Grand Central

OMG.as any kid in his forties may say. That is 7 minutes of my life i will never get back. I'm sorry but I could not last any longer listening to such dreadfully produced rubbish. I'm surprised that total boredom wasn't the charge made by anyone having to spend time with him/them.

Great to think that the Red Tops might cover it. But they'd just go big on GB losing. And not a very catchy headline for any sports sub-editor to come up with ... I'd go for TAI-TANIC ... ICE-COOL RUSKIES SINK BRITS

So .... Today's Speedway Star ... This entire debate about the final and tactics is consigned to carrying the GB team press release verbatim as posted here a few days ago. is that a fair reflection of the exchange of views that has taken place on the various terraces and in the pits this last week as people have got together and chatted about the weekend ? Without even mentioning the chat here. Yet again a page is given over to Rob Painter to give a reprise of the 'the future is bright missive', platitudes and all, but with the addition of a silver medal. Surely that is getting repetitive ?

I am tempted to join with you on this but I fear that opinions are so entrenched (on both sides) that I would get nowhere. It would appear that now 'Tai has spoken' many will be just be happy to let this lie. No matter that it makes no sense. And this despite the 'quotes' appearing to be less from 'Scunthorpe's finest' and more from a media manipulator's hand. Perhaps - with a bit of luck - this format of final will never appear on the 'World' stage again. And hopefully NONE of us will ever have to give it's tactics another moments thought. But I fear that GB will never be as close to a World Pairs/Team Championship again as they were on Saturday.

I admit it was quite a few years since I was involved in any programme adverts but It was 'dirt cheap' relative to other forms of advertising or so I felt at the time. Perhaps thingss have changed considerably since then; but with dwindling 'circulation' I would have thought that to be unlikely.

Perhaps we should moderate our language. The Manager is C. Has Tai written this ?

The Grinning Arse. I'd love to see that on T shirts and Caps.

Do many clubs make a net profit on programme advertising revenue ? Or is more likely that it helps to go cover some of the high production costs and any programme 'profit' is really just from the meagre sales ? And even then it is minimal profit; after an army of volunteers have a put in massive efforts getting all the ad's and providing the copy pretty much FOC. Can't help thinking all those man hours could bring in more revenue that created real profit if it were not 'wasted' on quite so many 'vanity productions'.

I have changed my mind over the last few weeks. I do see that a decisive final is required, now. Not just for a TV climax but also because it also keeps the later heats alive and hotly contested by many teams. Don't have a final And you'll get a lot of dead races. Just look at the British Final on Monday. It would have been dead after heat 16 as Robert had an unassailable lead at that point. I feel that both teams should go into the final capable of winning. Whichever side wins a heat advantage in the final wins the tournament . But if there is a 3-3 in the final then that is a tie and on 'countback' the team with the higher qualifying score is the winner. Same rules in the heat 43 race off between 2nd and 3rd scorers.

It's actually a funny fact of the whole competition ... I don't think there was much evidence that many of the teams really understood the difference in tactics required for the race/off and finals that made them VERY different from all the other races. There were only 6 races where setting out to get one of your opponents into last place was the ONLY effective 'plan'. And in three of them one side ended being reduced to one man so it became a little irrelevant. In the other three race ALL of them ended 3-3. It was obvious that Australia, Denmark and Russia had 'got' it by either 'going' for a second/third 3-3, or at least being very happy to settle for it when it happened. And in all three races that really came about BECAUSE the lead rider of the 'other' side singlemindedly (and pointlessly) went for the win and Zagar, Millik and Tai never make any attempt to assist their partner at all. We all know that hardly any team other than GB had actually done any team riding all week AND their partner in each case could be regarded as being 'difficult to help' so that comes as no surprise in the qualifiers. But we know Lambert WAS able to make use of Tai's help which was very different. BUT the reality is that NONE of those three winners ever even gave it a thought. And none of them had it as a 'tactic' that they had even thought of. They still seem to think that there was something 'helpful' about going for the win ! Including Tai.

Yes. That's how it goes in sport, isn't it ? We all shut up talking about games/matches/cups of the past once the rider/player has spoken. I think not. This is one of those that will still be spoken about when Tai has overtaken Ivan's records.

Actually the issue has NOT been answered at all. In fact what has just been revealed is that we now KNOW they got the tactics wrong on Saturday AND now, in addition, we know that they still haven't worked that fact out. Amazing.

Absolutely right. Now who did this 'thinking' on Saturday night and which numptie thought it wise to put out this ridiculous press release saying something so daft ?

So we will go into the final NOT having the easier winning position of 3-3 as a plan at all. I am not calling anyone thick ...... But ?

One of the odd things about the two night SON final was that at the end off the first night there was no climax. The very thing that we are supposed to have to keep the TV people happy. Mind You, last night the British Final showed how a final really does keep an event alive to the end. Lambert had won the meeting after four rides if it were to be decided on total points. And the semi for 3rd to 6th finishers kept those later races really meaningful. And didn't it show ? The SON race off and final on Saturday was pretty much the same concept but what works very well for individual racing doesn't transfer as well to a pairs format. For us GB folk concentrating on the top spot it should not be forgotten that having race 43 as a race off certainly made all the later races for the lesser teams equally meaningful. I do not have a magic bullet but having just one earlier qualifier (or scrapping them both) and making Friday night some sort of qualifier for Saturday's final might work. Creating a decisive end ... may take some imagination but trying to get something that rids us of the 3-3 issue is essential, and I don't mean 4320 scoring. Either side could win with a heat advantage but a 3-3 would give the win to the meeting top scorers. And apply that to race off and final, possibly, as others have mooted. But top priority is to call it the Speedway World Pairs and boost the prize fund so that all teams can afford to send 3 riders. PS (before PR reminds us) i know the FIM set the prize fund but a little help from a small 'monster' needs to add to the kitty

Exactly.

Mind you. Until the morning of the Tetetrow meeting all the people you had asked kept telling you that the Finals were to be won by the race winner. Some times we all get bum info.

Perhaps. But yet again it wouldnt have mattered. It was worth the very very small chance of success even if it ended as a 5-1 against.

Blimey. We are not getting an inch closer on this are we ?

Do you think so, really ? Everything points to that NOT being the plan. If there was one at all. Tbh I think they were just going to 'try their best' from the start and see what came of it. No plan for the getting a Russian to the back specifically at all.

No funnily enough they didn't. But fortunately for them Emil did not concede third to Robert despite not getting help from Artem. So they Won. Had Lambert got past Emil with Artem not team riding to help; then on some russian forum Ruskie folk very similar to us would be pointing out that tactical mistake that cost them the win.

The funny thing is ... many of us here, with nothing better to do in our spare time spent several days last week discussing the various scenarios and tactics with a Final race giving preference to second and third. And specifically how this may require totally different thinking than the qualifying races beforehand. Didn't that happen within the GB camp ? Or even inside Rossiter's head ? Weren't they all 'brainstorming' the outcomes and possibilities - not just for fun, like us - but for real because it mattered ?

You are still making the argument here for it being a tactical mistake not to try though, don't you see? He could (did) go for the win ... we lost the final. He could have stayed where he was in second ... no matter we would have lost the Final He might have been passed by Emil in the attempt to assist Robert ... no matter we would have lost the Final. He might not have been passed by Emil but helped baulk Emil so that Robert could get past on the last bend ... BIG MATTER We would be World Champions.

Well OK. But the one you just posted about a 5-1 wasn't really giving a contrary 'opinion ' instead it just tended to point out how little we had to lose by having a go.

As he collects his silver medal ... Just as he did going for and getting the win.