Grachan

Good win by Clivehitch. If only Ron Byford had remembered to use tacticals it could have been a different story. 1. Martin Ashby 2. Bob Kilby 3. Andrew Silver 4. Shawn McConnell 5. Phil Crump 6. Leigh Adams 7. Simon Stead!!

Difficult one this. I think it was a good thing at the start of the season in terms of team building. The top riders were distributed around and there were very close matches across the board. The problems came when teams wanted to change - Coventry being the obvious case. Maybe once the first change of average date is reached then a points limit could be set for team changes from that date on. I know that is just further complications to rules, but it isn't one that really effects supporters and, in particular, newcomers. All this makes it difficult to know which was to vote, but, once I've read the quation carefully, I'll vote to keep it because I suppose that is what I'd be doing.

It would be interesting to get his perspective on the 1973 KO Cup race with Peter Collins to see how the two compare.

That would be even more ridiculous than doubling them in my opinion as it's just further complications. At least double points is easy to remember! I think the argument in general against it isn't that it gives away too many points or is unfair in any way (it is, but no more than the TS rule). It's just that giving out double points for nothing other than being behind defies sporting logic. It's a question of Speedway's credibility more than anything. Personally, I always found the Tac Sub rule a bit of an embarassment too due to it only being available to the team behind, although at least the substitution concept wasn't as ludicrous as the Joker. In terms of closeness of results there isn't much difference between the two anyway. On the 3 occasions I've been through a programme this year to see what the likely result might have been I have reckoned that on 2 occasions the team that used the TR would have had a better result under the old TS rule and on the other occasion it was the same.

I think it's worded ok Phil, I just did it all in a bit of a rush without reading it properly. It's just inexcusable (copyright Dennis Sigalos, 1983). The TR rule is ridiculous.

I just voted YES by mistake, and meant NO. Is there any way of removing my vote or changing it? I feel dead silly now. The TR rule is ridiculous.

http://www.geocities.com/gam_noticeboard/shay83.html

You should know better than to question our Falcace on 80s speedway, Tigerblade!

I remember a second halfer at Swindon completely missing the fourth bend, wobbling about all over the place and finally going onto the centre green and ploughing through the flower beds as the track staff were forced to flee left, right and centre. Oh God, what was his name? Malcolm something. Holloway! That's it. Malcolm Holloway.

Sorry Norbold. Are you okay now? I didn't mean any harm. Honest. Very interesting site Jim. I looked at it earlier after locating this thread.

I've often wondered where New Cross Stadium was. I've just found out it was right next to Millwall FC, while searching for a some pictures to make a label for my Once A Jolly Swagman DVD! The Millwall history site might be interesting to some people. Try this page for starters: http://www.millwall-history.co.uk/the_den5.htm When did New Cross actually close down? I was surprised to see that the stadium was only demolished in 1975 and as far as I can see the land still hasn't been redeveloped. There were once plans for a Super Den that would have been built on the site of the old speedway stadium, but they fll through.

Apparently World Power Boat Champion Bruce Penhall used to dabble a bit in Speedway. Can't say I remember him though.

Not off to JCB Sports for a pair of football boots by any chance are we?

Wasn't Nigel Sparshott killed in a car crash a few years back?

I remember Richard Evans. He was a Swindon second-halfer at the same time as the legendary Melvin Soffe. I think he was part of the promotion team at Swindon a while back too.

Well done to Hans for winning. A marvellous 2-fingers to all who posted abuse to him recently. It looks like you've all inspired him on to greater things!

This is something else that is bugging me about this statement. What is being said here is that basically Hans cheated GB out of the World Cup by blocking Scott Nicholls. Therefore he is being seen as some sort of cheat etc. However, it would seem that if he had shown 'Karlsson no mercy on the outside' and helped GB instead he would be okay. It's complete double standards being displayed here. Hans Andersen isn't British any more than Peter Karlsson is. Giving statements like this to the press cetainly don't help what was already becoming a volatile situation.

I don't agree with Neil's comment here. To win the World Cup you have to defeat all the other teams over the course of the entire meeting. If he wanted a straight match race to decide the winner then he should be refelecting on the fact that if Scott hadn't pulled up earlier he would have got one.

I've just been reading the Yahoo groups list and it would appear that the 'breeze block' comment made on this forum has made the Danish press. It is also the main source quoted with regards to the apparent death threats that Hans Andersen has received. I'm not offering an opinion either way on this, but merely stating what seems to be the case.

The forum isn't endorsing throwing breeze blocks at anyone just because someone else posts it. Freedom of speech and all that!

Why, thank you Norbold. I'm not sure everyone else will agree though!

I saw this meeting on the live internet feed with Danish commentry, so I never saw all the Sky Sports allegations. I saw the final race and saw Scott Nicholls get stuck behind Hans Andersen on the first turn. Very disappointing, though I wasn't surprised to see Sweden win in the end as there was a feeling over the last round of races that they had stepped up a gear. I'm not a great fan of Hans Andersen. Sometimes I think his riding is extremely dangerous, and that hair style - whooo, no Hans. Don't like it. I have to say that this hysterical reaction to that last race is somewhat ludicrous to be honest, and I've just been to the link to his Guestbook and just think that the whole thing is getting a little bit silly. Maybe he shut off to help Peter Karlsson, maybe he didn't. I can't be sure as I just watched the race once. If he did, then I guess that's his perogative. If he wasnted a Scandinavian country to win and was prepared to do that, then that's up to him isn't it? He may ride for Ipswich, but he is a Scandinavian and he rode a perfectly legitimate corner. The fact is, if England had been good enough they would have come through to win. This is just a typical reaction to an English/British sporting defeat. Why does it always happen? Oh, we lost because of the ref. We lost because someone cheated us out of it. We lost because our shoes were too big. Need a scapregoat. Etc etc Blah blah blah blah blah. No. GB lost over 25 heats, not just one, and I was supporting them all the way. To come up with comments like throwing breeze blocks at him are offensive and plainly ridiculous.

I have to say I agree with that. When push came to shove, the Swedes stepped up a gear. Forget Hans Andersen - that's why they won. Is that the fault of the manager? That's debatable I guess, but wasn't it lovely (sarcasm) to watch another sporting event with England/GB fans looking dejected at the end?!

Why is it that people who criticise other people's use of English are always pretty hopeless at it themselves?

Interesting to see the Swindon team there as it's almost identical to the side that won the league 2 years later. It was obviously a young team and struggled, but it was allowed to mature into a great side over a couple of seasons. That just wouldn't happen these days. It would have no doubt been chopped and changed over the season and even more so over the following winter. Maybe there is a lesson there for impatient promoters (& supporters).