Sings4Speedway

The difficult area for a 'blueprint' for the sports survival is should we be looking for a plan to sustain team racing or keep the discipline going? I can safely say that if i was going to even consider promotion it wouldn't be of any team but of one off events / possible series. Whatever level it would be at i would be looking to ensure entertainment was at the forefront.

So true. Although with food could be closer to £60. How many fans are lucky enough to have partners / kids who also really want to go to Speedway and who wouldn't choose a day/evening/dinner out for the same money and with a considerable higher level of luxury.

I appreciate the views of BV72 and the crowd approximations of the Belle Vue sides last season. The questions that will always remain a mystery are did either side break even independently? Do the Aces double entry fee and 5-6 times higher crowds generate any more money once wages are paid out vs the lower income but lower outgoings of the Colts? What percentage of Aces fans do you think would attend Colts meetings if there were no Aces side running? Im sure there is a large quantity that do both already but would the 5 times extra all simply walk away?

That tactical switch could pay off for Kent but they will still be competing against Eastbourne and there will be some who favour a higher level of racing. Depending on the opposition will most likely decide where i watch during the year, as whilst the NL league standard is closer this year i have no interest in handing over my money if Kent start dishing out 60+ point drummings every week.

Ive got to say that Kents crowds are decent for many levels. A conservative average of 600 a week? Thats certainly similar to what was quoted as Workingtons figures for the Championship last year with far higher out goings. Mondays are well backed as it doesn't clash with many other activities BUT is tight for many to get there due to the early start, does limit the number of children who can attend on a school night and makes it tricky for away riders & supporters alike. Saturdays do clash with many other activities but does offer a lot more freedom of travel time, not sure what the plan is regarding the GP weekends but i suspect if the crowd figures can maintain / show a slight improvement the switch would be considered a success as it will make it easier to complete signings in future seasons and potentially pave the way for s step up in division?

As has been often covered Speedway has such a unique setup that it makes it very hard to implement a one size fits all approach. We have tracks that are owned outright and used solely for Speedway, owned but multi use, leased solely for speedway and leased dual purpose. The majority of stadia require Speedway to continue to bring any value to those venues. Yet we are in a situation whereby the promotions running are struggling to stay in business. That is what all Speedway teams need to be treated as, a business and that needs to be able to at the very least break even year on year. Currently the sport relies on a few fortunate individuals who are able to plough huge amounts of their own money into clubs to keep them afloat, i think everyone is aware that is not in any way a sustainable business model.

More than likely. Whilst it is clear that budgets need to be stuck too the Brum team assembled isn't so much poor as dull. Shanes will give a few thrills and who knows what will happen when the Oystercard red mist comes down but the rest are just solid. Perhaps it shows a shift in expectations that fans want entertainers and not just winners? Although the lack of winners may be the issue with this side? I can't see that many last places but can't see that many heat wins either.

Challenge now announced as a one leg affair. Good work by the Kent promotion considering all the regular opposition have stepped up plus testing themselves against another strong league side will be a good marker for the season.

Big dangers for many clubs (even the currently sustainable ones) is that every club thinks on an insular level, considering their own interests and to heck with the other clubs in the country. Without other clubs surviving there is no value to your own business. If this was standard industry drumming out of business to get a large share makes sense but it isn't, if this was football (and sorry hate cross sport comparisons) if one club fell by the wayside there are literally dozens queuing to take its place but in speedway we have the unique situation whereby a group of riders (with personal agendas) sign for clubs (with personal agendas) and are governed by you guessed it an organisation with personal agendas. Until everyone starts pulling in one direction the only way isn't down just apart.

There are some nails being not just hit on the head here but smashed. Having so many voices and opinions will always cause division as some want to see the sports very best riders & others want close even racing. Some think its vastly over priced others consider it value. There will never be full agreements but without sustainable clubs there will be nothing left. Outsiders if you like, new to speedway spectators want to see drama, action, close racing with the element of risk that the odd tumble brings. Look at speedway promo's how many are slow motion shots of riders side by side. Tracks could be small sand covered circles for all "outsiders" care as long as there are 4 equal riders racing shoulder to shoulder for 4 laps. As long as the riders are simply identifiable and there is drama plus lets face it how many established fans want much more from the sport either.

Whilst what you say is correct are they also the riders who are in a position to purchase a minimum of 2 new engines each? The ideal is to promote switching of engines currently being used before riders even graduate to NL level so that riders stepping up have already purchased these unicorns (mythical standard engines that are competitive and significantly reduce running costs) and know no other way. As things stand the majority of riders at NL level are feeding off higher tiers with engine purchases switching the other way round doesn't quite add up.

Certainly not going to disagree with the tail wagging the dog but i personally never fail to grasp the idea that the best place to start introducing new initiatives and costs is the NL. These by very definition are the least experienced / skilled riders and therefore have a lower skill set to adapt to change. In addition they are also the riders with the least funding and yet the imposing of standard engines upon them would force many out of the sport. Generating a competitive reliable engine is an excellent idea or club / league pool engines but forcing riders who have invested what little they have just to break into the NL before penalising them further just seems barmy.

As things stand very few clubs are equal and all we have is clubs that are able to survive longer than others rather than a sustainable model. Clubs need to look at the type of riders they want to attract, how many clubs and fans want mercenaries who just arrive for the big money? How many want loyal riders who have an affinity with the club? Higher teams also need to start caring about the development of future riders rather than blanketly ignoring it and assuming someone else will bring the next generation through, if they paid some level of investment now it could save them a fortune in the future. The sport has to fall in line with current commercial trends, quick easy entertainment fixes, cheap and superficial, basic enough for all to grasp quickly but most of all sustainable & adaptable.

Whilst we both have the same end goal my view is that riders won't pass on savings to the promotions but if riders were being paid less they would have to look at the amounts they spend/waste upon machinery. Current maintenance routines largely means replace parts rather than look after, will bikes last more than 1 season of course. No different to any other area of life if the money coming in is less then the money going out needs to be cut to reflect. Most riders aren't stupid and realise this, there will still be riders who can earn out of the sport and have fun whilst making a living. Those that cannot / will not make it pay, thanks for the memories, enjoy your retirement, time to let the next batch of riders move the sport onwards.

Think many of the riders with a bit of experience will up their averages nicely like Mountain, Bacon, Bailey, Perks & Wood. Newman is more than capable but might be forced to ride a bit out of position in a poor side. My bigger issue is with the non improvers filling a place for yet another year, Kurtz, Covatti, Harris, Bates etc either riders on the way down lining pockets or going no further but still blocking up places for riders who might.

Definitely a hard decision. One side feels tough on any rider already signed whilst the other i don't like the idea of a more talented rider with a bigger future left without a team place. Im guessing whoever may be replaced will have profiteered from the signing on fee already (much like most of the Worky riders will have done also).

Be very sad is Mason gets stuck without a visa / doesn't come back. Not sure what position that leave Josh MacDonald in either? Im guessing some items will have been purchased already, the whole thing has a knock on effect as many of these riders will get fixed up elsewhere at the expense of an already signed rider.

Forgot / wasn't sure on the reduction bit. Didn't know if conference league rides were being counted the same as NL or whether there was a time restriction? In all fairness it would actually help if all the rules had been published rather than some of them.

I believe Kennett is 9.58 ? 6.39 x 1.5 as the Rye House averages from last year were scrapped.

Awful news gutted for the supporters & riders alike. Plenty of time for dissection later for now its just best wishes to all those affected.

Tragic but true, i had previously worked & socialised with him.

What does it matter as its never enforced anyway. Over the past few seasons with the yellow & black in place ive seen a yellow cover with black quarters added with marker pen, a helmet that had a black and yellow design and the original yellow colour used so if there is no policing it what does it matter? Over the same time i believe i have seen 2 white helmet colours the rest have been a combinations of grey, blue, pink, and many brown. For a radical switch as we are no longer using the tactical joker colour why not have home riders red & blue, away riders black & white, yellow & black so there is actually a design difference between the two.

With the greatest of respect Kieran like many took a NL place before he was ready and now has been tarred with the brush of a struggling rider, a season or so back in the development leagues and he may feature again. Ryan Mac did largely the same in his previous years at Stoke but has been given several opportunities , he sadly is paying the price for his best year yet at Coventry and then the introduction of the 2.00 limit has partially frozen him out.

Very good point, the bond can be made up of actual money or assets which everyone knows are effectively worthless except upon paper. Im still surprised the Harris has the cheek to say he was under paid after some of his Rye House efforts, would have thought £2.50 and a packet of wotsits would have covered it. Its beautifully ironic that riders "can't make it pay" so jack up their prices, put clubs out of business and then don't get paid at all (maybe if they weren't so greedy they would still be taking a wage). Also the bspa, the governing body that has the "best interests of speedway" at its heart is determined to keep Rye House closed and see one of the limited speedway venues the country has lost to the sport.

Don't forget that Kemps "assessed" base average doesn't qualify on the conversion rate as he would have to be 4.5 or more in the Champs (we all know the bitter irony that one more meeting changes everything)