GS550

As reported on the BBC today:- http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42236328 "The UK's State Pension is the least generous of all the most advanced economies in the world, according to a new report. A study by the Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) suggests full-time workers in the UK do relatively poorly. The report found that the average pensioner can expect to receive just 29% of what they earned at work. Only South Africa - which isn't a member of the OECD - is less generous."

Well said. Standards of common decency seem to be slipping these days. It used to be people had respect for their elders, many of course still do, but there seems to be a significant minority of people that appear ignorant and disrespectful. The concession wasn't to have those over 65 admitted free, but rather a concession i.e. a token reduction of 3 quid or so on the full admission price. It was reported today on BBC that the UK has the lowest state pension of the developed European countries and which provides little or no disposable income to spend on trips to sporting events. The Glasgow promotion were quoted as saying that some over 65's had previously been volunteering to pay the full price i.e. forego and not take up the 3 quid or so reduction as those particular individuals could afford it. That to me is how it should have been left, so that those that could afford it still volunteered as they had already been doing, while those that were on nothing little more than the meagre state pension and couldn't afford it would still be able to attend. As has been said, for some those small concessions are often the difference between being able to afford an item or not have it at all, and this is what the Glasgow promotion appears to have overlooked. Better to take say 50 or so at £13 or £14 than have only a dozen at £16 or £17. But it isn't so much the monetary difference, which given some being put off or not able to afford I can't see the Glasgow promotion gaining financially, but rather the image and poor example they are giving which I agree I find disgusting.

Taking after his dad, I remember him as a young kid at Hyde Road going round and round continuously doing practice laps. And look how he turned out. Agree with both Gazc and RS50. And with the team Glasgow assembled, a solid top five, and only exactly 2.00 left for the number 7, its a team structure they could use with Sarjeant at 6. So yeah, unfortunately no room for Jack. Best of luck to him in 2018.

The fog in my head has cleared. No doubt for those of us that have had a hard paper round

"Tried to get in" you say. You mean they correctly sought entry being pensioners on the bread line getting by on the state pension so qualified for a couple of quid reduction.... .....and you reckon "they" caused some spike in prices. You may as well say that they caused OPEC to raise oil prices. Have you been on the sauce mate.

Pensioners have kept the country going for years, in retirement they usually aren't earning now and many are living on the state pension which derives little or no disposable income. It was only a reduced entrance fee anyway, they were still paying, just a little less, only about £3 or so reduction as I understand and still paying what they can. Maybe they should have left it on a voluntary basis as Glasgow stated that some of their over 65's had been volunteering to pay full price as those particular individuals could afford it. That way the ones over 65 that genuinely can't afford it wouldn't be affected. You're the guy that said you paid £55,000 for your car, so you obviously have a few bob more than the rest of us and hardly qualified to snipe at old age pensioners scraping by on the state pension.

Problem solved eh. Let pensioners get hypothermia and spend the winter fuel allowance on a Glasgow season ticket.

Good stuff. Well here's a bit of forward thinking. I won't retire for yonks yet but I'm gonna save my entrance fee so that when I retire and aint earning I will have enough to pay for the entrance fee that they've hiked up. I agree with much of what the Glasgow promotion have done but I thoroughly object to what they're doing with those over 65, it stinks.

Not the same thing, we aint talkin 'bout 8 year olds, its 14 year olds. The guy asked of his 14 year old son "how does he pay £8 (half price) as he doesn't work and doesn't earn any money." Answer: the guy that asked the question should be paying for him, he his responsibility not everybody else's but he expects the rest of us to pay for him.

What a load of bull. How does your 14 year old son pay. Simple - you should be paying for him, he is your responsibility not everybody else's but you expect the rest of us to pay for him. When I was 14 years of age I'd already been getting off my backside for a couple of years and earning from a paper round, with which I bought my own stuff and paid for trips to such as cinema and for that matter other entertainment such as attending a sporting event. You say: "However when he gets to 65 he will have hopefully had circa 45 years of earnings behind him to enable him to pay" Yes, many folk of around 65 have had 45 years of earnings.... and mortgage, kids to bring up, regular bills, debts to pay off, putting adolescent offspring through uni or supporting them through early adulthood and even later, weddings to pay for, and the like. Anybody I know that's around that age has little or nothing, so there's no mountain of cash that you seem to assume. When folk retire they stop working and stop earning. Sound like you've never lived on the state pension, there's little or no disposable income.

Oooh err

Not a bad team

If you mean none of or fewer to numbers 2, 3 and 4 then thumbs up. Could do with less of numbers 5 and 6 too. Definitely yes to numbers 10 and 11. And it wouldn't be so bad if they actually stuck to and followed number 15.

Why? Where? Its a discussion forum mate. Hence discussion!! Obviously perception is everything. Reality is I'm as cool as the proverbial cucumber. Nothing to see here as they say. Here, calm yourself down to a frenzy, have two wine gums.

Nope. Never said that at all. I said that as with others given sparse attendance last couple of meetings that I had "reduced" my attendance. I've probably attended more speedway meetings than many have had hot dinners and I've often visited multiple tracks so not just one track. I don't get to quite as many different tracks as I used to but have still been attending. There is a difference between (1) reduced from a high number to still a lot, compared with (2) none at all. You seem to have assumed the second. So you don't stand and watch, you're in the pits. Bit of an aside, but seems you're not seeing things from the perspective of a paying to get in supporter so are you really in a position to criticise poorer attendances, what they want to or don't want to pay to see, and what factors might influence the paying public. Anyway, moving on, ever been in the pits at the old Hyde Road stadium? Now that was a speedway track and proper stadium. Btw, here, have a wine gum.

Actually I prefer to stand at matches. I assume you use an armchair?

Have you considered changing your username to Cinderella? Didn't she find a shoe that she thought fitted? Apologies, my sense of humour got the better of me there. As regards the part which you quote you are, in fact, wrong to assume that I was referring to you and, in fact, I did not mention your name at all nor anyone else's. I was actually meaning generally and in 'future-tense' only, i.e. if something were to occur from this point forth in the future so it was a general observation under the heading of 'generally'. That clarified, no offence was intended be it to you or anyone else contemplating doing such a thing, i.e. in the future. At least it appears we understand one another better. I'm happy to discuss anything, different opinions are good. But they should of course always be with a reasonable level of courtesy and respect. Enjoy your speedway.

You're right, though was it not a trial for potentially signing fulltime i.e. only for BV in the coming season but which offer he ultimately turned down and decided to remain in the old NL. Was there not also a story about Steve scoring well from his programmed rides from reserve in a match and when he thought he was going to be asked to take an additional ride as reserve replacement he hid in the toilet? Back then of course any doubling up was more isolated and not widespread as it has become in more recent seasons. Even when doubling up was formally introduced a few seasons ago was its aim not to assist young up and coming riders so that they could be introduced to the top tier of speedway and take the step up more gradually rather than in the old BL/NL days when a 9 or 10 point second tier rider would fail in the top tier or never get past reserve/second string stage in the BL. In any case it seems that the aim and purpose of doubling up has been lost in recent seasons as being only to help solve a shortage of riders when the very instigation of doubling up may have possibly (maybe just maybe) have partly caused the shortage as when riders started to double up some established riders found that there was no place for them and they retired or gave up the sport sooner than they might otherwise have done, just a thought. Anyway, back on topic, I for one would welcome Glasgow having fewer doubling up riders or indeed none at all and instead having a team of riders that ride solely for the Tigers and whom supporters can identify with as being Glasgow riders that will always ride for the team (barring injury of course and hopefully 2018 is a season free of injuries as well).

Incorrect. I've probably attended more speedway matches than some of us have had hot dinners. How many times did you attend the old Hyde Road stadium? Ever? Yes I have asked you to refrain from personal derogatory insults - and correctly so given your comments which I have correctly noted as being of a juvenile nature. Note also that I have followed correctly to 'attack the post not the poster' as per forum etiquette and the forum rules i.e. by referring to the post content itself (your comments as being of a juvenile nature). You also incorrectly say that I have referred to you when I have not, it appears you have adopted a general note as applying to yourself which is entirely up to you. Conversely you have not followed forum rules and you have called me 'a fake fan' - which is false and which I am offended by. I have therefore reported post #136 to the forum moderators as contravening forum rules which specifically require posters to attack the post not the contributer (poster).

The memory is getting a bit foggy on this one but didn't they mess around with it and at one point change it from six or more behind to eight? And was it two tacky sub rides allowed (while still so many points behind) each by different riders so potentially the top two could have an extra ride? The memory is getting foggy though.

To "BenR195": No need for derogatory sarcasm and derisive language. You are, in fact, incorrect. I have an antidote answer for every point you have made. You will also find them already in various threads on this forum as points made by others and one or two myself. I am perfectly capable of debating / discussing anything with anybody. That I do not do so in reply to juvenile and insulting responses is to be expected. Kindly refrain from further derisive language. Thank you. To everyone else: Posters know me by now on here. I can debate / discuss anything with anybody. Especially when its in an adult like manner and many will have a different view and that's fine. Different views are good. But they should, of course, be with a reasonable level of courtesy and respect. I aint perfect and nor is anyone else but we do our best. Generally: If some of us are less than encouraged by the shambles that has been 2017 season with long gaps in the schedule throughout the season, culminating in fixture congestion, "Guest Fest" matches and all the rest then we are (less than encouraged). A few of the end of season matches that were very poorly attended are testimony to that. So myself nor anyone else shouldn't be derided for our attendance being that bit less and told by some disrespectful uncouth jumped up upstart that we have no right to comment nor discuss. This is a discussion forum - of course we are entitled to comment and discuss. Some of us can remember such as the old Hyde Road stadium - now that was a real speedway track and stadium (that some jumped up upstarts these days have never even been in). The sport thrived back then and there was no doubling up. Nor have I ever said anything about 30 teams, I've only mentioned potential amalgamation of two divisions, whether this be the first and second, or the second and third. It might not be such a bad idea to merge the second and third tiers, as I personally think it would be no bad thing to simplify things, cut costs, and have no globe trotting prima donna's. A regular settled team of riders that supporters can identify with as being "their" team would be a start, rather than the different "Guest Fest" list every week and R/R shambles that doubling up has greatly contributed to. And we are all entitled to our opinion, even me.

Not so. I am quite capable of debating / discussing anything with anybody. However, I will not discuss with someone who acts in a juvenile insulting manner as you have done.

Don't be so personal and insulting. If you wish to behave in a juvenile manner then take it elsewhere. If I, and others, do not want doubling up then we don't. Its as simple as that. We don't need you to dictate to us that we shouldn't have that view.

Kindly refrain from personal derogatory remarks. You don't know me and you know nothing about me. If you have to resort to personal insult then you have clearly lost the argument.

Jeux Sans Frontières?