mikebv

Didn't Mark Lemons wife do the marketing at Aintree including the Grand National? Maybe she could come on board with all her contacts...? Certainly majorly lacking in the way they have marketed the team and venue considering such a fantastic new facilty..

You can only presume "we will pay up in one go when we get our money back for the first nights fiasco" was the constant mantra and accepted by the Council...? Strange to allow a tenant to go a full term without any money being paid...

Still lots, of 'ifs, buts and maybes' but good to see some kind of plan.. The name changes of the League will be recognised by Football fans for example and make some kind of sense.. Clearly the issue will be to fit in the big names given their averages will be high. However better to do that than ban them completely from a legal perspective possibly..? The aim does look like longer term to get somewhere like a current PL team across the 'Premiership' with maybe one more heat leader level rider and one less second string than currently ride PL now. (With the biggest earners possibly conspicuous by their absence).. One glaring issue with regards to the sports integrity is having the same rider doubling up for both the top Championship team and the bottom Premiership team. Surely therefore you cannot have relegation and promotion (laudable aim that it is), until that is sorted as its another self inflicted 'Mickey Mouse' scenario waiting to be ridiculed come the inevitable time.. For me, not enough has come out re losing guest riders through a better fit for purpose RR facility and how the MC will ensure meetings don't become select meetings thru poor (or devious) planning of meetings on FIM nights. Two major issues which impact attendances very adversely I would say... And I still cannot see why when we end up sharing riders we still keep seven man teams... Still, Buster and Rob G look like they are starting to turn the oil tanker round slowly which is a start... Best of luck in moving the sport forwards..

Paying (allegedly) a rider £6k out of a home meetings income each week to cover the home and away meeting cannot have helped!! If the sport is to become viable, or heaven forbid, even grow, this has to stop.. If the GP rider concerned was there every week or not I can guarantee that the crowd level would have hardly been different, yet I can also guarantee that meetings were arranged on nights that were not conducive in generating good crowds just to ensure it fitted in his calender... Couldn't make it up could you? Speedway now is down to its die hard following only, who have proved over the last ten years or so that they will attend any old sh1te put in front of them as long as it involves "four bikes, four riders, four laps" etc etc.. Therefore. Time for the sport to go back to 'year zero' and start it all over again.. Desperate times call for desperate measures.. And this time learn from all those previous unbelievable mistakes and not do them again..

The amount you pay the riders isn't often down to points scored... Points money is often completely irrelevant given the differing deals riders do.. Zagar was said to be on £3k regardless of points scored... Top riders can get £2k basic before scoring any points therefore having No GP rider must reduce the cost base.. PS. Taking TWO riders out of SEVEN in the example I gave means FIVE riders per team therefore TEN in total not TWELVE like you calculated.. Did YOU not do maths at school..?😁 PPS. I didn't mention anything about how many heats a meeting should have..(?) Did YOU not do English either...?😁

I think the issue is more around how incredibly restrictive it is trying to work with so many variables around rider availability... The infrastructure of the sport should allow every team to race at the time they can maximise their income... British Speedway the way it is currently ran (using the riders they do), means working around Sweden, Denmark, Poland and the GP's so it can never hope to deliver this.. The only hope for the sport in this country is to "look after number one" and plan the logistics of the sport, ie the team strengths, the number of riders per team, and race nights, around that simple mantra..

Then they need to cut down the number of riders per team.... One of the problems in the Sport is the huge ability gap between numbers one and seven so run with less riders but of a more equal ability level... Maybe make five man teams from last years EL septets eg take Zagar and Jacobs out of BV's team from last year and you have no 'superstars' nor 'NL heat leaders' and must surely be cheaper to run...?

Once again we have a Speedway team changing its race night so a very few riders in the grand scheme of things don't have to get up early and fly to Poland on a Sunday.. Truly barmy way of running a business.. Until teams decide to run on the best night (or day) that they can deliver their best crowd then the ever slippery slope the sport is on will continue.. Quite simply, if Saturday night brings the best crowd then run then, if Sunday lunchtime brings the best crowd then run then etc etc etc.. And do it by only allowing riders who can make it every week. If an FIM meeting is taking place then either don't run that week or put a 'filler' in... The sport needs to have viable clubs to move organically forwards, the vast majority of what is left of the ever dwindling fan base are 'die hards' anyway so most will attend a meeting at any level as long as it involves 'their team', one that is represented by 'their riders' (and not guest riddled select sides)... Promoters just need to wake up and make it happen. The sport's whole planning is built 100% on a business plan where 'the tail wags the dog'.. Crackers..

Maybe also the farce of running a supposed professional sport on nights when you have six or seven guests on show is also quite a sizeable contributory factor in reducing crowds..? Wouldn't personally wait 90 mins near a tunnel to watch that... At least in the NL that hopefully won't be the case...

I like Cook, shows some passion.. Unlike many mercenaries who seem to ride under any 'flag of convenience' in several countries... Maybe has found his level, we will see, but give me 14 'Craig Cooks' every meeting and you would see some great Speedway matches...

Indirectly yes. Opening the floodgates, with hardly any control, delivered so much of what we have today... i.e. A business that 'opens' sporadically and only then, when its (mainly overseas) workforce dictate to the business owner when they will work for them... Imagine opening any 'leisure business' chasing the 'leisure pound', and expecting to be successful whilst only being able to open the odd weekend (THE key time for anyone in the leisure industry) here and there because your employees are not available as they are working elsewhere? Imagine running a business whose success is completely based on the loyalty of its patrons and only being able to tell your patrons your (ever changing) opening times as and when you can get someone to work for you..? Imagine running a business that you know needs to attract a new much younger customer base to survive, as your dwindling customer demographic is of an extreme elderly persuasion, yet you hardly open on Friday and Saturday nights, Sunday day, or even through the school hols as you cannot get staff? Incredibly that is Speedways business model... Amazed it has worked so well...!😀 Imagine going to a bank manager for a loan with that as your business plan and expecting them to throw some money your way!!😃

Spot on... The only things that should be discussed is how collectively each league can put together teams of similar strengths within the framework of a viable cost base, and work a plan so each track can race its meetings on the nights (or days) that all scheduled riders are available and it can generate its highest possible income stream... Team strengths and team member numbers to be determined by simple economics...

Cycle speedway do something similar... As you say, it would mean more credibility... Maybe though bring back the bonus point for an aggregate win and do away with the four point/three point/two point/one point situation? No Tac Subs allowed at all (or alternatively both teams can use it once each meeting regardless of score so Team Managers can play a part tactically?) with gate positions staying as per programme in both matches... Maybe instead of a £5k winner takes all for one meeting you could pool both meetings money and have a £7500 for the aggregate winners and £2500 for the losers..? Or maybe even a £10k winner takes all!! If you used a previous posts salaries. If £10k was on offer for an aggregate win a Number Five rider would earn £3500 for two matches if his team is successful and a Number One would earn £5000!! Truly performance related pay.. I am sure that would add some spice to every EL encounter!! (Bet there wouldn't be many riders when interviewed on Sky in the pits not knowing the current score like there is now!)😁

There is always an ultimate irony when it comes to Speedway rules in that they have to make so many to close the obvious loopholes created by the original rules, but that then leaves more needed to close the loopholes that have been created by the rules that should have blocked the loopholes!! (I think!)😀 On another thread the Polish team building rules have been quoted.. Seven men teams. Reserves must be Polish and under 21 years of age. At least four Poles in every team... And errr. That's it... No assessing averages, no PL/EL conversions, no protected race average v non protected race average, no he got this at second string average, got this at heat leader average and got this at reserve average, no mysterious ailments meaning riders miss meetings so their average isn't effected etc etc etc.. The Promoters do all these ridiculous calculations to try and get every team roughly equal at the start of the year but EVERY season at least one team is 30 - 40 points behind the league leaders at the finish!! (And it's always the team everyone on here highlights as 'cannon fodder' when all the teams are announced)... British Speedway..😂

That for me would be where the SCB would need to be strong.. And maybe all salaries paid from a central fund that they control? In the absence of the so obviously required independent body to administer the sport, (that all 'proper sports' have), it is time that the SCB actually started to help sort the mess out and this could be a way of doing so? Any sponsorship should of course still be allowed to top up any riders income, however if no 'superstars' exist there wouldnt be the temptation to do 'anything dodgy' to attract certain riders because there would be no real on track benefit as (hopefully) the spread from Number One to Number Five isnt as wide as currently exists from One to Seven in a seven rider structure.. Super League has proven a salary cap can work with clear consequence already used against any team trying to get round it. The success of which now brings promotion and relegation again as the gap between both leagues (once enormous) has now been closed to close to parity. The Poles lets face it are not targeting the 'second, third and fourth tier' riders anyway when they have made their new rule, as there are loads of Polish riders already at that level with more coming through. So let them have the 'superstars' and over here, no longer run a seasons worth of ever changing fixture lists full of select teams, (which inevitably encourage accusations of being 'Mickey Mouse' with a lack of integrity) to accommodate their participation.. Give the 'non superstars' the chance to earn good money over here by DU'ing and then let them ride in wherever else they can. (But their GB contract must be met 100%) 10 riders per match with possibly not much more than a 2 point difference in average from 'best to worst', all of whom have a chance to earn good money by priortising GB? Worth a punt surely?

Is it time for radical solutions..? Is it time for teams of five riders as per Denmark? Is it time for a salary cap of say 5k a team per meeting? Number One gets 1500, (eg Cook, Anderson, Hougaard, Nilsson King), Numbers two and three (PL number ones and EL heat leaders) get 1000, Numbers four and five (PL heat leaders and EL second strings get 750 each. No GP or world class riders, instead use their would be salary for two home and away matches as a £5k winner takes all prize fund (1k each to the winning teams riders). That would mean something is riding on every meeting. Unlike now where many meetings are dead rubbers with the season over for many by August and even those who will qualify for the PO's still often have little to ride for if qualification is assured.. We know Speedway can still generate a crowd if there is something riding on the outcome so make it happen.. To make it pay you would need to clear after all non riding costs, £15k per home match for both home and away meetings and the prize money. (Team sponsor and Sky cash could also maybe help cover it?) Basically top and tail most EL teams this year by removing the Number One and the Number Seven and you have roughly the team strength level.. No guests from the same league, a RR system that is fit for purpose and could you get 10 evenly matched teams coming to the tapes next season..? If you could it would mean 36 matches, (18 at home). Maybe top eight for the play offs which would deliver a quarter, semi and Final for the two teams. (First v Eight, Second v Seventh etc would be the plan). Win all your home matches and the Number One would earn £72k a season without any sponsorship. Let all riders DU and that would take them to circa £100k+ just for riding over here. And if their team got to the play offs even more... Could we get 50 riders of the criteria to deliver 10 teams? Is it doable and would it be viable..? Maybe it is time to get on the front foot re Poland's plans re riders restrictions and be self sufficient? Weekly Speedway on nights that generate the best crowds. No meetings arranged when it is known programmed riders will be missing and a bit of added spice where riders can more than double their pay through bonus payments if they help their team win the match and could it help get Speedway back on its feet?

I think it's more about meaningful fixtures rather than simply quantity of fixtures.. Without coming across as FF, DOC, (whoever else he comes on as) etc etc.. The 'POKO Cup' does effect attendances at the back end of the season for teams that are 'virtually there' in the Play Offs.. These meetings for the home team become effectively 'dead rubbers'... Won't ever bring a crowd in when nothing rides on the outcome, as 'challenge matches' and 'low prize money' individual meetings over the years have shown. Hence they have been removed from the calendar.. Definitely need an EL Winners Shield (with some decent prize money) akin to RL to maintain interest to the end of the season...

Problem is the NL meeting is often a loss maker for the Promotions that currently run an NL team alongside an EL one... And given the fractious nature of the EL fixture list one home meeting per fortnight is often the case already and still the stadiums are mostly empty... And to be honest, not too sure each EL meeting that runs with 'GP stars' now is always profitable hence some teams want less Speedway as it means less losses...! The one simple question that need to be addressed is this... Can you afford to collectively pay two top GP (or non GP world class riders) in your team circa £10k for both home and away meetings from a home meeting income delivered by less than a thousand punters.? I would suggest most clubs would say No! That is the stark reality facing the promoters and the sport in this country..

Every AGM is 'the most important ever for the sport' etc etc etc.. The truth is that this one will be the same as every other over the past 15 years.. ie. Akin to applying two stripping plasters onto someone whose leg has been cut off to stem the flow of blood.. Not sure about the biscuits this year but, as always, there will be plenty of fudge... Phrases like "we need to wake up and smell the coffee", or, "we need to radically change our current operating model as its simply not fit for purpose" and even, "we need to run this sport with sporting integrity if it's to be seen as 'professional' and not 'mickey mouse' to it's own fan base and the wider sporting public" will I am sure be conspicuous by their absence. (Once again)... "I've rearranged vem deckchairs Mr Captain like yer rekwestid bat ver boat iz stiww goin' darn Sir! Shall we jast jamp ferrit?"... "Oh no my lad, no need to be so radical, we don't want our customers being aware of what the situation is. We'll do as we always do and simply get the band to play their version of "The Best Of The Seventies, KTel Remix. That always keeps any restless patrons entertained"😀

The Poles will have thought this through... The aim will be to stop the 'Big Boys' (what they see as 'their riders') burning themselves out by flying around Europe three or four times a week... You can see the conversation... "Ditch Britain, dont fly in and out all week, stay fresh for Sunday"... "You will lose 100k you say for no longer riding 28 matches? No problem we have two sponsors willing to top up your 300k contract to 400k for just 14 matches over here"..... "And think of the benefits it will bring to your GP season by only riding here and Sweden? Plenty of time to get sorted, plenty of time to relax"... "Obviously the alternative is you decide to keep your 100k and release yourself from your 300k contract"... "Whats it to be?"

The second team would smash the former at Lakeside...😀 Hence averages can be misleading... However maybe the best of both worlds would be to use the mean averages per sector of ten for the first forty riders and then the mean average for the rest? Set a limit for five grades and six man teams and all work to that limit but only one rider from each sector in 1-4 allowed.. Grading will at least mean something to the public. "He's Grade One, he's Grade Two etc" And fans would have more clarity on the level of rider within that band when any incoming riders join the league later in the season. No way would Woffy or Lindback have been Grade Two level so would have had to replace Lindgren or Holder this season which would have stopped lots of conspiracy theories and the sport being poorly viewed as a 'bit Mickey Mouse'..

Grade these 66 riders into 'tens' and run with six man teams and you could get nine very evenly matched teams. Using nine out of every ten means one rider misses out per section but they can come in to replace injured or loss of form riders when the season starts. (Or covers the likelihood riders eg Woofy, not riding over here next year) One rider out of each Grade One to Four (ie 36 out of 40 riders available) and Two from Grade Five (18 riders out of 26 available) To increase each 'pool'... Add to Grade One any of next years 15 GP riders not already on the list and Sayfutdinov, G. Laguta etc (for the off chance they may want to come over at some stage a la Woffy and Lindback this year).. Add to Grade Two riders of the ilk of Ljung, MJJ, Milik etc Add to Grade Three any current PL heat leaders not already mentioned Add to Grade four any current PL second strings not mentioned.. And add to Grade Five any PL reserves/NL riders not already mentioned eg Bewley.. There may be debate about Kim Nilsson being Grade One but that's averages for you when you are a home track specialist.. Schlein and Batchelor it could be argued are lower than expected but also given their injuries maybe not? And Grade Five probably should just be Brits only? Nine teams, six riders per team. One from each pool of ten per team in Grades 1 to 4 and two from Grade 5 mean lots of 'subs on the bench' to ensure no guests. With clear transparency as to where everyone sits in a Grading system, either riding here now or not, and maybe it could work? A possible race format is everyone races against each other over the first nine heats. Then three heats of lowest scorers through to the highest and finally one nominated..? Thirteen heats, and maybe charge £15 quid as cheaper to run a six man team with a 'second string' lighter than the case this season..? Could happiness again be 40-38?😉

Work ONE day a week and earn more than double what you would earn for doing exactly the same job THREE days a week? Mmmmmm? Difficult one...🙄

Or indeed, confuse him....

Get five independent people with knowledge of the sport and let them grade riders 1 - 5. Most riders will slip into one of the five grades easily and for any that don't a vote is taken. It would prevent anomolies, eg Woffy being considered a 'lesser rider' that Kylmakorpi and also mean no PL/EL conversion nonsense.. Six man teams. (2 fives, and one each from the one to four). Teams could have the option of missing out a 'one to four' level rider and have another from the grade below, eg no grade 1 but two grade 2's etc There are too many variables in how averages are delivered to be regarded as fit for purpose when team building eg large home track advantage, ringer guests racing in meetings diluting averages of the other riders, falls, engine failures, riders missing (miraculously) meetings at tracks they race poorly on so their average doesn't change, riders doing more meetings than others around the globe which must effect performance and the obvious protected heats distorting the riders true capability.. Go to grading or have a 'free for all' with no limit to team strengths. No team could afford a team of superstars anyway and even if they could, after four or five weeks of watching home teams hammering the opposition crowds would drop through sheer tedium making them definitely not viable.. We on here could plot 90% of the World's riders into five levels with no problem. Leaving the 10% of 'maybe's' to be discussed in more detail.. Don't use something that is so open to manipulation that it's incredible to think it is still used...