenko, etc retire? Will the youngsters like Nicki Pedersen, Andreas Jonsson, Jarek Hampel, etc be as good?" Had there been such a thing in 1986 for instance, the question may have been asked, "What happens now we've lost Penhall, Olsen, Carter, Sigalos, Lee, Mauger, etc? Will the new breed of Ermolenko, Pedersen, Jonsson, etc be as good?" No doubt when the likes of Ward, Sayfutdinov, Holder, Woffinden, etc are established stars and coming to the end of their careers the same question will be asked. Absolutely nothing to worry about.

Im afraid some people are stuck in the "good old days" and will never escape to see the light. The Grand Prix series is one of the few successes of our sport and anyone who wishes it to crumble is unwittingly wishing further decline of speedway as a professional sport. To return to a one day final would be financial and commercial suicide for the sport. Sadly, some people don't know a good thing when they see it.

So did Pepe but neither would add any interest to the GPs so I hope Bepe follows suit.

Yes, natural ability/talent is much the same. But you read into it that I said Carter had no talent. I didn't. You then read that I said Screen was/is better than Carter. I didn't. You then added names to a previous poster's list (which I highlighted in bold) and said you agreed with him on those names. So, although you may not realise it, you are changing what people have said to validate your argument.

Come on Bjarne, we're waiting...

There you go, reading words that are not there again.

You keep misquoting me. I never said Carter didn't have talent.

I saw him many times and admired him greatly, particularly his performance in the 1984 British Final which will live long in the memory as an amazing achievement. Not only did he win it with a broken leg but he put the likes of Peter Collins, Chris Morton and John Louis to shame with their whining by proving the track was raceable. However, one advantage I have is that I'm not biased by team loyalties and any Halifax or Bradford fan is understandably going to see him in a way that clouds the fact that he didn't possess the same natural ability on a bike of those I mentioned. Carter was brave, confident and fearless. He had the focus and ambition that Screen and the Morans lacked at times. He worked hard for what he achieved because he couldn't rely on abilty alone to carry him. Screen is and was very much the British Moran. Their natural ability had to do most of the work because of their lifestyle. The bottom line is that Screen can read a race without thinking about it; it's pure instinct. He can do things on a bike that Carter could only dream of.

Well you clearly know nothing about me with talk like that. To be honest, your last two sentences actually back up what I say. And it's not arrogance, it's just the truth. Carter was not a natural on a bike in the same way that Screen, Morans, Loram, etc are/were. As for planets, well, I'm in agreeance with you on that one. I'm surprised you're even getting a signal up there

PMT?

I know so.