enotian

But isn't that the Catch 22? What's potentially on offer depends upon whether or not Sky renew their contract and for how much. I don't think the promoters could commit to announcing that all 15 gp riders will ride in the 2014 Elite league without knowing they could afford to deliver that product. Something's need to be done behind the curtain.

Good point but it isn't even that straightforward as the missing riders teammates score would increase. Complicated For it to work it would need to be simple to apply and enable the team with the missing rider to be competitive. As I say a handicap system would only be marginally more palatable than guests so I can't see it being adopted.

Just assumed he'd be on a PL 7.00 assessed ave. But none assessed double uppers is the sort of rule that would exist isn't it.... ....for whatever reason. As he's unlikely to obtain an official average it must've been Thorssell as the only option as I can't imagine we'd be able to sign anyone from another PL 1-7. I suppose it could be an asset of another promotion who hasn't been active in Britain this season but I can only think of Monberg who'd be any better than our own asset Claes.

No need for a handicap system to be complicated. If you're missing a 9point rider, 9 point head start. (adjust in the event of a rain off if applicable) Not completely fair to the team with the missing rider (re 5th ride/tacticals)but it might incentivise teams to sign a replacement and/or develop a competitive No.8. Alas that's easier said than done. And on the basis that the guest facility is most likely popular with the riders I feel we're stuck with it regardless of how strange it appears in the context of a team sport.

Mikkel Michelsen must be the best case scenario. Looks like his Polish team didn't make the play offs and Eastbourne are all but done. Have a word Bjarne

Agreed

Rene Back 7.95 Stuart Robson 7.86 Ludvig Lindgren 6.84 Claes Nedermark 6.20 Richie Worrall 5.78 Steve Worrall 4.03 Jason King 3.53 42.19

But he has signed to ride for Lakeside next season.

You had to pick the last season that the British League had a full complement of 16 teams! Saw my first and last British League match that season. Joe Owen vs Dennis Sigalos. Hooked forever. Check out how many British riders you could pick a national team from... Belle Vue: Chris Morton, Peter Collins, Larry Ross, Andy Smith, Mark Courtney, Peter Carr, Kenny McKinna Coventry: Tommy Knudsen, Gary Gugliemi, Steve Bastable, Rick Miller, John Jorgensen, Sam Nikolajsen, Kevin Hawkins Cradley Heath: Erik Gundersen, Lance King, Phil Collins, Alan Grahame, Simon Cross, Finn Jensen, Steve Collins Eastbourne: Bobby Schwartz, John Eskildsen, Paul Woods, Antonin Kasper, Colin Richardson, Olli Tyrvainen, Denzil Kent, Steve Lucero Exeter: Ivan Mauger, Andy Campbell, Sean Willmott, Buddy Robinson, Robert Maxfield, Frank Andersen, Louis Carr Halifax: Kenny Carter, Neil Evitts, Steve Baker, Eric Monaghan, Doug Wyer, Steve Finch, Craig Pendlebury, Kurt Hansen Ipswich: Billy Sanders, John Cook, Jeremy Doncaster, Kai Niemi, Richard Knight, Nigel Flatman, Carl Blackbird Kings Lynn: John Louis, Dave Jessup, Richard Hellsen, Steve Regeling, Kevin Jolly, Martin Dixon, Keith Bloxsome Newcastle: Joe Owen, Rod Hunter, David Bargh, Eddie Ingels, Phil White, Martin Scarsbrick, Alan Mason Oxford: Hans Nielsen, Simon Wigg, Marvyn Cox, Melvyn Taylor, Jens Rasmussen, Ian Clark, Nigel Sparshott Poole: Michael Lee, Sam Ermolenko, Finn Thomsen, Stan Bear, Brian Jakobsen, Neil Middleditch, Kevin Smith Reading: Jan Andersson, Mitch Shirra, Per Jonsson, Tim Hunt, Malcolm Holloway, Pierre Brannefors, Peter Glanz Sheffield: Shawn Moran, Neil Collins, Les Collins, Dave Morton, Jan O Pedersen, Martin Hagon, Reg Wilson Swindon: Phil Crump, Bo Petersen, Ari Koponen, Shawn McConnell, Alun Rossiter, Alf Busk, Per Sorensen Wimbledon: Malcolm Simmons, John Davis, Kelvin Tatum, Gordon Kennett, John Titman, Roger Johns, Mike Ferreira, Andy Galvin Wolverhampton: Dennis Sigalos, Preben Eriksen, Peter Ravn, Andy Grahame, Robert Pfetzing, Kent Noer, David Cheshire

How about an un programmed reserve to take it up to seven man teams. I think that format would be excellent as perhaps the 7th and 8th ranked teams wouldn't be a match for the likes of Denmark. Or how about rotating the format on a 4 year basis? For example:- 2008: 6 or 7 men teams 2009: Pairs (using the old knockout GP format) 2010: Four Team Tournament 2011: Individual World Final (3 qualifiers, 1 repecharge + a final) 2012: bach to 6 or 7 men teams etc etc Variety is the spice of life.

I think I'm right in saying that the current heat format results in all riders having one ride from each gate position? Forgive me if I'm wrong. Although I believe that this is the fairest approach how about allowing teams trailing by say 6 points to alter the gate positions to their own advantage? It could be something as simple as allowing the trailing team to dictate a move from column A to column B gates or the more specific re-positioning of any rider, although odd or even gates would still need to be upheld. Sure it wouldn't have an effect in all meetings but I do feel that it's less open to ridicule than double points. Programmed gate positions seem to have been the norm forever but I'm sure that they were only introduced in the 80's to stop the best riders always getting the best gates. Whilst I agree with that if allowing changing gate positions as a tactic can result in closer matches it might be worth considering.

Just think it would add some variety and possibly allow teams to be built in different ways. Say that you're unable to acquire a genuine No1 so you go for strength in depth this flexibility would allow you to position your top man so that he wouldn't have to face the opponents genuine No1. I think it would add some tactical thinking and possibly make things less predictable. I think changing the 1 to 5 was allowed in the KOC a few years ago but invariably not many seemed to bother to swap pairings around for one or two matches.

Does anyone agree that the rigid structure to team line ups and the demise of old style tac subs has resulted in matches becoming far too predictable or at least repetitive? As it would appear that the BSPA prefer for all riders to have their 4 programmed rides (with fair justification) it would appear that the days of tac subs has gone. And with the structured 1 to 7 I find little variety in how matches develop. So it got me wondering if there was any merit in allowing any rider to ride at any position within the 1 to 7? Obviously the two lowest riders would remain as the reserves but they wouldn't have to ride in positions 6 and 7. On the downside it could mean that the top riders from each team never face each other but the flexibility should give team managers some way of affecting the result of a match and add some much needed variety, albeit before the match starts. I feel that allowing such flexibility would introduce some additional debate as to the tactical merit or otherwise of a managers line up.

You'd need to define 'established'. I'd base it on number of matches rather than average. This would reward teams who provide better training by allowing them to use developing riders at lower average until say they've riden 100 competitive matches or so. Very interesting. I'd rather see it phrased "all teams build to the same points limit but a rider who remains with the team he rode for in the previous season has his average reduced by 0.5". So say Simon Stead average 7.5 for Belle Vue in 2006 he'd come into the 2007 Belle Vue team on a 7 point average but would be a 7.5 rider to anyone else! Great idea.

After the Bosman ruling, considering an individual as an asset is no longer valid as anyone whose contract expires is free to sign a contract with any other employer. As speedway riders tend to sign contracts for the length of a single season and to all intents and purposes are self employed they are essentially a contractor and therefore free to sign as many contracts they are able to fulfill. Hence, riders riding in different countries. Therefore, last years saga surrounding transfer fees for Nicholls, Hancock, Hamill etc was totally dubious. Regardless of their legality transfer fees in general are a total drain on resources. I'm sure most promoters could do without having to shell out 10's of thousands of pounds to build a team. Surely it would be much better if they spent that kind of money on producing new riders. The problem speedway has is how to adapt a system without the notion of assets but which would still encourage investment in young riders, rather than importing foreign riders. Who'd spend money training a rider only for them to go and ride for a rival? To do this I believe that training contracts for riders should be formulated, designed to give structured instruction on all aspects of speedway. It might be necessary to offer different levels as not all riders start at the same level of ability. It would essential be a formal qualification in speedway. A "trainee" rider would sign a training contract with their preferred training provider/promoter who would provide the training required to reach the qualification standard. Once a rider qualifies they are then allowed to sign for any club they wish without any transfer fee being exchanged. However under an agreement between all promoters the riders training club would be compensated a nominal fee per season based on the riders ability (ie starting or finishing average for that season) and the standard cost of training. Essentially a loan fee payable each season to the training club. This would reward those clubs who provide the best training which should inturn increase the standard of training and hence improve the standard of riders produced. Riders without the qualification, ie foreign riders, would be subject to a similar loan fee but with a premium to encourage the use of qualified ie British riders so that it would be more cost effective to track a team of British riders than foreign riders. The annual loan fee for non qualified riders would go to the BSPA who could then use the pool of cash for the benefit of the sport in general. Eg, funding a winter tour for young riders or supplying air fences etc etc depending upon how big the fund totals.

Previously didn't they multiply or divide by 1.5 to assess riders swapping between leagues? So If you're a 9 point PL rider you'd be a 6 point EL rider etc etc. All depends on the relative standards in each league I suppose.

No you wouldn't. You'd only pay for the 5 meetings you promote. I think I'm right in saying in most instances speedway riders are on appearance and points money so they only get paid per meeting and the home promoter would cover that from gate receipts. I think that would be workable. It's certainly not a problem that couldn't be resolved using a bit of common sense and a little compromise. You can spend as long as you want uncovering reasons why things won't work and it's very useful to do so. But you shouldn't lose sight of what you want to acheive. In this instance it's a format to bring speedway to a wider audience of spectators, sponsors and TV viewers by raising the bar in terms of the standards of on track action, facilities and presentation. Yes you'll uncover problems but don't quit at the first sign of difficulty. If it's worth doing you find a way of doing it.

How would it be disasterous for cash flow? Say you're the euroleague promoter for Wolverhampton. You'd arrange to hire Monmore Green on 5 dates. You wouldn't need a season long lease with the landlord because you only want to run 5 meetings. (You might even only need to deal with the domestic league promoters depending on their lease) Whoever you contract with it will be additional revenue for use of their asset so I'm sure they'd be willing to allow the lions share of the rent to be paid after each meeting. Then you'd have ticket sales and race night payments being made at roughly the same time. I'm confident those 3 main cash flows would be manageable. I don't think there'd be any other major payments required. It's just like running a club night. You agree to hire a club pay a deposit arrange for dj's who you pay on the night when you've received your money at the door then settle up with the venue owner. It's quite simple really, that's how bits of kids manage to do it all over the country. Of course you need to promote it aswell but speedway is really good at th....... nevermind. e

Part of my idea would be to run the euroleague in a four team tournament format meaning the minimum number of riders required would be 64. (16 teams 4 riders per team). These would be the feature riders anyway. Obviously there'd have to be squads to cover at reserve and the inevitable injuries to avoid having the dreaded guest facility. Say 3 more per squad although I wouldn't put a limit on it but based on average you'd be unlucky to have more than two riders injured at one time. It's hard to say but if we do say another 3*16 riders that takes you up to 112. The current Elite league has possibly 90 riders in comparison so on that basis yes there might be a wider range of abilities and the euroleague might even have a lower standard but remember you'd be picking from a larger pool of riders. The likes of Gollob, Hampel & Holta would be involved not sure about Rickardsson. Plus some riders like Walaszek are genuine star men in there home countries despite never hitting the heights in Britain. And I'm sure the Polish teams at least would make up there squads with young talents like Kolodeij who haven't yet arrived in British speedway (except a spell at Reading I think?). Perhaps you could have a bit of fun allocating actual riders to euroleague teams just to illustrate the standard of the lower ends. I do feel that smaller leagues do lack a degree of variety but yes it is a trade off between the two. I also feel the 4 team format for the euroleague would allow a greater chance of blanket TV coverage. A total of 80 matches across say 8 countries. I'm sure Sky could cover all 20 matches held on British soil while other TV companies would hold the rights in the other countries meaning each match could be covered or at least recorded if not shown live. There'd be an archieve of all matches so in the event of a live match being abandoned a recently recorded fixture which hadn't been shown live in this country but may feature a British team could be shown in its place. And you could also package together a highlights show to keep the viewers right up to date with the league positions which I believe is being discussed on another thread.

The last time there was one big league it contained all the top (now known as gp) riders and matched them against young 16 year only novices. With a domestic league pitched at Premier League level I'd imagine the top riders would be the likes of Joe Screen, Gary Havelock who although still great riders are no longer at the level of the big gp stars and you couldn't fit them all into one team. Plus an amalgamated promoting company would see no merit in tracking sides which couldn't compete. Yes but there is a football team in every town around the world more or less. It's a bit extreme in the North East but the Diamonds would find it very difficult to attract non speedway fans from Sunderland (it's only 10 miles away) as they just wouldn't want to support a Newcastle team. That's the limitation of domestic leagues in terms of attracting a new audience. Even in football there are maybe less than 10 clubs which have global brands meaning they attract supporters from different geographical areas. I see markets such as Italy and Spain and Asia as key development areas. They all seem to have a healthy interest in motorsports so why not speedway. As I keep saying it's the best one! But with all the will in the world how are you going to sell Eastbourne vs Peterborough the Japanese public? You'd even struggle with Wroclaw v Luxo Stars it just doesn't mean as much to a wider audience. Sure an expanded gp series wouldn't feature a Malaysian or even Spanish rider but whose to say it wouldn't in the future. Speedway does not appear to be as expensive to get into compared to many other motorsports and it's something the gp organisers should try to develop. I'm sure they'd love to focus alot more on Antonio Lindback's Brazilian heritage to give the sport a higher profile in South America. An important point is that we all now live in a global market place like it or not. All the big companies have to expand globally to grow otherwise they get chewed up by overseas competitors. It's this global market place that the majority the big sponsorship deals go to events shown around the world. At the moment speedway will find it hard to find attract global companies because it only reaches Poland, Scandanavia and Britain. Anyway don't worry cos it'll never happen. There's nobody with the vision or expertise to market the sport to the level it deserves. I suppose well just carry on conceeding that whoever makes the gate wins and be happy to be the poor relations of motorsport because the others have better PR and image rights to obscure their failings. e

Kevin, Firstly thanks for indulging me but can I just say just because something doesn't work right at the moment or might be hard to acheive doesn't mean that it is worthwhile doing or doing better. I'm guessing Bill Gates' first crack at an operating system wasn't too hot..... Would you agree that most of your reasons for disagreeing with my proposals are because it hasn't worked in the past due to a lack of expertise or application. I don't find that acceptable. Why can't you arrange a fixture list within a couple of days? Sure there'll always be some excuse for someone not wanting to ride at someplace for some reason or another. It's all rubbish. There is no valid reason why a fixture list can't be drawn up within a day or two. let's try to have some sort of professionalism. Ditto with the ability to finish matches. If a team can't arrange a meeting by the cut off they forfeit the match and it just doesn't get run. Now you'll say the supporters lose out by losing a match. Hopefully the penalty will act as a deterent. The whole point of the new structure is that there won't be any reason other than bad weather to not run a meeting. With a more structured and concise international calender all riders at the domestic level should be available and if they're not you ride without them. Again this deterent might make promoters turn to riders who are going to be available. Seems to me that British speedway is the maker of many of it's own problems. You can't please all of the people all of the time. Sure riders would ride in every league going to earn more money but why should british speedway bend over backwards to help them out? Seems to me that British domestic speedway offers more meetings than any of the other leagues so let's start flexing some muscle and if riders decide to concentrate on Sweden and Poland then so be it. See your point about people arranging holidays around away tours but again this is a minority element. As I say you can't please all the people all the time and I feel the added excitment of two pinnacles to the season would overide it. Don't get your point about costs. Without the top 20 riders from the elite league there can't be many left to drop down and those that do would generally be No.1's in the domestic league and paid as such but the points limit would mean they'd be spread across the teams. Essentially the domestic league would be pitched at Premier League level. Yeah you might have one or two more expensive riders but I can't see it being significant and also I think there'd be more meetings (say if there are 26 teams operating split in two thats 24 matches in the 1st half of the season and 24 in the 2nd half and the better riders would also ride euroleague matches for another 20 meetings) which could be factored in to reduce pay rates. Plus by running the first half of the season on a regional basis travel costs will have been reduced. Essentially once you're in the 2nd half of the season you'd only have travel outside your region 6 times. That's all relative to location I suppose. The point of keeping up with the Jones' doesn't ring true either. The points limit would prohibit that to a large extent plus my suggestion of all the promoters amalgamating all of their assets into one promoting company would mean there'd be no transfer fees as essentially each rider would be contracted to the league centrally and be allowed to move without a fee. Again the one big promoting company would be responsible for ensuring each franchise lived within it's means. You could even go to the point of pooling all revenues and distributing equally whatever was best for the company as a whole as it would be the returns of the company as a whole which would be shared out amongst the shareholders. Some tracks might not be as profitable as others but without them the whole company would be worse off. If a particular franchise was unprofitable and couldn't be turned around then it would be disposed of and perhaps a different venue sought. You say the gp can't afford more riders and doesn't attract many more fans than the old one off finals. My point is make the product something a wider audience will want to see. Let's have better marketing let's try and get all those motorsports fans who follow other series aware of sgp. I'm confident you see more action in a 3 hour speedway meeting than you do in a season of formula one! And it's more spectator friendly by which I mean you can see all the action in one field of view. If you're saying speedway can't attract more supporters because it isn't as good as other sports well end of discussion? The idea of expanding the elite league has a major problem! Where are the riders going to come from? The 10 teams in there at the moment struggle to find good enough riders as it is. Yes the points limit/standard can be lowered but that means you get a wider spectrum of ability which isn't condusive to close racing. You'll have Leigh Adams up against James Burkinshaw for instance with no disrespect to James. I'm not talking about implementing these plans for the start of 2006. I'm viewing this as the way ahead a strategy as to how speedway can grow to survive and the measures that may have to be made to make this possible. My proposals are based on the following assumptions, let me know which ones and why you don't agree. Speedway is improved when there is a close proximiting between the standard of riders competing. Therefore any structure must seek to maximise competition levels whilst also allowing for development of new talent. A properly organised well run bona fide gp series has the potential to reach the largest possible market meaning if marketed correctly and the product is good there is greater chance of attracting new supporters and sponsors into the sport. All interested parties must work in harmony. By continually making life difficult for each other nothing will ever be achieved. Therefore any structure must seek to minimise any conflicts. And yes the gp series should contribute towards rider development as without new talent coming through it could never prosper. I assume domestic speedway will benefit from a higher profile gp series but at the same time realise that this is not a given and therefore feel any domestic structure must be able to exist within it's means.

Just a couple of points to pick up on if you don't mind? Under what I'm proposing no team would ever have 2 members missing every other week because gp riders wouldn't ride in domestic speedway just gp's, internationals and euroleague matches. Part of the reasoning behind my ideas are so that such conflicts of interest are reduced. I know I know domestic speedway is only good because it has the top riders in it.......... I don't agree with that I think speedway works best when all the riders competing are of a similar standard making it just a little more unpredictable. Can someone point out why it's so important to have the big stars riding week in week out from a spectator point of view? Remember you shouldn't view this from your own personal perspective. Just because you might like to see Greg Hancock or whoever ride every week doesn't mean it's for the best for the sport as a whole. Next, the Ashes test matches are scheduled to last 5 days each so effectively the sponsors were getting 25 days of exposure. And I think the Ashes can guarantee slightly higher media coverage than speedway. My suggestion to improve the gp series was to add a qualifier the day/afternoon before each gp. Would being able to see two meetings per weekend make more people willing to attend? Would this be enough to cover the marginal additional cost? I don't know but with a wider variety of riders/nationalities it would be less repetitive (repetition doesn't seem to bother fans of other gp series) for you and would give TV the possibility of more live action for not much more cost. I sense that you just don't want a gp series but surely you must agree that it is more likely to attract the attention of a wider market for both spectators and sponsors? Remember there was no Elite league on Sky Sports until the gp had made the breakthrough. You seem to reminise of a time before the gp when everything was a bed of roses! That's not my recollection. Certainly not of the last 25 years anyway. You might be right that the swc is badly promoted but i'm talking about improving it making it something people will look forward to seeing. Just because it's not done properly at the present doesn't mean it can't be done. Yes I am an optimist. I just think top class international speedway is something which would attract a wider audience. The examples of Rugby Union & Cricket point to the general public responding to the national teams rather than seeking out their local club. My idea for a 4tt euroleague would mean only 5 home matches per season. Obviously you wouldn't operate a track for just 5 home matches. What I had in mind was that the euroleague would merely share a track with a domestic team on 5 occasions. Say Belle Vue, Coventry, Poole & Wolves for arguments sake were Britains entrants. All 4 tracks would have teams in the domestic British league with a full programme of matches at that level. But on 5 occasions during the season there would be a seperate euroleague match against 3 opponents. The Belle Vue euroleague team would essentially be nothing to do with domestic team. Much like Boston riding at Kings Lynn. 2 different promotions operating from the same track but in different leagues. You don't say why you think domestic speedway should be run at two levels? Anyway my domestic structure wouldn't be one big league it would be two regional divisions (must help lower costs?) which also act as qualifiers for a 1st and 2nd division. It's a quasi form of promotion/relegation but I just think it would give more teams a chance of winning a trophy. There'd be 4 league titles up for grabs and even if you'd struggled early season and not qualified for division one you get the chance to start from scratch to win the 2nd division against other teams who'd also struggled. It must at least offer more variety than a 10 team Elite league? As I've stated previously I wouldn't mind speedway continuing as it is but the trouble is I just can't see that happening. The sport as a whole needs to see more revenue flooding in via supporters and sponsors. The costs just aren't going to decrease. Stadium rents will go up, riders pay rates will go up that's just economics. The only other alternative would be to downgrade. But I just can't see watching speedway in a farmers field with limited facilities being the way forward. I myself prefer league racing to the grand prix but from a growth point of view you need a product that you can sell to as wide an audience as possible. Domestic league racing just doesn't have that potential. Sorry but it's true.

Yes I'm a Diamonds supporter have been since too long ago to mention. All I can remember of my first meeting was Joe Owen vrs Martin Yeates but I've been a regular since 1986. And yes I love my league racing especially as it's normally a close match at Brough, even when we won the Premier League, I don't really recall the Ian Thomas all conquering Lada Diamonds, although my only experience of top flight speedway (apart from on Sky) was seeing Denis Sigalos' Wolves hammer the 84 Diamonds. My only problem with league racing is that I can't see how it'll attract new supporters to speedway? Any ideas yourself? It's a bit clouded up here in Newcastle as everyone is obssessed with the barcodes so everything else plays 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc fiddle but to my mind you've got to get in the media and with all the will in the world you'll be lucky if your tabloids would even print the result of the play off final, the biggest domestic meeting. Apologies if that's wrong as I don't read them myself. As I've stated I think you need big events to attract the type of media coverage which will attract new supporters and sponsors. I'm basing this on the increase in public interest in cricket after the Ashes and Rugby Union after the World Cup win and I seem to recall football was in not to great a position until Italia 90 and a certain bloke crying brought it back to a wider audience. So that's my rationale. Personally i wouldn't mind speedway remaining a marginal sport as it's cheap and I never have to worry about getting a ticket so that suits me fine. The only trouble is that I can't see how long it will survive at the current level and of course I think the riders deserve better for what they risk just to keep me entertained for 2 hours a week. A 6 round GP series just won't attract a major sponsor. They'll only get there exposure 6 times for a start. Why bother. You might have a point to less meetings making them more special by why not apply that to league racing. My idea would be to have a genuine European League to give the gp riders another 20 meetings per season to fill their calenders. The Euroleague would consist of 16 teams (4 from Britain, Poland & Sweden and say one each from Denmark, Czech Republic, Germany and Italy) on a four team tournament basis. Each team would have only 5 home meetings and would ride at each of the opposing 15 tracks. Ideally I'd see the teams being an extension of the grand prix teams essentially using the Euroleague as further exposure for their sponsors and for development in terms of machinery and future riding talent. Under these proposals you'd only be able to see gp riders on British soil at roughly 21 meetings per season which would make them special events. The Euroleague teams would be made up of gp riders plus the best of the rest from the domestic leagues. I'd hope that the link to gp teams would self regulate the team strengths but some form of points limit might need to apply. I think the 4 team tournament style meetings usually lead to closer finishes and the double point tactical ride or whatever it's called pans much better in that format. You'll all doubtless moan about there being no team riding in this format but personally i think that's a redundant argument as you don't see proper team riding in league matches except for maybe a couple of times per meeting max! I also think the format is geared more to a play off final. I'd like to see the top eight teams in the league qualify for the play offs with 2 semi finals a last chance run off and a grand final all being run over a week just like the current world cup. As I keep saying you've got to make these things into events which will attract more than just the supporters of the two/four teams involved. No sponsor is just going to want to sell their products in only Manchester and Coventry. You've got to move with the market forces. Of course these proposals would mean domestic speedway would be greatly changed. Ideally, I'd hope that the exposure gained by the expanded higher profile gp series and euroleague would help domestic speedway by bringing speedway to a wider audience and making more sponsors wanting to be involved at the lower level also. Realistically, experience shows that the money usually stays at the top so any domestic set up would have to live within it's means. For a start running a league with different promoting factions just isn't working. It's a radical approach but I'd like to see all the promoters form one promoting company. Each promoter gaining shares in proportion to the assets they contribute at inception. The biggest plus being that all riders are centrally contracted hence removing the possibly illegal transfer system currently in place which only seems to prohibite new tracks from opening due to the cost of aquiring a team. The promoting company would then decide on which venues they'd want to utilise there assets at. Some will be owned by the company some won't. Once the operating tracks have been finalised the promoting company would appoint a "supremo" at each venue to represent that track. Essentially it would be a status quo as the promoters of Newcastle would want to be involved in running Newcastle rather than another track. The benefit of the situation would be that each promoter would now have to act in the best interests of the whole company rather than just their own track. It's a subtle one I admit. I'd say that without any gp standard riders taking part the domestic league would be run at Premier League level so young riders like Simon Stead and Chris Harris would be the star names whilst gaining experience in the euroleague at the same time. Former gp riders like Havelock and Louis would also be No1 heat leaders and also allowed to ride in the euroleague to add to the number of meetings they'd have per season. If say the promoting company decided to operate 26 tracks (I think there were 25 Elite + Premier tracks last season) that would be too many for one big league. So i would split the season in half. The first half would be a split into 2 regional leagues. Northern & Southern would make sense in terms of cutting costs and attracting away supporters. The first half of the season would be spent trying to become regional champions or to finish in the top half of the regional table. Because the 2nd half of the season would consist of the top halfs of each regional division forming the first division whilst the two bottom half finishers would end the season battling it out to become 2nd division champions. You could easily change the names so as not to make one sound inferior to the other if that's your want! The beauty is if you haven't had a great first half of the season you start again from scratch at the halfway stage with the chance of winning some silverware by defination against a lower standard of opposition (ie they also finished in the bottom half). It effectively would give you two seasons in one. Obviously in sport there always has to be someone who finishes last but at least under this system you'd spend the 2nd half of the season riding against teams at a similar standard. Obviously there'd still have to be a points limit but i'd make it simpler to make team changes by rounding up/down averages to either .0 or .5 i.e if a rider averages 4.37 and is british and under 21 he's rounded down to 4.0 if he's foreign or over 21 it's rounded up to 4.5. That means there will be alot more riders on the same averages making team changes easier which would hopefully reduce the need for guest riders a pet hate of mine. The promoting company should also take control of the conference league standard racing as that would effectively be building their rider assets and should be run accordingly ie without so many old hands a genuine under 21 league with maybe 1 old hand per team. Remember under 21 gives you 6 seasons of action to make the grade at the higher level. These are basically my ideas as to how domestic speedway could fit in harmoniously with a higher profile gp series which I feel is the only way to take the sport to a higher level. Hopefully if anything it's raised some debate as to whether both domestic speedway and gp speedway can co-exist. e

Although the sgp should be the speedway flagship there should also still be room in the calender for international events. I'd like to see the world cup remain as a week long speedway festival (preferably held in one country) but would also like to see the format rotate over a 4/5 year cycle. One of the great things in speedway is the different formats. So one year have a proper 4 team tournament. The next year have the world cup decided over a pairs format allowing more countries to take part. I think a formula similar to the knock out grand prix format of 2004 would be ideal to run a pairs meeting over. The country represented by the rider finishing last is out or have to avoid finishing last in their next heat etc leading to a grand final between the two best pairs. The following year have a world cup on an individual 20 heat traditional format. In the space of a week have 4 qualifiers with the top 3 going direct to the final and the next 4 going into the last chance race off for the final 4 places in the grand final. The winner of the grand final, over 20 heats, is the world cup champion. Finally I'd look to have a genuine 7 or 8 rider team world cup tournament played out over a test match format with the top two countries meeting in a grand final. Variety is the spice of life and using the different formats should allow a greater array of countries to be involved at some stage aiding the development of the sport into new markets whilst keeping the annual world cup fresh. The Under 21 world cup and individual championship should also be retained to assist in the development of future gp talent but surely sending young riders making their way in the sport to all corners of the continent to qualify is counter productive. Why not base both events in a single country each season? As I say the way to attract sponsors, TV coverage and spectators is to promote large scale events. And speedway is probably the only motorsport to have genuine international team competition in its various formats which must be a unique selling point!

One of the major problems in speedway at the moment is that not all the relevant powers pull in the same direction. Surely for the good of the sport everyone should pull together and do what is best to increase the profile of the sport. However, there are so many conflicting interests the administration of the sport seems more like a war than a cohesive unit seeking to better the sports standing and future. In my opinion we need a set structure in which all the interested parties can gain what they require out of the sport but obviously there will have to be some compromise. As I believe the way to increase the sports profile is through holding large events with the highest standards (both racing & presentation) I'll start with the grand prix. BSI or whoever has the rights for the series must seek to increase the number of rounds preferably to 16. This should include reaching destinations outside of Europe (America, Asia, Australia). It's not feasible to do this for one off events but these are big places with big populations. Why not have an Australian and Commonwealth GP in different Australia cities on consequtive weekends. An American and Inter-Continental GP in the USA etc etc. Attracting crowds in these non european events might be a problem at first so to establish the series why not seek a tie in with other motorsports series. i.e. Hold the GP on the Saturday night before the Japanese Moto GP on a custom built track within part of the road racing circuit. It's a loss leader but if you can price them to attract 10k supporters who are primarily there for the Moto GP you've still got an event which enhances the sgp series. To do this kind of overseas tour and to return to the modern stadia (not neccesarily as big as the Millenium stadium but all seater with the facilities expected of a professional sport) developing custom built tracks is important. Yes at the moment they are not ideal but surely it is not impossible to develop!? Rock concerts assemble and disassemble stages in these arenas within a day. I appreciate a speedway track is more involved but that should be the aim. Something you can pack away and move to the next venue. The only problem I have with the current GP format is there isn't enough riders in it. How is speedway supposed to attract a worldwide audience if there are only ever 5 or 6 countries represented? But you have to balance that with having the best riders in the series. The solution? Have a qualifying event either the night or afternoon before the gp. If you finish in the botton 4 of the previous gp you have to do the qualifier along with 4 home nation (where possible) wildcards and 8 invitational riders. Effectively meaning you'd be back to 24 regulars. If you're running two meetings in two days you might attract more overseas visiting supporters and it's potentially two gate receipts to cover costs. A qualifier would also be allow for track problems to be addressed before the big event. I'd also like to see spg teams develop. This seems to happen now but are referred to by the individual rider. Surely sponsors would prefer to be in the team name like Rothmans Honda or Marlboro McLaren. Afterall no sport like it or not can operate at the top level without attracting substancial sponsorship and if the series has to be known at the "Thingmebob SGP" then so be it.