Sings4Speedway

Its not all down to the riders though. Promotors demand riders turn up with 2 x well maintained bikes. The turnaround time of fixtures and fragility of a modern bike compared a more durable older machine dictates that a third bike/spare is a practical option. Then theres milage picking Jason Edwards out as a standard british double upper (no offence meant) Jason has a 500 mile round trip to home meetings at Redcar. Multiply that by 10-15 depending on cup runs etc, then double it for away fixtures rough estimate 30k miles a year......who would be willing to put that on their own vehicle each year for no sensible offset against the depreciation

I love IOW but they are stubborn buggers, to be fair i don't blame them. The way they were treated when they advocated change and then moved on to NORA was nothing short of diabolical. They have done a huge amount for British speedway over the years but they know the future isn't stepping in to save the current mess.

Boxall, Complin, Worrall, Barker.....what do you put in the water up there

Whilst i very much agree its hard to argue that more opportunities at a development level creates bigger competition in league speedway. Quick scan of 2015 shows 10 teams and 70ish riders. Around half of those went on to rider NL and several higher (some were already NL at the time). It certainly shouldn't be league places for all but it should be a case that those with enough ability can showcase their talents in the MDL/NJL and if they are fortunate to get opportunities from there so be it. The MDL was shrunk down to pointless numbers, those competing lost interest, for any starting out its hardly an inviting option leaving the majority of newcomers being the cream of youth rounds whilst the rest get discarded. The NJL is great with the focus on current and next generations but then fails to offer variety of racing across a night. The solution is to get a lot of kids into speedway, supply plenty of opportunities to get on track and learn how to race and hope from there BUT certainly easier sad than done.

This is why it would be mightily helpful if team building average green sheets were generated. Keeping Mulford as the example finished 2024 on 4.38 signed for 2025 on 4.27 (2.5% brit reduction) so assuming same again has happened this winter (although on that basis i make him 8.5ish)

Without disrespecting the other second half/MDL riders you can only beat whats in front of you and the level in those meetings is way down on previous years. Eli is a steady rider, he gets round and a lot of his points last year were picked up when others fell (not his fault). He has improved his gating and knows how to be a road block which helps a lot of slick tracks. That said there aren't really any riders missing out by him taking the team place so i hope he makes a go of it.

Morley will always be a decent signing, think Meadows will get found out once again now that the league is back up to a decent strength and be very surprised if he lasts the season.

So let me just check this so i can pretend to follow along..... 2024 Ablitt finished season on 5.04 less 2.5% reduction..... 2025 Ablitt didn't ride "professional league" still gets 2.5% reduction 2026 Ablitt can "apply" for an additional 8% reduction In my tiny mind he shouldn't get the 2.5% at the end of 2025 simply because he didn't participate and then be able to claim an additional 8% for......not participating...... There has to be a point where the actions of a few are considered to be bringing the sport into disrepute

Thers no major discrepancies between the two sets of averages except for Simpson NT 4.50 vs NL 8.42 and Loftus NT 3.00 vs NL 8.39

Looking solid rather than strong, lacking an out and out number 1 at the moment but if they could squeeze Max James in at reserve with Mitchell my calculator leaves a Crang sized hole. That would generate a team that should win at home but has potential to go missing away.

Im assuming Connor Coles, Ben Morley and Max James all have to apply to get the 8% reduction which may or may not be granted.....

Also shows why the limits shouldn't yo-yo around. 38 point limit last year introduced a several non ready riders combined with natural average inflation and a short season seeing riders like Simpson on averages higher than their probable ability.....therefore the need to jump up to 42. Why can't that NL just stick at a number (ideally 42) with 3.00 minimum and maybe things will start to level out again.

Im going to say it.....Simpsons NL average is way to high for this to be considered a decent signing, if he had come in on his Trophy average that would be different but 8.42 is a massive number......he will probably do alright at Lynn if its deep with his Grasstrack background but technical tracks are going to be a big challenge

Surely its trying to compare apple cider and Perry....... One was tweaking a rule post season starting the other squeezing one in pre season with the caveat that it will be taken out if it doesn't suit Scunthorpe at the end of the year either way both are nonsense.

I think the fake outrage was more genuine fear. A Nora national league could have easily operated alongside the BSPL leagues but with the ability to take a fresh look, introduce fresh ideas but also drop any that didn't work whilst being forgiven as it would have been a known work in progress. Instead the BSPL threatened riders that competed in it and threatened clubs with closure if they co-operated. Rather than generate track time for both established and emerging riders its was beaten down by snakes who champion themselves as saviours of the sport.

surprised they didn't change the rules for him again....

Do yourself a favour and pop it on ignore like the rest of us. Simon Lambert was/is an excellent mentor who has a huge amount of knowledge available both technical and mechanical (though perhaps not fitness) anyone who listens and adopts any pointers he gives them will be better for it.

It was obvious what would happen the day it was announced. Personally i think the NL limit should be 40 and leave it there, changing year on year creates a bigger mess. 40 allows a little natural average inflation to help riders progress beyond but also high enough that a decent standard of teams can be put on track. Lowest rider average should be 3.00 meaning riders have to work hard to earn and keep their place rather than being convenient low numbers.

Any rider on a 2.00 is daft but Ben Whalley is New Zealand national champion. He beat George Congrieve who was decent in a stronger NL so id say even a bad season is going to see his average go over 6.

Why? Scunthorpe look in enough trouble as it is. This will sound mean (because it is) but i genuinely don't get all the hype around Max Perry needing a team place all the time.....surely the fact that it happens season after season says something? Team building averages shouldn't be tinkered with just to accommodate someone to frankly has suspect machinery and doesn't mix it enough. Neither will feature given the points available but Mickie Simpson would be more deserving of the position than Perry based upon last season.

Strong looking top 4 and ridiculous joker starting at reserve should see a good season for the Aussie Academy. Threat is nullified a little once Whalley moves into the 1-5 but short season should be ok. Hope Anika finds an aggressive streak as i worry speed may be there but gating and first corners are going to be a problem.

The big issue that has crept into the sport is that being good enough is no longer the sole consideration for a team spot. Ultimately if a rider is more than good enough they will get a team spot but there are also a growing list of maybe riders that squeak in for other reasons like locality, sponsorship, recommendations from riders who have no actual interest etc. The grim reality is that very few riders are ready once they turn 15 be that physically, mentally, emotionally or whatever. There have been and will continue to be altercations between riders who are above and below the legal age and it won't always be able to be swept under the carpet. I would happily see the minimum age for NL returned to 16 and could even be higher.

The National League has always struggled with the disparity in crowds at various tracks and therefore the budgets for sides created. Kent would easily pull 600+ weekly at Central Park and double that for a Bank Holiday clash. Likewise in that era Eastbourne, Birmingham, Mildenhall but all were standalone teams. On the other end Stoke and Buxton would draw 150-300 on a good day and don't even think about the bad days. The rest would slot in the middle and like teams built have good days and bad. Len claimed to have turned a profit every year at Kent NL so was it wrong of him to build better sides according to his budget? Scunthorpe entered a team so bad one year that most clubs hosted them as double headers as they knew nobody would pay to turn up and watch, is that a help or hinderance to other clubs?

I completely get that Kenzie gets an average after 4 fixtures and he knew (or should have known the implications) what is wrong is dropping the lower limit to 2.00 and allowing those who achieved under 3.00 to race on be signed on their lower number. Then the team building limit gets jumped back up to 42 allowing stronger sides and if sub 3 point riders are signed a bigger gulf in class. A 9-10 point rider and a 2 point rider in the same heat is unlikely to produce good racing or a huge deal of entertainment.

To be fair to Alfie like all other riders he is free to ask for what he likes and its the promotions job to decide if he's worth that amount. There's a stand off waiting to happen, promotions will have to start saying no but i respect that riders shouldn't have to leave home knowing they will make a big loss.