Chris116

Was it the weather forecast that has caused the delay?

Probably sometime around 1929.

Going by train is possible but there is a rail strike on Saturday, limited services on Sunday, a rail strike on Monday, doubtless limited services on Tuesday and a rail strike on Wednesday so it could take most of the week to get home for some. Also the stadium is a rather long walk from both the railway station and most hotels in King's Lynn.

A number of people have said about the lack of organisation and control from the management. The problem is that the management are some of the promoters who will only act for the benefit of their team and not the benefit of the sport. Until there is a genuine control board who are totally independent the sport will continue to shoot itself in the foot.

Why should it be the home team? We often hear that visiting teams don't want to race on a date that is offered. I agree that something urgently needs sorting out but saying it is always the home team at fault is just not fair.

The promotion had been told by the stadium owners that speedway would not be able to continue in 2023 so the promotion arranged a farewell meeting. So far totally reasonable. Then the stadium owners realise that their plans are not going to happen and the speedway promotion also find their plans for a new track are sunk without trace. So reasonably the two sides have talks how how both can help each other out. Date for the farewell is getting very close but no agreement so it is not unreasonable to go ahead with the farewell meeting. Now we have the good news that both sides think an agreement is going to be possible but it has not been signed yet, so running the farewell meeting still makes sense as it is still possible that no racing for Edinburgh will be possible in 2023. Many tracks and promotions have been in a similar situation in the past and sadly many will face the same problems in the future. How many farewell meetings for both speedway and stock cars were held at Boston. There it almost became an annual event and if the stadium still existed I am sure many fans would be happy to still be having a farewell meeting every year!

Read what the BSPL statement says. The SCB would like to apologise to the Wolverhampton Team at the Premiership Pairs Round 5 at Belle Vue on Thursday 27th October where an error was made in the calcification of the results for the semi finals, where on the countback system Wolverhampton should have qualified for the race off. Three teams tied on 20 points however the SCB Regulations quite clearly states as per SCB Regulation 016.1.3 - "If more than a two way tie the team with the highest scoring heat results will qualify" Under this regulation between the three tied teams Wolverhampton, Peterborough and Sheffield, this meant Sheffield finshed in 5th position having not scored any 6 - 3 results in their favour, where as both Wolverhampton and Peterborough had one race each with a 6-3 advantage. Wolverhampton and Peterborough also had one race each of a 5-4 advantage. Thereafter Wolverhampton had one race with a score of 4-5 where as Peterborough other three races were all scores of 3-6, meaning that Wolverhampton should have qualified with a higher scoring heat results. So the 5th round positions will be adjusted to the following - 1st Belle Vue 2nd Ipswich 3rd Wolverhampton 4th Peterborough 5th Sheffield They say the rules were not followed and from my reading of the rules, I have to agree with the BSPL on this occasion.

So you are saying that the rules were changed after the event! Having looked at the rules on the SCB site as well as those quoted on this thread I can't find any changes so how can you claim the referee followed the rules correctly?

If the referee complied with the rules to the letter why did the BSPL issue the statement the following day altering the result? Did the referee get it wrong or has the BSPL moved the goal posts in the 24 hours after the meeting?

Did the referee not have a copy of the rule book or did the referee fail to read the rule book? The team managers also appear not to know the rule book as well as they should and even if you can't remember all the rules knowing where things are in the rule book and having the ability to actually read the relevant sections should be a minimum qualification for the job. Heads should roll or at the very least some urgent re-training is required.

Some formulas do pay to enter but the BriSCA Formula One drivers are paid start money and prize money although at best the most successful driver in a meeting will be lucky to break even. The video shown above is of the BriSCA Formula One's.

The video was taken from the area where most of the crowd would be behind the person taking the video. The crowd that can be seen is probably around 20% of those present but I agree small crowds are a worry.

I don't think they can run it next Sunday as there is a two day Halloween Rave.

The BSPL website really does its best to hide information. They put up a preview of a meeting but if it is rained off they simply delete the preview with no information as to why. This means you have to go to the fixture list to find out if the meeting is postponed or if it is simply the internet playing games. Back when Nigel Pearson was doing most of the site the preview was always replaced by a short message say the meeting was postponed for whatever the reason was and any new date if one had been agreed. Can someone explain in words of one syllable to BSPL that they are supposed to make it easy to follow what is happening or are words of one syllable to complex for them!

When has the BSPL/BSPL ever learnt a lesson about anything?

I fully agree that teams who do not complete their fixtures should be penalised but I don't think you can always blame the home team. There have been a number of times this season when it appeared that the visiting team refused dates, often due to rider availability. There needs to be a central, independent office that compiles the fixture list. Teams should have to confirm dates they can run home meetings and any dates they do not want to travel. This would have to be done before the end of February so the fixture list could be issued before the end of March.

It has to be remembered that Covid did not stop older riders from retiring but did significantly slow down the careers of junior riders. This has seen those in the NDL find moving up into the CL harder and also seen a massive reduction in those in 125cc, 250cc and 500cc under 16 series. It will take about five years for the situation to correct itself and we all know how good the BSPL are with five year plans and keeping to them!

My mother was a Peter Craven fan and a Belle Vue fan. Sadly she died in 1995 but I bet she will be celebrating this evening. Well done to all at Belle Vue.

A better idea would be to clear out moaners like old bob. Far more efficient and saves people having read all the moans.

That is the first rule that MUST be removed from the rule book in my opinion.

This thread proves that, depending on how you read the rules, one or both of the teams may or may not have broken the rules. What is also clear is that the BSPL and SCB need to get the rules for 2023 looked at very carefully by a legal experts so that they are written with no loopholes and watertight so they do not allow dodgy goings on as we have seen in the past. If BSPL and SCB cannot manage that then they are not fit for purpose and a new independent governing body should take over.

And the BSPL will look like a right set of charlies yet again!

Is this a case of Poland giving us a choice of us agreeing to Thursday not being protected in exchange for riders being allowed to race in more leagues OR Poland running on a Thursday when it is supposed to be protected? Also, should the BSPL agree to the move what is to say that Polish teams won't quietly tell all their riders that racing for more teams will result in the rider being dropped by their Polish team?

Was that a politician who made the promise?

It is all very well blaming the home team for not staging a fixture but are we certain that an away team is actually responsible by not agreeing to dates offered? There needs to be a rules that all teams supply the dates they are able to hold home meetings and any dates they are not available for away meetings to a totally independent fixture body who then give teams their fixture list. Any postponed meetings are referred to the fixture planning authority and both sides have to agree to the new date which will be based on the availability dates teams supplied at the start of the season. With that system in place run a Spring Cup with the finals run by the end of May with no arguments. Then the main league would take place with all fixtures completed by the end of August. The Play offs then take place with four teams in each league involved. While the Play offs take place the first round of the KO Cup takes place between teams not in the Play offs. The Play off semi final losers are added into the KO Cup second round. Which are held around the Play offs finals. The play off finalists are added to the KO Cup third round which should see the KO Cup finished by the first week of October. Refuse to race on the allocated date means three points deducted from the teams total in the league or a walkover in the Spring or KO Cups. I wonder what reasons this system could not be used will be found other than promotions not liking no wiggle room!