Najjer

How many riders are now actually effected by Poland’s restriction though? All these press releases that keep referencing the problems around rider availability because of Polish restrictions We’ve already had Jack Holder and Jason Doyle confirm they are going to carry on over here, whilst Robert Lambert, Rohan Tungate and Nicki Pedersen are confirmed as being out. Haven’t seen anything on Dan Bewley or Jaimon Lidsey. The ‘massive rider availability’ problem is because 5, possibly a few others aren’t riding here? Has to be more to it than that.

I’ve said this a while back, but what a refreshing change in the world of British speedway Rob Grant is. It’s never going to be a world beating league winning team, but ran to a budget to remain financially viable and complete open and honest communications to the fans.... the paying customers keeping them informed. Some of the silence from other teams is deafening and shows a complete disregard to their paying customers. Fair play to Newcastle.

A little late in catching up on this one, but an interesting article here for anyone who hasn’t seen this yet.... https://www.speedwaygp.com/news/article/8732/kubera-move-to-lublin-on

There are many people within this country that literally despise and can’t stand football. Doesn’t stop it being a national sport though.

Of course I’m a supporter - I wouldn’t be on a Speedway forum if I wasn’t a speedway supporter. It’s the level of that support is what has changed over the years along with a whole host of other people.... who are never right

I’ve suggested a solution to that but been told it’s not feesible because people putting the fence up might get abit more muddy than normal

Using these scenarios then, why would a trench not work in scenarios 1, 2 and 4? I appreciate it can’t be used at tracks where they have stox but that doesn’t stop it being a better solution for other tracks where it is possible. For anybody with a basic understanding of fabrication, groundwork’s and construction, it would be very easy to solve the ‘issue’ you mention of the edge collapsing. For what purpose you asked?? For increased safety. You can’t put a price on that.

I’ve had this argument about air fences many times in the past. Whilst you don’t see the ‘fences lifting’ or riders sliding under them anywhere near as much as you used to around 20 years ago, I’ve never understood why the fences aren’t sunk into the ground 12” or even more and then anchored down to prevent that being an issue?

I think that ship sailed for the “South” when we lost Newport, Exeter, Reading, Trelawny, Plymouth, Swindon and even Rye House to an extent from the division The old premier trophy meetings were always great season openers.

Only for one week or so. New or returning people then will object to the “increase” the following week as that’s likely one of the reasons they stopped or haven’t ever been before. It needs to be over a sustained period of time and actually just reduced full stop. Some tracks charging £18 is madness.

Who has reduced admission fees? Nearly every team in the land is I believe overpriced, especially championship teams in a comparison vs the price of Premiership and the higher standards.

Jack has already said he will be choosing Britain over Sweden. If given the chance, I’d expect Chris to end up doing the same I expect

Only if you want to spend 10 days at home isolating

6 man teams seems the obvious solution to rider shortage. That potentially saves on around 20 riders across the top two divisions.

What did Glasgow and Somerset say in the speedway star?

The problem that people in the past haven’t been happy about was when as an example, Paul Starke missed meetings for Poole in the top tier in the past because he was riding for Somerset on the same night in the 2nd tier. That’s just an example. This problem was then solved by the introduction of fixed race nights. Aslong as the riders signed up to my team attend every meeting then what’s the issue then? You’ve misunderstood my point on the guest rule that I have. I have pointed out that I think it’s a big problem that as soon as a rider is missing, guests are immediately deployed. I have suggested this shouldn’t be the case and should have to be the very last resort.... whilst also suggesting some form of restriction to prevent certain riders being able to ride for so many different teams. There was a ridiculous situation a few years ago when Scott Nichols rode for about 3 teams in a week before then riding against those teams for his actual team later that week. Just for reference, I’ve been a regular member of this forum for over 15 years

It’s been going on for years. I remember in that year I mentioned in 2008 it was actually seen as bad news when Simon Walker came back from injury. It’s too easy to use guests nowadays and nobody wants to watch a team full of guests. That is one of the biggest problems... especially when the chairman has said the reason certain teams can’t ride in the league because it limits his own choice of guests for his side!! D’oh!

What is the problem with doubling up and doubling down? The teams in the Premiership and Chanpionship never race eachother and they no longer ride on the same nights to create a clash of fixtures, so what’s the problem? The only thing it does is create a solution to potential rider shortage and fill up the quota of riders needed across both leagues. The problem is the guest rule - where you have one rider ride for several teams within a week before then riding against them for his actual team at the weekend. That is madness and should be limited and/or stopped. I’m a strong believer in that guests shouldn’t be allowed full stop if only one rider is missing. In which case rider replacement should be used. If two or more riders are missing then a guest should be allowed, but only on the value of their home or away average depending on whether they are at home or away. I remember back in 2008 at Somerset when we had guests like Craig Watson replacing Simon Walker away from home because of his inflated home average, when he was pretty useless away. A guest replacement should never make a team stronger. There has to be some sort of limit imposed either on the rider, the team or over a time period restricting how many times they can be used in my opinion.

Again, especially after the recent Glasgow press releases, how refreshing is it to see a promoter being so open and honest to his fans and paying customers? It goes a long long way I feel, and beats the whole “sit quietly and say nothing” approach that so many teams seem to adopt. Fair play to him.

The moment a rider signs a contract, they know the rules (or at least they should) and have therefore agreed to them. They can’t then claim restriction of trade when they have knowingly agreed to it.

It also does effect Championship sides potentially - rides in the 1st and 2nd division in the Polish league can only ride in 3 leagues. It’s still unsure how that could effect the likes of Riss, Becker and Masters to name just three. Does the Premiership and Chanpionship count as two leagues potentially ruling them out of the Swedish league (and any others)? As others have already eluded to, it is a knock on effect in that Pedersen, Lambert, Iversen, Tungate etc all need replacing and it will likely be they come from the Championship.

I didn’t say anything about how much experience they have - I said the quality. Every year the points limit gets lowered it weakens the teams from the previous year. That is a fact proven by maths. Correct - which the top riders will provide better racing than lower standard. They are more skilful and much more likely to carry off certain rides. Bartosz Zmarzlik for example is not only the best in the world but he’s the most entertaining too.

I can see the logic behind 6 man teams if rider availability is an issue, but not a cost saving measure. I have this arguement year on year that weakening the product will continue to reduce costs but continue to reduce the income too as more and more people give up on the sport as a result.

Ahhhh this arguement about the 45 point average always gets me! If ‘rider averages’ were calculated purely on average points scored, then there would be some legs in that arguement. Because rider CMA are calculated using points X rides / 4 - when you take into account heat 15 and riders taking 5 rides, it’ll work out that the total team points based on that calculation should be about 42.00-42.50. Years ago back in 2002 it was 45.00 including bonus points which is about right. Lowering the team total CMA year on year just weakens and weakens the product year after year. The strength of the second division is nothing compared to what it was, probably even 10 years ago let alone even further beyond that.

So is it fact, speculation, rumour or happening?