Grachan

From Halifaxtiger's post it's pretty obvious how one committed rape and one didn't. I'm surprised people are having problems seeing it.

The Yorkshire Ripper believed he was innocent. Doesn't mean he was.

According to the Defunct Speedway website, High Beech was still staging meetings right up to 1967.

I guess they must have agreed with her though. And Jessica Ennis is higher profile than Charlie Webster (both at the club and nationally). It's certainly not her and her alone.

It wasn't just Charlie. It was Jessica Ennis too. Plus several club sponsors, includng a company owned by boxer Johnny Nelson.

Not too many things wrong this year. the increased points limit is good, though could have been more than 2 points what with 2 less teams this year. Like others, though, I don't see why they drop the "2 points for a win of 6 or less". They say that home supporters were a bit upset if they lost a point. Well, durrrrr!! They're supposed to be upset. It's called sport. You lose a point, you get upset. And it makes the last heat scenario for the extra point much less relevant, because it only effects the away team. and away teams normally have about 5 supporters there on a good day for your typical league match. The whole point of the scoring system was to keep matches alive. But, if it don't have any impact on your own team, then it's not alive. Still, at least it will keep those following the scores online gripped. So, close to a good AGM boys, but no cigar once again!

Seriously? You honestly believe that because a woman poses for sexy photographs she is not in a position to condemn rape? I find that a very strange point of view. Do you feel, for example, that Richard Attenborough was not in a position to speak about human rights because he played a killer in films? My only knowledge on this is what I've read on here, but from what I can gather there were two blokes. One picked up a very drunk girl, took her to a hotel room, and gave her one. Very dubious behaviour to say the least, but not rape. The girl then passed out, is that correct? He then called up this footballer, who turns up, gives her one while she is unconscious, and sneaks out again. That's rape. Clearly. The grey area is that maybe she never actually said to him to stop or said "no", but in the first instance there was clearly a degree of approval given, but not in the second. As for making a stand against this, then I guess it's up to individuals and how they feel. Certainly if a guy does his time then in prison, for me, I don't see why he shouldn't be deprived of work. But being in a public position like this does make it a more difficult situation. I admire Charlie for taking a stand, though. Good for her. She's putting herself in the firing line of typical low level internet trolls so I hope she can handle them. Good to know that other people are also taking the same stance and she's not alone.

Very true, although that is more club specific.

I'm not saying if I like it or if I don't. It was plainly obvious to me that when it was introduced there was as immediate, noticeable drop in crowd levels.

I guess crowds have been slowly on the decline for a few years, but speedway was having a bit of a renaissance in the early 21st century. There were 2 moments that were real key moments for me. Two things that were introduced, and when you went the following season there was an instant, visible drop in crowd levels. One was when they introduced the Tactical Ride rule. The other was the 39.95 points limit. Both of these had a drastic effect and drove away many core supporters.

Japan did normal speedway until the mid 60s. It was then apparently banned because they saw the sliding as too dangerous. I've been to a couple of meetings in Japan. Must be about 10 years ago now. It's called Autorace and is raced, as you say, on tarmac. The racing is individual and it is very much a gambling sport there.

Blimey, if you start banning refs for inept handling of a meeting tgere wouldn't be any left!! Honestly, though, I don't see that as anything more than opinion on a ref's handling of a race. Even if, as you say, the ref should have excluded riders, it's not really a disciplining issue.

Nathan Greaves. Barely scored a point all year. Borrows a bike from Simon Gustafsson. Wins heat 2 and scores paid 8 from his 3 completed rides.

Facebook groups are what you make them. I've been loving the old pictures that have been put up lately. Anything that gets silly on there I just ignore.

I don't think the return of second halves would solve anything. Second halves weren't popular even when the sport was in it's heyday. I remember once they actually introduced some sort of competition for second halves (was it the Golden Sash or something like that?), with points being added up and so on, just to get people to hang around and watch, but most people still went home after the main match.

I like the idea of the leagues amalgamating an splitting into divisions with promotion and relegation. One problem with that might be the lack of riders to go round though. This is one reason we need double up riders, fast track riders and so on. If you were to make a league of 18 teams - as it once was - and then start putting the riders that currently ride in the UK into those teams, you are down to National League riders by the time you get to the reserves. But I say if there are enough riders to go round then amalgamate the leagues and have promotion and relegation. Have the same points limit in all leagues but have a rider average conversion between the leagues, so that if a rider drops down his average goes up or if he goes up a league his average drops. Same as now. Any rider from a relegated team can keep his higher league average if he stays with the same team so that it gives an incentive the better teams to be a "glamour" club in the higher league and give them a good chance of going back up. Not sure where the extra riders come from though! Maybe we should go back to fat old blokes with moustaches riding at reserve like we had in them there good old days.

You give up on speedway because Chris Harris qualified from the GP Challenge? Bit of a drastic decision that, isn't it?

Yeah. It depends where you look. I looked on Eurosport player and it wasn't showing. Looked on the actual Eurosport site and it was showing there. So I got rid of my post, but you quoted me damn you

I seem to remember they had a non World Championship Grand Prix series in the 70s and Morton actually did win it.

It's often said about Carter's tyres in 1982, and because Ivan Mauger said it then it's seen as gospel. The thing is, Carter was won his first 3 rides so his tyres couldn't have had too ngative an effect. And looked on for a second place until Penhall knocked him off. Then, of course, his head went totally, but I think that had Penhall been excluded in that race then Carter would have won the re-run and been on a maximum going into his last ride. So he certainly had it in him, but sometimes things just go against you. If he was ever going to win then it would have been that year. With regards Jessup, I never really saw him as World Champion material, but maybe that was because he rode for Reading.

Depends on the system. Using the ko system Gundersen would havewon a few by sneaking into the finals many times via the eliminators, then doing Nielsen in the final. Using the current format Nielsen would probably won them all and gone down as the undisputed greatest rider of all time that he should have.

If you agree he's innocent until proven guilty, why would you want him banned now when he's still innocent?

Not really a relevant argument as Darcy Ward is 22 and Nicki Pedersen won his first World title at 26.

Surely this should be a 2 minutes exclusion for the USA if they sent the wrong rider out,

They gained more than that. They had tac subs too. This was a very good performance by GB.