enotian

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-53669432 don't be so sure.... in a world where you are struggling to make a return from your sport stadium as a going concern and planning permission suddenly becomes less problematic (under the fog of a pandemic and a housing crisis (didn't Boris campaign to get rid of immigrants to solve this?)) and a property developer comes along offering you an out..... you might just bail out and take the pay off. Lots of decisions being made to "aid the economic recovery" which will make a lot of very rich people even richer. Then again I'm a sucker for a conspiracy

yes I wouldn't pay to stream an Eastbourne meeting unless it was against the Diamonds. There is no way each track could have run meetings and relied on streaming revenue. Those receipts would be far lower than gate receipts and other income that a normal meeting would generate. But with a little creative thinking arranging one meeting per week featuring a number of teams (albeit scratch line ups due to the lack of riders) either pairs, individual or 4TT might have attracted viewing figures of the scale previous TV matches had. Then you start to look like having a viable product. Not ideal but might have got the sport some much needed exposure at a time when sports channels must have been desperate for live content.

given that people have paid subscriptions for more content than speedway you couldn't expect those figures for a pay per view but even if you got 50% at £5 per event (c20 heat individual, 4TT, pairs etc) you're into £200k income. I'm no expert on the costs of running a meeting but I can't imagine £200k wouldn't cover it. alas I think the window of opportunity has passed and now our screens will be filled with millionaires who didn't want to entertain us when we needed them to. whilst our under paid speedway riders who I'm sure would have jumped at the chance to entertain are still sat twiddling their thumbs earning nothing for another six weeks at least. we've all been let down during this pandemic but you do have to feel for the riders.

Total missed opportunity for speedway in this country. They've correctly identified that the sport can't run, as intended, behind closed doors..... and then done nothing about it. So now they wait until a potential further relaxation to allow x number of spectators, which at this point has to be as likely as a return of tighter restrictions. They seem to be planning for an August to November season by which time most other sports will be under way in some form or another. Speedway could have returned from Monday if the promoters had given some consideration as to what format would have allowed the sport to have returned behind closed doors. Clearly due to no supporters and a lack of riders there's no way of holding fixtures, as intended, across the country. But if you could arrange one event per week featuring each of the clubs (say pairs or fours) and make it available pay per view then you might have had a viable product. If you got 10,000 subscriptions around the UK (or globally) at £10 that should provide enough revenue to cover costs. Supporters who are normally paying £15+ per week are literally a captive audience so if the product was good enough the events could be weekly. You could even offer season tickets for a series of events. You never know a broadcaster might have even paid for the content and made it free to their subscribers, given how desperate the sports channels are for content. Driest May on record and not any shale shifted in anger..... lets hope that November is just as dry.

Whilst the demand on the NHS has been avoided (largely thanks to people who don't actually need it not turning up and, sadly, likewise people who do need it not turning up) the virus is still an unknown quantity. However, I don't think running speedway would place any significant pressure on the NHS. Indeed I suspect many of the Medics might welcome the escape? But given the hysteria surrounding and lack of verified information on the virus it's hard to see how sporting events can go ahead with spectators present. I agree that most speedway crowds could social distance but you have to ask would you want to? Any night out is supposed to be enjoyable, not a test of your health and safety risk assessment skills or standard of your PPE. Socially distanced events just don't sound like any fun at all to me. The point about the age profile of speedway fans is important as many may still be required to stay indoors for a longer period. Could any promotion afford to run with even lower crowds? Then factor in the lack of riders? There's probably only about 20 Championship standard heat leaders available plus another 40 youngsters so running credible leagues looks impossible. This and the fact that standard of streaming service individual promotions could offer would probably be sub standard and the revenues less than gate receipts, kind of leads you to a less is more scenario. Pool the resources together get a weekly pay per view event with a decent standard of coverage for streaming. Spread the riders across teams and maybe run pairs, 4TT, individual championships (even a mini league) over the shorter season. Hopefully you get subscriptions from across the country. If say the average normal attendance at the 22 tracks is 800 and you attract 50% of them (factoring in families would only need one subscription) to the weekly pay per view for a standard £15 per event that's a decent income stream and should make it sustainable for the promoters and riders and affordable for the public. It should be relatively easy to set up although I'm not sure what the Eurosport position would be. Maybe they'd even fund it for some much needed live content for their channel?

If the only riders available are UK resident (and not riding in Poland) I reckon there are only approximately 60 who have either had a team place in a top two divisions or were about to for the first time (Palin etc) due to be active in 2020. Assuming that any Aussies won't return for a short season. Spread across 19 teams it's going to be hard to run anything with any integrity. I suppose you could have mass doubling up if the Premiership teams stick to Monday/Thursday.

Looking forward to the Gems matches. Some really talented youngsters to see before they (hopefully) become massive stars. I think it's probably the future sustainable level for the Diamonds tbh. Interesting move by the new promotion. However, hopefully the double headers won't be marathons. The danger being that those not inclined to hang about for a half hour of track grading between matches or for 4 hours plus to see 30 mins of action will have had to pay £3 more for nothing extra. Regardless of any centre green displays or ability to buy fresh meat produce, it could end up being a massive turn off for some. Intend to get both matches done in a maximum 2 and a half hours please.

Have to chuckle when people defend the seven and then in the same breath say that we've got two points to play with to make changes! There's no point in trying to deny that a team that's two points under the limit, doesn't have a #1 and will struggle in heat 13 and 15 is going to struggle. But at least it's an interesting team with same potential to improve. Who knows if James Wright can recapture his former form? Or if Connor Mountain will have a break through season? Or if Nik Skorja is a top talent (World U-21's in 2019 (scoring 7,2,2) which only Lambert from the Brits qualified for). Or if THJ has self esteem issues? Who knows? What it does show is that the new owner is prepared to take a gamble. Let's hope it pays off.

Looking at riders active over the last two season (which given the Wright signing might not be long enough) the following fit Rene Bach 7.19 Doolan 6.71 Ludvig Lindgren 6.47 Palovaara 6.25 Bjerre 5.87 Matej Kus 5.63 Nike Lunna 5.63 Andersson 5.62 Theo Pijper 5.49 Kurtz 5.43 Jan Graversen 4.93 Andersen 4.86 Would Palovaara and Bjerre fit exactly to the points limit??

the point being that averages are misleading. Having not ridden in the majority of heat 13 and 15's last season whilst third heatleader for Glasgow, Vissing will now be in both heats week in week out. Who knows he might have still averaged above 8 had he rode in those heats last season so he might retain his average but he'll have to defeat better riders to do so now he's our #1.

Noticed Germany's Kevin Wolbert's name on that list..... ...he was a Brough specialist at one point. It would be awesome to see some genuine Danish talent in the Diamonds ranks but Britain doesn't seem to be their training ground anymore. Would double down Aussies be allowed to ride for the Diamonds? Sponsored by their Premiership club? Wondering if the likes of Grazczonek or Tungate end up like Sam Masters and wanting to ride in the Championship afterall??

Agree. He's 8.5 without having ridden in heat 13 or 15 much last season (it matters). Riding at 1 he'll struggle to average 7 IMO. But no point in complaining about the team. It is what it is and money aside and starting after everyone else aside we're just not an attractive proposition to the majority of riders.

Hardly seems worth bothering does it. Which is what I think you're saying in a roundabout way. Nevermind. There's always the National League. Only three other teams to have beaten us to signings there

Wilson-Dean, Heeps, Wethers, Ostergaard, Grondal(?), Clegg and Phillips. When Wilson-Dean's average drops (after one meeting? like Ellis etc) to about 6.00, replace Phillips with a 5.00 (Bacon? Greaves) You can't win anything without being competitive in 13 and 15 but should be competitive at home.

Phew that's steep but might mean he's available, if fit, as I can't see anyone else taking that risk. Can't see him achieving 8.75 but if he returns to form (the first New Zealander to score a top division maximum since..... one Mark Thorpe) he could average over 7.00. Doesn't he have history with Rathbone??

Barker or Howarth (Leicester?) instead then. What would Bradley Wilson Dean's average be? And is he expected to be fit/riding? We are the spiritual home of the Kiwi.

Looks like Ricky Wells and Cameron Heeps won't be back to Edinburgh. Not out and out No.1 riders but if we go for strength in depth they could do a job.

No please ignore the other comments. I'm basing my opinion on the proposed fixtures (twice h & a against your own region and once h & a against the other region). This is definitely a good idea and should have been done ages ago instead of the pointless Shield. I agree with you that the only really fair approach is that every team faces the same opposition the same number of times but that's either only 11 home fixtures or too many at 22 home fixtures. So 16 home fixtures is perfect. However, as you've pointed out, in terms of fairness it does raise the issue of all the teams not facing the same opposition the same amount of times. For that reason, as seems to have been confirmed at Redcar, there should be a Northern and Southern table (not a combined table) with the top three from each qualifying for the play offs. I reiterate hopefully when it comes to the quarter finals the 2nd in the North will play 3rd in the South etc. This will mean that if one region is more dominant than the other then the top three teams can make the semi finals. As I say not perfect but neither is the traditional league format when you consider teams can improve/strengthen over a season. Hope that clarifies for everyone.

No it doesn't. You've pointed out that if there's one league and all the teams in one region are poorer than the teams in the other, then by virtue of having more fixtures against poorer teams, would finish higher up the combined table despite having always been beaten by teams in the other conference. In your example by virtue of the Northern teams being of a higher standard the worst two or three wouldn't be able to make the top six because they have 20 harder matches (i.e. against northern teams) than the best teams in the south who only have 12 harder matches. That inequality is exactly why there has to be two separate 'conferences' (and unfortunately for Newcastle/Plymouth why there doesn't really need to be an even number of teams). Importantly, as I pointed out in my original response, the quarter finals need to be 2nd north vs 3rd south and 2nd south vs 3rd north. That means if the northern teams are all better than their southern counterparts then three of them will make the semi finals. Not perfect but it's sport it's not supposed to be perfect. It's all theoretical anyway so don't even get started on the averages after year one!! Where a six pointer in one conference could be a nine pointer in the other.....

No. Exactly not that. Fixtures as have been announced. 10 home against your five conference rivals and (i.e. twice each) plus 6 home against the teams from the other conference (i.e. once each) making 16 fixtures. My point was that there shouldn't be one league table as the mix of fixtures could mean that the total points could be skewed if one conference is weaker than the other. So there should only ever be two conference tables with the top three in each progressing. Not the top six in a combined league progressing. This is perhaps a subtle concept but it's the only way of ensuring that the league standings are not skewed. i.e. everyone in the same conference has rode against the same opposition the same amount of times. It has the added benefit of their being two conference champions and also makes the play off's a little more distinct from the league. Should have done it years ago.

That's right. So it should be two 'conferences' with both the conference champions straight to the semi's and hopefully 2nd in the North plays 3rd in the South etc in the quarters. Meaning that if the top three teams in the Championship are in one 'conference' they can all make the semi finals. This regional split should have been implemented ages ago. 16 home league matches is just about right and hopefully the cut off will be end of August.

So far as I am aware the Newcastle promotion have a similar reputation, yet still struggle to attract riders. The point is that, whether it's Poole and/or Glasgow or not, there is a disparity between what some clubs can afford. Not the fault of those clubs, they live within their means. My point is that their isn't sufficient clubs left to sustain the three tier structure so the Championship needs to be a sustainable standard for the majority, which inevitably means less professional and featuring less expensive 'international' standard riders. But whilst clubs with larger budgets remain in the Championship the rest will try to be competitive on the basis that if they're not the crowd levels fall. Either way is unsustainable in the long term unless you can reduce costs. You could argue that if speedway in Newcastle is unsustainable (due to a Sunday race night and/or high stadium rental etc) then they should drop down to the National League but that's the problem. Even if Belle Vue and Cradley continue it's a maximum six team league which just isn't viable and not great news for the development of young British riders who struggle to make Championship level pay (Thomas, Wood etc). With only 22 tracks in operation, now would have been the opportunity to have restructured to two tiers, widening the gap between both and getting rid of doubling up for all bar British development riders. Workington's demise last season should have been the tipping point. How many more will fall before it's inevitable?

Wasn't meant as a jibe at either. Regardless of how they fund it they're (plus whoever else you allude to [I didn't know there was further south than Poole]) big fish in a little pond, resulting in riders pay expectations increasing. It's sport if you can afford to why wouldn't you. Only trouble is when others try to compete and it becomes unsustainable.

Trouble is even if investment can be secured Newcastle will struggle to be competitive and that isn't sustainable. With Glasgow and now Poole money in the mix, a Sunday race night, no access to foreign newcomers and a track that doesn't suit the modern bikes we're always going to struggle to attract riders. With no blame attached to the promotion. The 2019 team on paper was decent but it became apparent that the likes of Worrall, Jorgensen and Bjerre weren't there as a preference. Why the authorities insist that the three league structure is maintainable is beyond me, given the number of tracks which have folded recently. Looks like there'll only be three stand alone National League clubs next season if Plymouth run at that level. You can't cut costs at Championship level because half the riders need to be competitive in the Premiership and on the continent, effectively using the Championship to supplement their priority fixtures. With the reducing number of tracks the Championship needs to be the development league for young British and UK based riders who don't ride on the continent. At that level the costs can come down. But with the likes of Glasgow and Poole splashing cash at this level there's only going to be more closures as the have nots struggle to keep up.

Wouldn't cricket grounds be the best fit? Is there historical precedent in Australia? Clearly they're not obvious bed fellows but I know a lot of the Counties struggle financially. Would it be possible to have a permanent speedway track covered by cut out sections of the cricket outfield? Not in-expensive but less so than a new stadium. Generally speaking you'd be appealing to two different demographics so wouldn't be competing for the same audience [debatable].