SPEEDY69

Does it run ok? If so, should be fine.

Absolutely agree with this, it's become a circus, without the entertainment value. I used to like getting to know a rider (not personally but their performances/ability) and then want to see how they progress. I now no longer have a team affinity due to the rapid fire changes every year juts before the play-offs and instead follow certain riders no matter which team they ride for. Hence I only see around 6 meetings a year now rather than the 30 odd in years gone by.

Doesn't make much sense to me that Swindon prefer Thursdays and Poole prefer Wednesdays that Leicester are at those tracks on the other day?

This is my view: http://www.speedway-forum.co.uk/forums/index.php?/topic/86663-no-word-from-the-bspa/&do=findComment&comment=3169007

I may have said this before but I don't think the racing is actually the most important thing - a few more passes in a meeting won't make people flood through the turnstiles. It needs a more conducive environment for fans within the stadium. If the place itself is somewhere people fancy going to socialise with friends and see a bit of racing as well then people other than us purists may want to attend. Kids go free is a good incentive but what do they do when they get there? Maybe trampolines or bungees, maybe video games, food/drink for kids with seating, soft play area or sandpit/pillow. These things will attract them. Now, for older folks then somewhere warm, covered and seating are important. Motorcycle themed activities maybe - a speedway simulator or bikes to sit on/view, you could have motorcycle rider allowed to park together and encourage club meet ups, provide a room/venue for parties/events within the stadium with catering facilities. I'm just throwing these things out there but reducing the large payouts to some riders would give the money to be able to offer some of these things as attractions - when at a dull meeting what else is there to keep you entertained? So will you come back?

It certainly used to be the case that no oil was allowed to be dropped on the ground anywhere, not just the pits. I see no reason for this to have changed.

I think you make a really good point there. Those who currently attend speedway are maybe too focused on the racing whereas new people will view it more on the whole package? This is certainly true of other sports - the 'racing' in F1 for example is usually dull, cricket, rugby and football also have really dull matches but people enjoy other aspects such as entertainment in the stadium, seats and covered terracing, decent inside areas for food and drink and to be able to socialise and dip into the action as necessary. Most speedway tracks are run down looking with outdated facilities and a poor environment for this socialising. Everyone says Belle Vue is great but to have to walk around some car parks, with no signs just to be able to get to the stand and then be faced with one overpriced burger van gives a poor spectator environment for casual type fans. The racing can sometimes be boring but if people can enjoy just being there then they will likely come back - equally the racing could be great but with little to do other than stand around in the open air people still get bored and may not bother coming again.

Financial advisor?

Spot on.

Harris could always become a taxi driver and chauffeur people around in his 80 grand Range Rover. Give two people 100 quid and one will have spent it the same day whilst the the other may still have 50 quid left - I don't think it's a lack of income for those two but what they do with it. I always remember two professional riders who were England stars in the 80s/90s. One used to spend an awful lot of money/use sponsors to get brand new gear every year - the other kept almost everything the same except for leathers and guards/covers. Their performances were comparable every year but I'm sure one had more in the bank!

The additional experience of different teams and tracks will do no harm to him and glad you have realistic expectations. Some of these young Brits need time to develop, some more than others and I just wish teams were more stable to allow that to happen and for the fans to get to know their team. It really is now getting to be just a bunch of individuals and not really a team and that turns me off.

I don't think the tracks are the problem. People need to be attracted to the sport in the first place - and I don't mean the odd friend or two of an existing fan.

Mountain has struggled at CL so I don't expect will score all that well at PL. Must admit I don't like teams making all these changes, makes a mockery of the winter team building and engenders no loyalty from riders. Oh for the days when teams stayed almost the same throughout the season.

Pity, I was going to this meeting with my daughter. Never mind me or the other fans though.

How far are you going back for 'normally' - they lost home and away in 2017 as well. Perhaps it wasn't Godfrey's choice, perhaps it wasn't the reduced travelling costs either, perhaps it was a plain old draw - but given the record of the BSPA and previous 'draws' e.g. British semi finals it's easy to see why conspiracies are thought of. I still can't get over the Rye debacle and promoters circling like vultures around their riders.

Really? You'd rather take on a team that have beaten you home and away this season than a team who you mullered at home 54-36????

Thanks for the explanation. I really don't see the point myself, or why it's not shown alongside the actual old-school table but why not take it further - by taking into account what teams have been raced against and how good they are, factor in the line-ups and track conditions as well so that a real analysis of form can be made............

I can't be the only one who doesn't really understand that. When I look at the Championship table, it shows: 1 Peterborough 13 7 0 1 1 1 1 2 0 607 563 32 2 Lakeside 11 6 0 0 1 1 0 0 3 549 437 25 3 Glasgow 10 6 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 467.5 431.5 19 4 Berwick 12 6 0 1 0 0 0 1 4 537 541 19 5 Workington 9 2 0 0 1 2 0 1 3 408.5 399.5 17 So how Workington are actually top is beyond me.

I'm also almost certain of the fact that Scunthorpe have avoided the league's top two teams in the Shield semis is nothing to do with Godfrey.

That's the mystery of perception. Maybe if I was a Belle Vue fan I'd have a different opinion but as a neutral I want to see competitive action where you never know what might happen. It was all to predictable for me e.g. Smith made the start in one race but it was obvious he'd be passed. The couple where Batchelor was in front were ok and Bewley is good to watch at NSS. It was a shame Swindon, and Morris in particular, were poor.

You know the answer to that. The sheep mentality is alive and well. Now I see that everyone does a practice start and then has to have their chain tension checked before actually going to the start - why, because they saw someone else do it. The chains do stretch but they're not that bad, especially if the same one you used all season. Does fiddling around with clutch cable adjustment at the start line make any difference - no, but riders do it because someone else did. One which has surprised me though is that Greg H appears to have lower seat height (like in the Eighties) and makes great starts - I'm surprised no other rider has decided to copy that. There's even amateurs and people yet to learn to ride who get sign written vans and top kit then can't even slide. The only way to halt this is to stop paying them/providing them with so much - four helmets, as you highlight is to me complete extravagance and shows they are paid too much.

At less than 300 metres, Gustrow provided some great action at the weekend.

It's all a bit of a lottery - I was there for the Swindon meeting and that wasn't that great. Was also at Peterborough recently (another track cited as good) to see almost 15 heats of follow the leader. I didn't think the Leicester meeting was too bad - hoping tonight is better though.

Do you mean Scunthorpe and Godfrey?

Some good ideas here but who would agree to fixtures on nights where half of the team are missing - and who would want to run a fixture where the opposition are decimated? I agree that promoters need to be able to maximise their income and minimise their outgoings and the rules framework should allow that.