GS550

No I aint "missing the point" at all. Not even for one second mate. Perhaps it is yourself that is missing my point. A quid is only worth about 30p these days - an inescapable fact. Yes, it depends on how far you go back - indeed correct. Nevertheless, at some point a quid has become 30 percent of what it used to be worth. 17.5 is just a number. Times that by 0.3 and you get £5.25. So it really is only "worth" about a fiver these days. Its all about perception. The good news is that the £140 per month you are spending x 0.3 = only £42 per month. Sorted!! Salaries these days are measured in tens of thousands of pounds don't forget. And, just for you (my sense of humour couldn't resist!), here is (another especially for you) recount of how SCB bought a car for more than £50,000 about 10 years ago and came on 'ere complaining about 2 quid!!!! My football going friends and workmates think £17.50 is "cheap as chips" compared to what they pay at football. The reason why they don't go to speedway aint 'cos they think its too expensive, its 'cos they don't like the sport. But yeah, they keep telling me that speedway prices are "cheap as chips". It aint "£22.50" at Glasgow - its only £17.50!! Yeah, "family of fatties" - brilliant!!

Can't believe people moaning about a couple o' quid - it is 2016 fer cryin out loud. A quid is worth about 30p these days, so such as £17.50 is more like a fiver used to be. You will pay a couple o' quid just for a sugary drink from a petrol station kiosk and folk don't so much as blink. The best one is still SCB on 'ere recently saying that 10 years ago he paid over £50,000 for his car and in the same post complained about a couple o' quid!! I mean honestly!! I respect that other people have a different perspective - all I'm saying is from my perspective a couple o' quid is nothing and I aint rich that's fer sure (unlike SCB, I've never had a car over £50,000, ...or £40,000, ...or £30,000, ...or £20,000). Jeez, folk spend more than £17.50 every night down the local boozer or just on a round!! I just find it unbelievable that folk think £17.50 is loads a money - it aint!! (imho)

Exactly. All this percentages thing conveniently overlooks that admission fees have been in the teens for the last decade and seems like forever. In this day and age £17.50 is nothing and perfectly reasonable. Another poster, SCB, was complaining as well about 2 quid difference and in the same post he mentioned that 10 years ago he paid over £50,000 for his car!! And he was complaining 'ere about two quid!!

Sorry but I find this petty. £1.50 is practically nothing in this day and age. It's 2016 fer cryin out loud, a quid is worth about 30p these days so £1.50 is like what 45p used to be., so hardly anything. Recently another poster, think it was SCB, was complaining about the same thing and amidst his points was that 10 years ago he paid over £50,000 for his car - and he was complaining about two quid!! If I understand correctly the admission fee is about £17.50 for Adults, if only some people would behave the same!

Exactly. All this talk of Glasgow being top heavy doesn't take account of such as Garcia going well and racking up points, and that the other two in their bottom three are also decent riders for their respective positions. More of a concern for Glasgow at the moment seems to be injury to Worrall. The Aces website doesn't update from its news article a week ago: http://www.bellevueaces.co/newsitem.aspx?id=1685

Is the chip on your shoulder so big its blinkering your vision

How insular the last couple of posts are. A valid point is raised and the usual suspects turn on him. Pathetic and unnecessary.

Seems you are correct (see weblink below). Having had a look at the online video Barker runs towards the fallen rider/bike in a collective heap, and immediately tries to help by getting the bike off Matty. It seems clear from the video that Barker was concerned for Matty and anxious to help. It is also apparent that there are many whom have stated falsehoods about this, much of it assumptions - including those that simply weren't there. I too have criticised Barker in the past and assumed that there may have been something in the comments/claims on this thread. Seems a lot of people on this thread have a lot of retracting to do. Weblink to Heat 5 video (on Glasgow Tigers website): http://www.glasgowtigers.co/video/glasgow-tigers-vs-berwick-bandits-lc-heat-5/

Hang on a minute. You say you've bought a car 10 years ago for £52,000 - and your arguing about admission to a speedway match being £17.50 !!! And you say your car purchase price has increased by £20,000 - but you're arguing about a rise in admission to a speedway match of about two quid !!! You're right about not being exactly double, but the rise in prices of wages and all sorts (not Bassetts) has definitely substantially increased, while speedway admission prices seem to have been mid-teens for ever and pretty flat. In the 21st century, in the year 2016, £17.50 to see a speedway match aint a lot. To be fair I should mention that you usually seem very well informed and there's many a time I've seen your posts clarify something and very informative - don't want to be overly complimentary y'know but credit where credit's due. I guess I didn't make cleat that I was joking and tongue in cheek about the know it all thing - I'm probably just jealous, so apologies. Wages and costs - sadly I do deal with those, and yes I've seen them substantially increase over the last 10 years, wages in the industry I work in have definitely (virtually) doubled.... ok substantially increased.... ok they increased quiet a bit. Cheers and have a great 2016 season, its all ahead of us so loads to look forward to, thrills and hopefully not too many spills. Think I was a bit hastie there, sorry mate. Incidentally, on the other thing the wife says I do talk drivel so you have at least one backer there. Prices and cost and all that - I guess it depends on each person and what they are happy with. Have a great 2016 season, its all to look forward to. Cheers Classic!! To be honest I didn't want to make another post, but this was just too good not to acknowledge. This cheered me up. Thanks Mr Cyclone (or CSI ??)

What a load of drivel you talk! You know fine well that I was referring to average income of the public at large. In real terms speedway prices - as a percentage of income - has actually fallen over the last 10 years, that's a fact, you may choose to disagree cos you always seem to have a go at Glasgow and you are clearly anti-Glasgow. Time to take that huge chip off your shoulder and get a life mate. That's just plain wrong. Prices have generally doubled and I deal with company costs, they have definitely doubled. Average wages have also virtually doubled. Speedway admission prices have fallen in real terms. You may choose to disagree as the resident know-it-all as you always claim to be on anything and everything. "True" - thanks mate. But its a myth that wages have fallen. Average wages have actually substantially risen, if you mean so have costs (accommodation, electricity, food, etc) then yes that's right, so no reason why speedway should be any different. Check out car prices over the last 10 years for example, they have virtually doubled. Same for a lot of stuff, and wages are definitely virtually double what they were 10 years ago while speedway admission prices have remained flat so in real terms they have fallen as a percentage of wages of the paying public, for Mr Average that is (no pun intended).

Admission prices have been at about £15 or thereby for about 10 years or more. Wages have doubled in that time so to be still only in the teens at £17.50 is hardly any change at all in the last 10 years. Admission prices in speedway are way behind inflation, wages, and prices generally over the last 10 years.

Yes, a difference between: ( A ) an "Assessed" average - for the purposes of team building and team points limits, what a rider is "assessed" as being; and on the other hand ( B ) a minimum standard which shall be attained to facilitate a work permit, two different things, or at least I would expect them to be, hence my own personal view is that the minimum standard that shall be attained otherwise barred from our leagues is to me set too high if it is to act as a minimum and especially if it is a bare average i.e. net excluding bonus points.

If you mean every "good" rider will ride every track well, to paraphrase Don Corleone if history (of speedway) has taught us anything... it is that not all riders can ride all tracks well! There will always be tracks that some riders are suited to better than others and conversely some tracks that are bogey tracks for some riders, even high average ones. By and large you're right of course, most will the majority of the time, but....

That would make sense, to adjust it for the difference in the calculation. Although I still think 8 including bonus was ridiculously high to be set as a minimum, or 7 excluding bonus as a minimum, just my personal view. Yeah 9 didn't seem right, I can't remember it being 9, and seems it was 8 as confirmed by Alan Jones. Although personally I don't agree with it being set at any of those figures as a minimum.

Teams have won championships with so called "top heavy" teams, e.g. when it was: Joe Owen, Rod Hunter, Bobby Beaton, Alan Emerson, it didn't matter what the other 3 scored - that top 4 obliterated any team on their own. Long time ago yes, but to have two 10 pointers (Hunter and Beaton), an 11 pointer (Joe Owen), then also an 8 pointer (Emerson) was already too much for any team. The other 3 might as well not have bothered to turn a wheel, it didn't matter. As I recall they did it 2 seasons on the trot, winning back to back championships. They were feared alright and it was nothing to do with the bottom 3 riders although there's more than one way to skin a cat right enough.

Maybe its due to (as claimed by some within the sport) the alleged shortage of riders, some saying halfway through the 2015 season that little or no cover for injuries, few replacement options for long term injuries and (allegedly) a shortage of riders, many riders already doubling up or already doubling down, all that stuff. The other thing is the focus more on the scoring average without bonus points, did the previous threshold (of such as a 7 point average) include bonus points(?) and now the 5 point threshold doesn't include bonus points(?). I don't know myself hence the question marks. But if the method of calculation has changed to now exclude bonus points when it previously had included them, then that is also significant as middle order riders tend to rack up more bonus points than a heat leader, so a 6.5 average rider may well have a net average of less than 6 and maybe nearer 5 as a net average without bonus points. So not really comparing like with like. Just a thought.

There is a world of difference between making a point that a theory is 'rubbish' - and conversely stating personal insults that are clearly intended to be derisory. The detailed points made in my post #479 remain unanswered. Should you answer them or address me then please refer to the points only. Thank you.

Oh don't worry.

Entertaining as always cyclone. I think you mean post #479. You want to try answering the points on that post - which remain unanswered, no doubt because they are indefensible which is why the Edinburgh mob have given it a wide berth. The reason why the stuff in red wasn't mentioned is because they were rendered redundant and effectively superseded by the points I made in post #479. The historical agreement and close nearby thing is a load of rubbish. How come the two clubs happily co-existed and both ran on a Friday through the 70's, 80's and 90's. So all that nonsense about close proximity and different night is the biggest load of garbage. Glasgow raced on a Friday night anyway and when Edinburgh were forced to move to Powderhall in the 70's and the only night they could run speedway there was on Fridays (Glasgow's racenight) Glasgow allowed or didn't object to Edinburgh also running on a Friday. So what's the problem now. Answer - none. Try actually answering the points in my detailed post #479. Bet you can't.

A well reasoned and well put post. I also came within about 2 seconds of clicking the "Like" option. There's a couple of things though if you could help clarify or explain. You mention about this agreement existing from 1965 and being in place in some form since about 1946 etc. So how can we explain Glasgow and Edinburgh both running on the same night, Friday, for years e.g. when Glasgow were at Blantyre, then Blantyre 2, then Shawfield, covering the 70, 80's and 90's. Both Glasgow and Edinburgh ran on a Friday night and happily co-existed so what's the problem with them both running on a Friday now. Was it not the case that Friday was always Glasgow's race night anyway (I don't know fer sure so it is a question). And then when Monarchs had to move to Powderhall in the 70's they could only get Friday racing there and they were allowed, or not objected to, by Glasgow. If that's the case then is it not reasonable to expect Edinburgh to "return the favour". Then there's the modern day aspect. Times have changed. The sport has changed. The world is a different place and even speedway has changed, different engines, different rules that keep changing every season or so. The needs and circumstances, the business world, etc, have all changed. If any business, or sport for that matter, doesn't keep up with the times it will fall by the wayside. Poland has a much bigger influence now and riders tend to race there on Sundays to the extent that riders that would otherwise be available the rest of the week are not available on Sundays. Tracks which race on other days now have an unfair advantage that didn't used to be there. To put it another way, tracks that race on Sundays are at an unfair disadvantage, a situation that did not exist when the rules or agreement you refer to was made. It is no longer fit for purpose. Then there's the big city teams aspect. The sport has advocated over the years that such teams benefit the sport overall. On that score it would surely be in the interests of the sport to have a big city team that is thriving and that would also point to changing the raceday back to Fridays as was always Glasgow's racenight anyway - and which Glasgow allowed Edinburgh to also race on in the 70, 80, and 90's. Food for thought.

A well reasoned and well put post. I just happen to disagree with a number of the points. For example, it seems to me that it is the Edinburgh management that have been childish, petulant and unprofessional as well as somewhat arrogant and dictatorial. Lets be clear: Edinburgh's fans will not desert Armadale en mass and go to Ashfield instead, that is just ridiculous. I have also found a number of Edinburgh's fans to be extremely hostile and arrogant, including acting in a foul mouthed, aggressive and intimidating manner even towards innocent bystanders. And less than gracious and overly boastful and arrogant in their win which they diminish by such arrogant behaviour and which I find very undignified on the part of a number of arrogant Edinburgh fans, yourself excluded. Some it seems have never heard of the term "magnanimous in victory", again I exclude yourself from this. Back to the aspect of Edinburgh's management, It seems to me to be so childish to do anything other than be neighbourly, instead it seems Edinburgh's management and a number of its fans delight in being arrogant and hostile towards others. I find it all very sad.

That's just nonsense. There is no logical basis for it. And what's all this arrogance "find another day" attitude. Are you one of these guys in your car that thinks you own the flaming road, you think you "own" Friday as well do you. So how come in other counties they run all the speedway league meetings on the same day then. Are you trying to say that speedway in such as Poland and Sweden is on its knees? Obviously it isn't. Are you seriously suggesting that you will somehow be lured by the prospect of attending Ashfield instead of your beloved Armadale? As Mr McEnroe once said, you cannot be serious. "I seriously doubt attendance is the issue". - so it is recognised that Glasgow won't steal Edinburgh's support. "Plus there is Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday & Thursday to use" - so why don't Edinburgh use it then!

No, my post certainly was not "a total anti all things Edinburgh post". I answered points one by one of another poster and which I did in good faith. I'm surprised at you Scotsman, your posts are usually of the more intelligent variety on this forum. If you read my post you will see that it sets out reasoned points and that is all it does. If you have anything constructive to actually respond to my points then you are of course welcome.

You say: "Usual guff" in reference to my post. My post made reasoned points and you should not be so ill mannered, discourteous and insulting as to refer to my reasoned points in such manner. Instead your post as quoted above is full of vitriol and which I find vulgar. It appears you have never heard of the saying "magnanimous in victory". Instead your post is full of derisory insulting language e,g, "Slashfield" and which is rather churlish, uncouth and unbecoming, then going on to be full of self-proclaimed boasting and yob-like behaviour including other juvenile yob-like acronyms as "GIRUYT". What age are you twelve? All rather unseemly and every such post that is made and yob-like proclamation such as your post quoted above devalues the achievement of winning a league title and you lose the respect of others. And it was not at all "spot on" as you errantly put it, you are well wide of the mark and you clearly know nothing about me. It also appears that you overlook that I originally mentioned a foul-mouthed Edinburgh fan at Armadale on Saturday whose behaviour was aggressive, using foul mouthed language, inciteful and deliberately intimidating to innocent bystanders. I then only answered the points of another poster and which I did in good faith. If you wish to behave in a juvenile-like and yob-like manner then kindly do not involve me. Thank you.

The circular you mention or what you refer to as a "letter", which you say "crossed it line" - having read it I cannot find anything unreasonable in it. It also does not state that Glasgow fans should "boycott" Armadale, it simply says that the Glasgow management themselves will not be attending - a different thing entirely. And at no point is the word "boycott" mentioned - that appears to be an invention by Edinburgh fans. So, no, it did not cross a line, that is just nonsense. It appears that it is the Edinburgh management that are juvenile in all this, and which the Glasgow management have understandably become tired of. You say Glasgow made 2 fundamental errors, in answer to your points: 1. It seems that they were surprised by how juvenile the Edinburgh management were. 2. It appears that Edinburgh management are jealous of Glasgow's financial position Can we be very clear: it is complete nonsense for Edinburgh to object to Glasgow riding on a Friday, Edinburgh's apparent claim that Glasgow would somehow steal significant numbers from Edinburgh's gate/crowd is not valid and has no real basis in fact: the Edinburgh management unilaterally withdrew the mutual discount arrangement between the two clubs on the basis of there having been only 2 supporters that had used it. Edinburgh's argument just doesn't add up. Clearly, fans of each camp follow their own team and will attend accordingly. Are you seriously suggesting that you and a whole shedload of other Edinburgh fans will somehow desert Armadale en mass and instead flock to Ashfield? That argument just doesn't hold water at all. The stance on this by Edinburgh's management does seem rather pathetic. It also seems pathetic and rather childish that the Edinburgh management withdrew from what was clearly a mutual cooperation gesture originated by the Glasgow management, re the joint discount arrangement. It seems that at every turn Edinburgh have sought to be deliberately uncooperative and have shunned every attempt by the Glasgow management regarding mutual cooperation and Glasgow's attempts to encourage a more friendly atmosphere between the two sets of fans for the benefit of all. Edinburgh's management have shown themselves to be aloof at best and deliberately obstinate. This appears to have had the knock on effect of encouraging Edinburgh's supporters to follow suit and take umbrage at anything emanating from Glasgow and thereby stoking up a hostile atmosphere among its own fans towards Glasgow. There is therefore no actual basis for Edinburgh to object to Glasgow running on a Friday, no actual basis at all. Edinburgh fans will not desert Armadale and flock to Ashfield instead, that is just nonsense. It seems Edinburgh have just objected because they can, for the sake of objecting and putting a spanner in the works over at Glasgow. So that again really is childish on the part of the Edinburgh management whom it would appear are just being deliberately obstructive. Then there is the position of Alex Harkess. He should surely not play a part in deciding on this issue or various issues upon which Edinburgh are involved. There is far too much self interest in the sport and conflict of interest by those running it. It appears that Edinburgh's position is one of sheer jealousy that Glasgow are doing alright financially and with their stadium etc and they don't want Glasgow to be successful. That's what its about. Sheer jealousy and childishness by the Edinburgh management. And from there total non-cooperation in anything by Edinburgh. Little wonder that the Glasgow management became tired of it all and hence the circular you refer to which in fact contains nothing which crosses any line at all. The summary of the riders, yes I agree with much of your summary. You missed one aspect though. Wolbert substantially lowered his average at Glasgow last season and by some coincidence substantially raised it again. This raises a serious question i.e. was it deliberate on his part? If it was then that brings the sport into disrepute and begs a number of other questions including fraud and corruption of those involved. He isn't the first rider to do so and I'm sure won't be the last. The dreadful performance of Glasgow's team at Armadale, the track does tend to suit the home team more than most and if you aren't dialled in then no matter how hard a team tries they will get nothing, not as neutral and fair as Powderhall was so that kind of one sided result was always on the cards at Armadale, a bit like Berrington Lough used to be.