Fortythirtyeight

Read the rule book. A rider doesn't turn up with a team having been declared is classed as no facility situation. R/ R has to be applied for and approved as the missing riders absence has to be covered under the existing exemptions, leaving for a family crisis is not covered. You can't change your declaration at the last minute to suit. but obviously they did!

Referees have a history of not knowing all the rules. A ref was informed of a rule infringement at one of last nights fixtures, his reply was ' oh let's just get on with it, time is dragging on and he won't win the race anyway !" I asked two promoters today there understanding of the situation and both said the rule book states no facility for R/R.

Don't really believe it but the question still stands. I can't see why they were allowed R/R ?

Question on the rules regarding Howarth not actually taking the guest booking. How can Edinburgh be allowed to use the R/R facility when a rider fails to take his place at the last minute for a non speedway incident? ( Family emergency) Cant find a reason they should have been allowed R/ R , should it not have been a no facility situation and therefore only the reserves allowed to cover his absence? answers on a postcard please.

Now Done electronically Dave, and the BSPA do not read them, only the press office ( Mr.Perason's boys ) so they can pinch stories for the S/S or Speedway GB website.

The reason Wright didn't make the 2 mins was because he was wanting to change his tyre as, due to the track conditions, his was wrecked . Smith was still repairing his bike after being taken off and the ref would not give any extra time to either rider for repairs despite Wright having two on the trot. Apparently it got heated in the pits with the ref as he eventually allowed riders ( from both teams ) to use ' spare worn ' tyres as track conditions had worn out most edges. He only did this after heat 12 and excluding Wright hence him not going off 15 m as he wasn't allowed to replace his tyre. Track doctoring at its best? Somerset will claim their tactics on track prep worked as they won but not a great spectacle. By the way, the ref has no say on intervals, that's down to the home management.

Only the Top table meet every month and even then it can be just three of them , the other promoters just get minutes of the meeting a month later. The promoters only get together when summonsed . The top table have been caught out making behind closed decisions on several previous occasions, ask the ' Ged Father '.

Rumours on Sunday that the BSPA mafia have already reassessed certain riders who currently don't have a championship team Those same ' members ' have already approached these riders for their own teams before going public with the changes. Coincidence that Leicester are now making a change? Usual stuff from the mafia

Be careful.....Workington asked to move to Fridays at the same time as Scunthorpe and Glasgow both of whose promoters at the time were on the management team. Guess who got what they wanted?

And can now take Championship guest bookings! So my point still stands....ridiculous rule.

So not only do you start a new thread that isn't needed you tell a rider he should RETIRE? Have a word with yourself. The lad may not be good enough for Championship standard racing but that does not mean he has to quit the sport, he's doing perfect ally well for Belle Vue so why should he retire? Silly statement.

Visited the most expensive track in the country for this match. Not a great spectacle on this technical track but the score kept it interesting. Thought the Bears were unlucky not to get a point as the crowds reaction by the start line ( or lack of it ) suggested Wright had got third place in heat 15 and judging by Wells reaction , pulling out Wrights cut out cord after the race, Wells thought Wright got it too. VAR might have been used twice as Bacon looked to have got second in his race too. some impressive rides by lesser lights but the inconsistency showed you have to gate to stand a chance but Wells and Andersson showed ' undertaking ' was possible if you knew where to put yourself as selective track grading took place ( every track does it ) Healthy crowd on a nice evening and all finished by 9:10. An hour and forty minutes for £18:50 and £3 for a programme.....good value?

That's what was discussed at the last AGM but certain promoters openly admitted they would not stick to any pay scales so the idea was binned and that's why we have our current ( no change ) three divisions. Not enough British riders to form two leagues and would struggle to have one at a current Championship standard.

That's as large as any Championship club I've visited bar Glasgow and there's wasn't a lot larger. Redcar looked healthy but same scenario as Cradley, crowd all on one side. Newcastle , Berwick, Sheffield, Somerset very sparse.

From the 12 tracks I regularly attend this season, The only club that is ( each fixture ) getting large crowds is Cradley at £10 adult entry, the grandstand is packed which is to be envied by just about every club in any of the three divisions including their hosts Wolverhampton. Other clubs occasionally getting large crowds on bank holidays or local derbies but I would say every clubs crowds are down this season with change of race nights and general apathy. Newcastles crowd appears to be very sparse this year.

Peterborough asset first , purchased by the ' Ged Father ' .

"As far as I know "....so you don't know the truth and are just gossiping. My point is the rule is stupid. Replace Wallinger's name with Macauley Leek, dropped because his average is too high and now in the same position as Wallinger, not allowed to guest in any team as he's not in a team......ridiculous!

It's definetly not and No.

The speedway version of that rule was done away with half way through last season as the Vice Chairmans track was bottom of the track preparation reports so he simply tore up the report system. Thats the BSPA for you.

Yes, the rule is a joke. If he's turned down Plymouth (?) then I would totally understand as he lives in the north and works for a living but that is not the argument, it's the ruling itself that is wrong. If he was allowed to take up his booking he just may get offered a team place but he can't because he hasn't got a place already. Ridiculous.

Can't think of any track around any pitch that could be classed as a good ' race ' track , passed or present. Glasgow is awful despite the efforts to improve it. Berwick and Workington , much better tracks but suffer from narrow exits to the bends spoiling the overall shape and therefore racing lines, most crashes at these tracks occurred at the exits of the corners unlike smaller tracks. Paisley was very poor, Halifax was spectacular but home riders dream. Hull was very narrow and rough at times. Exeter was the same and , like Halifax, the steel fence put visiting riders off.

So the lad gets dropped ( the reasons don't matter for this point ) and now has his ' guest ' bookings for a Championship club cancelled as he's not in a declared National League team any longer. So now he has no team and no bookings. Any wonder this sport can't be taken seriously?

Dependant on what type of shale the track wants depends where you can get it from. Red shale is easily available for northern tracks from an Edinburgh quarry ( weather permitting ). There is a large quarry near Leicester that supply's black shale, the problem for clubs and probably more so for Plymouth is the transport costs which can be more than the price of the shale. Clubs will not stockpile due to tight finances. There's probably less than six experienced, good track men in the country now as its a dying art. Terry ' the track ' who does Redcar and Birmingham has been used by the SCB to help tracks put their issues right but he is based in the midlands and can only be in one place at a time. If you don't invest in your track your wasting your time.

MR.Pipe? The only thing that's changed since he took over is that he has a new coat with his name and title on to go with his previous ones.

Wallinger and Leek both have increased their averages from last season so to sack them appears harsh. Wallinger was just starting to show improvement as his confidence returns after continual ' knocks' and Leek formed a good partnership with novice Kelly who needs to be protected at this early stage of his career. Now he has had his first ' injury ' he doesn't need extra pressure on him as he learns his trade. whilst I understand Leek may be out for a few weeks it appears the decision to sack them both is another example of ' success ' being put before ' development league'.