1 valve

You’re absolutely correct. The only occasion a superheat could be worth considering would be to decide the aggregate point if/when the scores are level after the two matches. Or maybe not award one in the event of a tied aggregate?

Actually there was quite a detailed lighting plan for the King Power which resulted in none of the pitch floodlights being higher than the internal dimensions of the stadium. This reduced the volume of light pollution to an acceptable level thus conforming with laws applicable to the protection of wildlife including the local Bat population.

As has been said previously elsewhere, under investigation it is highly possible that planning officials will recognise that parking capacity will be insufficient for the likely attendance numbers. This will see the planning application rejected leaving the site ripe for development of commercial office & industrial units.

If the number one of a team gets to ride in heat eight that means the missing rider is the second highest scorer for his team. So no real issue there although a bit of a waste to put a number one in such a relatively (for him) easy race. A much better rule would be that a team must use RR before a guest can be used and where a guest is required (i.e. because two riders are missing) then the guest is used as a substitute for the lower average rider. The RR rule should be adjusted to allow any rider whose average is higher than the missing rider to be used once and twice if the RR is lower than the missing rider. However, RR facility should only be allowed for the same rider for 5 consecutive meetings after which the facility is withdrawn in favour of a guest with an average two points below that of the missing rider which will continue until the rider returns or the team sign a replacement rider. The above may need some tweaking, but the essence is to force teams to use RR and reduce/remove the use of guests.

Well last time around Leicester a few weeks ago riding at 6 he managed 7 points from 7 rides. Guess that’s an off meeting - Stars fans pinning a lot on a greatly improved performance this time around.

Nick Morris becoming available if Brum can be bothered to try something to improve results. Dare say he’ll be putting in plenty of practice at Leicester to get up to some sort of reliable pace.

No problem agreeing that limited race nights are not ideal. However with Poland holding most of the cards (& best riders contracts) there’s no point at this moment in challenging/changing that particular situation as too many riders would be lost to the UK. But it could happen over time should UK begin to gain support from sponsors/tv/riders & fans alike. One of the issues effecting crowd levels is the situation where a team can go weeks without a home fixture thus failing to create traction with fans by having regular weekly meetings. This issue would be addressed by at least having a meeting once a week. and of course not everybody could race on Saturdays Change has got to start somewhere and evolution rather than revolution would be the preferred way forward and much better than the current stagnation. Plus the right promoters having the right reasons (& desire) to bring about the change.

No not at all. Change is required and that change has to be with both short term (i.e. what can be done now) and longer term (i.e where we want to finish up) objectives. To start with. 1. Do away with doubling up. We know this is in place so that the current number of promotions can field teams. Problem is, this undermines the credibility of the sport. So clearly less number of teams will be required. 2. Recognise that fixed race nights are for now a necessary evil. This may be expanded if and when the "super League" creates traction with media, fans and riders alike as something going in the right direction. 3. Currently there is the availability of credible riders to form eight/nine teams. Make this the number of full time professional clubs for the "Super League". Each of these teams to meet 2H&2A in a season. Two meetings per week 1H&1A Subject to weather etc. This should provide for a 16/18 week season. 4. The promotions of the "Super League" should meet strict criteria such as track availability and long term viability for starters. 5. Those promotions not in the Super League allowed to run NDL type meetings, semi pro at the most and or Individual meetings featuring riders from "Super League". Note, no alternative league should be run which purports to be close to the "Super League2 as a clear demarcation would be required. But, as I have said on many occasions, the biggest challenge facing the sport is in fact the promoters themselves, where a few (at least) continue to act first and foremost for themselves to the detriment of the good of the sport here in the UK. These folk have indeed at times kept the sport going and almost certainly believe the sport "owes them" something. So until they recognise that the sport owes them nothing (they've had their day) and begin to help rather than hinder the transition of the sport from what it is today to something more convincing and believable, we supporters are stuck with what we have - Business as usual.

The concept is good and very much alongside the numbers back in the day, when UK had pick of race nights and plenty of riders available to make up the teams which is now sadly far from the case.

If clubs elect to choose a race night say other than Monday or Tuesday, they might well be able to make up a team of riders willing to forgo commitments abroad. However, the issue would be other teams would not have the same type of availability, especially for riders contracted to Polish leagues. Not sure how you come up with 28 matches. is that a league of 14 clubs (13 opponents) home and away plus some sort of cup competition or a league of 8 (7 opponents) home and away x two? The latter would/could work (fixed race nights) but the first is a none starter simply because of the removal of doubling up.

You're right - 14 tracks with Oxford running one team. No rider would be excluded, just not available through either choice or contract restrictions elsewhere. But when UK clubs choose their desired desired race nights and their riders, they would need to consider, Tuesdays - No riders with Swedish contracts Wednesdays - No riders with Danish contracts Friday/Saturday/Sunday No riders with Polish contracts Also no doubling up Using Leicester as an example, From Mondays meeting lineup with the Tigers, should one league have run this year only one main body rider and the two reserves would have been able to commit to ride throughout the season for the Lions. I'm not against one league at all, just that if it does go ahead restricted race nights would still be required which by and large would remain as Monday & Thursday and that there will be a finite number of capable riders available to fill line ups of a much smaller number of teams (five, six or seven riders) in total than the combined Premier & Championship clubs. Its not an opinion, its just the math of the situation.

Thanks for the correction.

Currently there are 17 teams across the Premier & Championship leagues. This will be reduced to 16 next year with the loss of Birmingham. So on the basis that all other clubs will run next year, for team of five 80 riders will be required Remove doubling up, riders contracted to Ekstraliga and Danish/Swedish nationals with contracts to race in their domestic leagues that clash with UK "race nights" simply means there will be insufficient availability of riders for sixteen teams - not counting loss of riders through injury. Given the above considerations and as well as ensuring "Juniors not good enough" are not unmercifully thrown into the deep end, there would be an available pool of riders next year to make up no more than 10 teams but more likely nine. So rather than just discuss the merits of one league, maybe the discussion should consider which eight or nine team would take part - and what admission price would be considered appropriate.

And how much do you think would be a reasonable charge for an adult ticket for an event made up of 5 man teams from current championship (mostly second string or riders at the end of their career) & NDL riders?

Two clubs may not want one league for what ever their reasons, but if one league did come to pass (it wont) there will be more than two clubs required to drop out of the concept simply because of an insufficient number of riders available to make up teams for the current existing clubs. That is of course unless the sport is absolutely dumbed down beyond all recognition to have teams of 5 riders, with no English, Australian, Swedish, Danish & Polish riders from the Ekstraliga and final numbers topped up by riders from NDL level and similar.