enotian

It is one of speedways problems and attractions. It's (or used to be) both an individual and team sport. Other sports like Darts and Snooker have international team events but there's no team work involved really. Whereas speedway does involve team work at least off track nowadays if not via team riding anymore and has affiliation to geographical area which other motorsports "teams" don't. To that extent it's difficult to formulate a pyramid structure for speedway that most other successful sports have. Is it SGP - SEC/SGPChallenge - SGP2 - SGP3 - SGP4? No. Is it SON/SWC - Domestic Top Flight - Domestic 2nd/3rd tier - Domestic Youth Leagues? No It's a bit of both and not very structured to the point it isn't a pyramid at all. SGP - Polish Extraliga - SGP Challenge/SON/SGP/SEC/Swedish Elite - Danish top division/SGP Premiership/Polish 2nd Division - Other domestic leagues. As I've posted before, it looks like Discovery Sports understand the need for a structure to ensure there is a sufficient supply chain of riders to develop the SGP product but would the FIM give them the power to structure domestic competitions to facilitate that??

You can definitely create a better atmosphere indoors, with better lighting (imagine all the lights turning red for an exclusion) and reverberated sound but the earlier poster is correct you'd need to compromise on track size at most indoor arena facilities. If you could find a large enough facility to include the right size and shape of track plus suitable spectator area's then it could be a game changer. Track preparation not subject to the elements, no rain offs. Better presentation. I think if you're talking about erecting a roof over a current speedway track I can only imagine it would be extremely difficult and expensive. I've been go-karting in such a converted warehouse but not to the scale needed to include a speedway track but there's a potential multi use of the 'centre green'. Let's watch some go karting while the tractors are on. Fantasy stuff unfortunately.

Presumably that's what Oxford have offered? So if that's the going rate then that's what you have to pay. I admit for a rider that is way past his best it seems a lot of money but what else can you do if you're serious about strengthening the team in a world where there are few other realistic opportunities. Mind, no wonder the sport is going down the pan if bog standard riders are on that sort of money.

That's the problem though isn't it. Next season they'll want to be free to ride in Poland on a Sunday even if they don't actually end up getting any matches. Also these new Dane's won't come in and and score like Kenni or Rene did (apart from Birkemose). They'll be 5 pointers which is decent and better than what we've got but won't hang about to become future heat leaders. If they do they'll deffo get rides in Poland. Again I'm not defending the promotion because Summers to Oxford tells you everything you need to know about how serious an effort has been made to improve the team.

He publicly stated he doesn't having previously said that was his plan. Of course he probably had to say that. But you're correct regardless. If you can find some council owned land it's probably earmarked for housing. If it isn't it'll be next to housing. Even if you did find a plot which is otherwise unused you'd need to persuade the local authority that having a speedway team will benefit the local economy. Good luck with that on the basis it attracts a handful of visiting supporters for about 15 weekends of the year. Alternatively you find a private plot of land and agree terms with the owner presuming they can't sell if for housing. Then you have to invest heavily in building the track and facilities. Interesting to see how the people behind the new Workington track have achieved what they have but I'm guessing the land owner has an interest in the sport?

Yes they will because they also have a quarter of the leagues top 12 riders. Although their reserves will not be as good as Edwards and Thompson. Surely.......

Foreign riders who don't ride in Poland. There's a couple of Swedes who've been and not done much. People will say move from a Sunday. The Diamonds can't. Plus how ridiculous is it that the amount of speedway operating on Saturdays and Sunday's in this country is so miniscule?? We know the top riders are accounted for elsewhere at weekends but there simply has to be a level where speedway supporters can spend their weekends following the sport in the UK.

Shouldn't have signed a quarter of the leagues top 12 riders then. You reap what you sow. Tbf the rules allowed it so why wouldn't they. It's such a shambles we're now saying that the winners lose out. Crazy but entirely believable.

I do know. Which is why I'm pointing out what should have been done rather than throwing all the blame at Rob Grant. Clearly he's not blameless and is at this point surely damaging his non speedway business either via funds or reputation but you hit the nail of the head. Self interest to win a competition which has become a joke that nobody is interested in. Simple measures could have been put in place to avoid this sort of scenario. Although I still fear the Diamonds would have been wooden spoon candidates with some of the other team building decisions but at least they would have been able to secure someone to carry the fight in heat 13 and 15.

So that proves my point. Even though Newcastle offered more money to heat leaders than Poole, who have 3 number 1's, they still choose to ride for less money because they were all able to obtain team places and presumably preferred the security of an established track or didn't like home matches on Sunday's or the track. However, had each team been restricted to 1 rider over 8 points then one of those riders would surely have signed for Newcastle on those better terms. Now Poole would still have signed the best team because they'd have signed the best under 8 point riders. That's entirely fair as they're a better run more knowledgeable club but at least all 11 teams would have had the opportunity to have at least one competitive rider in heats 13 and 15. The fact that Rob Grant had offered these heat leaders terms would suggest he realised that the team needed a number one so has he picked a poor team or has he just picked up the pieces of what was left over. Still nobody can come up with the name of a feasible number 1 rider he should have signed. I'm not here to defend Rob Grant as I do believe he's completely out of his depth and has been 'ill advised' and regardless of availability of heat leaders the team/club is a shambles. But the point remains. If the BSPL want an attractive league which retains all of its members then they needed to ensure each team could track a competitive team. They've failed miserably in that and I suspect will have 10 teams in their league next season. Maybe that's what they wanted? In which case job probably done.

Whilst I think that is probably true the point is, if the authorities want an evenly matched league or even just want to maintain then number of teams in the league, then they needed to give each of the 11 teams the opportunity to sign competitive teams. By allowing two teams to sign half of the league number 1 heat leaders that was never going to happen. We just don't know how much money Rob Grant was offering heat leaders during the winter but given 2021 it was never going to be anyones first choice. Regardless of the standard of teams it just makes no business sense to have a scarce resource able to dictate terms in the pursuit of 'sporting greatness' or whatever winning the CL gives you. From everyones perspective, apart from the riders, it makes entire sense to manufacture supply over demand as then everyone can benefit from the resulting more realistic terms.

If there are more heatleaders available than team places those going rates suddenly reduce if a rider wants a team place. Simple economics. Obviously they won't ride to make a loss but will have more realistic terms or sit on the side lines and wait for a better paid opportunity. The top riders will go to the better teams on better terms which is fair but they wouldn't be able to sign three of them when there are only about 12 available across 11 teams. Fair enough if Newcastle then didn't offer sufficient terms they'd deserve the criticism but the question nobody can answer is who else were Newcastle supposed to sign when everyone else was offering better terms for the limited number of heat leaders available.

Are Discovery Sports not the ideal organisation to take that control? Not just of the UK scene but internationally. 1. They seem to understand that the flag ship SGP needs a high quality field hence SGP2 and in particular SGP3 and SGP4 aimed at developing young talent. For all Greg Hancock was a great ambassador for the sport it's so much easier in a social media world to market young talents to the youth market. 2. They have the broadcast platform and need content to sell subscriptions. That only happens if the content is attractive enough. I doubt that the current offering of SGP/SON and British Premiership is. 3. They want to grow the sport globally, reignite old markets (USA, Australia) and expand into new ones (Asia, Middle East, maybe even Spain) for the purpose of attracting more subscriptions. To do that they need control over development. You either work with them to realise the vision or you rally against it in the wilderness.

Mathias Thornblom looked decent in the Swedish Elite league match last night. Mixing it with some top riders. Doesn't look to have a Polish place although someone will probably snap him up if that's the sort of form he's in. Failed at Berwick a good few seasons ago but looked CL heat leader standard last night. Albeit on a vastly different track to Newcastle. Swedes not riding in Poland would fit the bill for the CL as there are hardly any Tuesday fixtures and no Thursday fixtures but too expensive for the Diamonds??

Depends on what you're prepared to do with a pig

that's fair but as a new promoter I don't think there was anything Rob Grant could have done to get that sponsors licence any earlier. Unsure when he effectively became promoter? 2020 or 2021? Maybe a ball was dropped but as a Sunday track I don't think having access to sign foreign riders would make much different. Even young Aussies head to Poland now rather than learning their trade in the UK. what did happen to ease the problem was rising stars. whether you liked it or not it did create opportunities for more UK riders. Take Jordan Jenkins as an example he'd been knocking about for 3 or 4 years as a young prospect but was never able to hold down a team place for whatever reason. He and others, are now reaping the benefit from having an extended run in the CL. Now he might never become even a CL heat leader but he's developed into a CL standard rider capable of beating heat leaders on his day. I think the majority kept their places or got a team place elsewhere so it worked on that basis but then the pipeline has been closed with teams unsurprisingly reluctant to give the next level of youngsters an opportunity when opponents are not obliged to. So an opportunity to introduce another group of riders into the rider pool was lost in a pool that wasn't big enough in the first place. So what forward planning was put in place was then abandoned.

That's a sound assumption. To be honest it looks like the Diamonds team has been done on the cheap but in reality only the promoters and riders know if that's the case. Maybe Complin is on heat leader money? Whilst we might suspect everything has been done on the cheap that might not be the case. In reality there are probably other reasons it's been difficult to attract riders other than money. Sundays for a start, maybe the track, maybe the lack of stability around the club but certainly because there's not enough to go around. I agree that the new foreigner market is unlikely to solve the problems. You're effectively shopping at the not good enough to ride in Poland shop. So you'd do well to bring in anyone who'll be able to score much more than the assessed 5.00 or 4.00. Having said that they can't do any worse than the current reserves so if a couple of new riders average 4 or 5 and the guest for BWD is capable of scoring in heat 15 and 16 and the other 4 do their jobs that would be enough to win some matches. But not home to Leicester and Poole.

not sure but as I understand it the former promotion didn't have a sponsor license either. Just relied on being able to sign EU riders who at that time didn't need permits.

I don't know if it was bollocks or not and as someone has said it's how hard you try that matters. Offering low terms would never attract those riders but you'd still technically tried, however futile that attempt was. But to try and unpuzzle you, and I'm not an expert, but I think EU riders who have previously ridden in the UK were all able to continue to ride in the UK post Brexit. Either without a permit or are guaranteed a permit. Bjerre, Smolinski, Pedersen and Vissing all fall into that category. Not sure about non EU riders but the attempt to sign Batchelor was mid season when he already had a permit to ride in the PL. What Newcastle couldn't do is sign new foreign riders because the promoters didn't have a sponsors license. If you think about the 2020 line up that never happened it was possible to sign Skorja and Smetaka as EU riders at that point but not for 2021 without a sponsors license. Now even with a sponsors licence some riders Smetaka(?) might not be awarded a permit as they don't fit the criteria. Which is why he never got to be in the Poole team last season I think. In summary it was possible to sign those riders without a license last season, I think.

He tried to sign Batchelor before he decided to sign for Kent last season

you choose not to address the simple mathematical reality. that's fine but the consequence of not addressing the lack of available riders is the current situation and the potential loss of more tracks. you do however improve the product by having equally competitive teams. as I pointed out in my last post if you want equally matched teams at the same level then you simply work out from the available rider pool how many equally matched teams can be in the league. This pre-season that was about 9 teams not 11. So you refuse Oxford and expel one of Birmingham or Newcastle to improve the product. That's the option. pre-season Sedgmen wasn't an option for anyone and he hardly has a heat leader average and we'll see how long his current for lasts. And some riders averages are bound to increase because there are some understrength teams so averages will increase as the same points are available. I don't know if Newcastle could have done what Birmingham have done or not. You would presume so but which new foreign riders would sign for a Sunday track pre-season? You could include bonus points in the GSA's and retain the 42 point limit but you're reducing the standard of the teams which is what you don't want? It's a simple choice really. Do you want equally matched competitive teams? In which case you have to set the rules in some fashion to make that happen. Either restrict the number of teams in the league or reduce the points limit to reflect the pool of available riders. Or you're not bothered about equally matched competitive matches and you set an arbitrary points limit knowing some teams will be under strength. I really don't care but the consequence of the former means some teams don't come to the tapes and the later means some teams may go out of business due to tracking uncompetitive teams.

Exactly, there isn't any. Sedgman didn't want to come across to ride one league but changed his mind and was hardly desirable. Kelleher was not worthy of a return and even if he'd signed instead of Congreve it would have still been way under the limit and terrible and he wouldn't have become an asset. Which for some reason appears to be important? Admittedly, the team signed is terrible and to a budget but the fact remains that the points limit set for 11 teams was higher than the total combined averages of the riders available by some considerable margin. Hence at least three teams starting under the limit by at least a point. And that's including riders who weren't ever going to do the season. You can't dispute the simple mathematics that the sum of the points limit multiplied by the number of teams was greater than the total average of riders available. And so the wealthier/better run clubs sign the riders they want and the poorer clubs have to make do with what's left. That's fine if there are enough riders available to make a competitive side but that wasn't the case this pre-season. Hence teams having to dig up riders to be able to come to the tapes with 7 riders they can arguably call their own, even if in some instances they were never doing the full season. It now appears that Rob Grant is to attain a sponsors licence which should allow him to access new foreign riders which he wasn't able to do before. I don't think he could have obtained this any earlier? Even so any riders signed now were unlikely to sign pre-season as they'd have signed to Polish clubs. Yes Sunday is a problem but it's the only day available to Newcastle. I'm not here to defend the promotion as I've voted with my feet after hardly missing a home match since 1986. The last couple of pre-pandemic seasons were the finish for me. Simply not worth the money. Terrible racing and matches that take forever against scratch teams. The fact remains that if the CL wanted to retain the 42 points limit standard then a simple calculation based on the list of available riders averages should have determined how many teams should have been allowed in the league. But they were never going to turn down Oxford returning or expel Birmingham or Newcastle. So what was the only other option, if you wanted all teams to be competitive? That's right, reduce the points limit or at least restrict the number of 8pt riders each team could sign. Truth is why would the wealthier teams want to do that? So you end up with teams of vastly different strengths and prey that the rubbish teams can make if through the season and still be about the following season. At some point those prayers won't be answered and the number of tracks will diminish even further than the bare minimum we have now.

okay don't answer that question but tell me which riders are available to sign.

who else should they have signed?

Teterow stats since 2015: Most race points - Jason Doyle 56 points (14 wins), Zmarzlik 46 pts (only 4 wins), Zagar 45 pts (9 wins) Gate race points - Red 31%, Blue 27%, Yellow 25% and White 17% Gate race wins - Red 35%, Blue 28%, Yellow 25% and White 12% Best line up position - #5 54 points then 12, 11 and 10. 46, 45 and 43 points respectively Worst line up position - #15 16 points the 2 and 3, 21 points each Semi appearances - Zmarzlik, Lindgren, Doyle, Iversen and Zagar 3 each. Zagar with 2 wins, Doyle and Iversen 1 each. Final appearances - Zmarzlik 3 no wins, Doyle 3 one win. Other winners, Zagar, Woffinden and Janowski.