woofers

What's the point of rule 10.28 ? both Worralls are out with bikes displaying the same number (2).

Just read the report referred to. Looks like riders and team managers didn't know the rules. I tend to agree that some rules are confusing because they get "added to" instead of rewritten when they get changed, however it should not be that difficult for riders and team managers to understand them - they can be easily found and the chapters are clearly headed into applicable responsibilities, with changes to previous years in bold type. Surely one of the first things you do either as a rider, or any official, is understand the rules you are operating to ? I don't agree that referees apply all the rules all the time, otherwise some meetings just wouldn't run - how many times have you seen the mandatory Countdown Clock at TV meetings (rule 15.2.4), and why do so many riders ignore rule 12.4 (necks must be covered)? Woffinden falls foul of rule 10.5 (name on seat or mudguard), and every time an Elite League riding comes out on someone else's bike he probably breaks rule 10.28. I'm not suggesting these rules are good and have to enforced, but rules, like law, that aren't or can't, be enforced are usually bad rules / laws.

No point asking him to stop, he revels in it. He was asked before, on air, but just repeated the "f" word. Sure, lots of people use bad language, but very few (if any) high profile personalities do so when being interviewed. It certainly shows a lack of respect towards those listening to him. He seems to enjoy it, it's another sign of his attention seeking, (and he displays enough of those attributes already). Sad, really. He really is in need of a guiding management and PR hand. In the meantime the only way to change this, is to stop interviewing him completely, (my preferred option) or when he does swear, just curtail the interview with a brief "thanks Tai". Perhaps we could petition Steve Brandon, or BT / Sky on this basis?

Oh deep joy, now that little spat about identities has been cleared up perhaps we could get back on topic. Over 24 hours since I suggested that "those in the know" could offer a hint as to the "real" reason behind Mr Woffindens strop, the only response has been from TWK who came up quickly with, training schools, personal matters, team selection and riding order as potential reasons for immediately walking out of the national team. Now, aside from personal matters, which I suggest Mr Woffinden would have been better advised to try and resolve quietly behind the scenes, walking out for any of the other 3 reasons does seem a trifle petulant, arrogant and misinformed. Surely the team selection and riding order are matters for the team manager? Of course team members should be involved in this and their views sought and accommodated where possible - but a resigning matter if you don't get your own way? Similarly, if training schools are an issue, wouldn't it be better to work with the "authorities" to seek a solution rather than, "right, you're not doing it my way, so I'm not riding for you" attitude. Frankly, I am not surprised Mr Woffinden hasn't given the real reasons for his walk out, because at the moment no one can come up with anything credible that would justify his actions and his PR would drop even lower. If it's the money he would come over as greedy, and if it's any of the others, they would show him up to be a bit of a spoilt brat who thinks he can run the whole show. The grown ups among us would surely laugh and shake our heads at such short sighted behaviour. For all his talent on a motorbike, he seriously needs some professional management and PR advice.

Well so far no has come up with anything plausible besides the money, and the rider himself said he wasn't going to be "mugged of" in future. What else, other than the financial issue, could you be "mugged" of ? For all those posters categorically stating it wasn't money, give us a hint of what else it could possibly be, you little teasers !

That's a shame, Sunday racing is no no for me as it takes too much out of the day, and last year the Sunday meetings dragged on far to long. A double header could take forever to complete.

If the prize money allocation is the source of all this discontent, (and I have no reason not to believe Steve Shovlars post, he has been a fairly reliable source over the years), then it highlights a couple of basic 'management' errors - 1. The allocation of prize money should have been understood, and agreed, before the event. (Most people go to work knowing the basis of the remuneration they are going to receive). 2. Instead throwing a hissy fit, would it not have been more sensible to suggest discussions be held to change the prize money allocations in future. Basically, I support the equal allocation of prize money but it has to be recognised that in this instance we have a rider who is considerably better than the rest of the team and is scoring proportionately higher than the others. A relatively simple solution could be along these lines - An amount to be shared equally and the balance to be shared on a points scored basis, e.g 5% to the reserve, 55% equally between the 4 main team riders, 40% in proportion to points scored.

Good idea from Kevin Tatum - "if you move at the start, you go back 15 metres". The rule is quite clear, riders have to remain stationary. A simple change to implement, and it would quickly put an end to rolling and anticipating the tapes rising. It would also do away with this 'referees discretion' whether to call a race back or let it go, as I believe he does not actually have the option to do this within the rules.

OK, I accept that the rules I have mentioned are not in any way critical to the quality of racing we witness, however I don't understand the rationale for these if they aren't applied, so what's the purpose of - 10.5 All motorcycles will have the rider's name displayed on the rear of the seat or on the mudguard 10.28 Riding numbers, these are mandatary for all EL Meetings, and optional in the PL and NL......etc Last week Buczcowski (No 3) rode on Newmans bike at Swindon displaying '7' on the bike, and at Wolverhampton last night Wright (No 6) came out on Sedgmens bike displaying '2'. In these examples, has the rider broken the above rules and, if so, what would be the penalty? A fine? Some riders ignore rule 12.4, (a riders hair and neck between the helmet and race suit must be covered), is there an official who should be monitoring this ? Has anyone witnessed the 'mandatory' Countdown Clock at TV meetings (rule 15.2.4) ? I can't recall seeing one at any of the televised league meetings. If there isn't any point to these, perhaps they could be removed from the 2017 regulations.

Yep, just what Speedway is crying out for....a bit of humour. The only type of humour on display last night was .... farce. I think we all, including the referee, could determine that Doyle wasn't giving 100% at that time, tantamount to cheating I'd say. We need a referee like the lady at Event 1, who was prepared to make a brave, and correct decision.

Will be interesting to see the attendance level for this one, I think the Saturday evening fixtures have held up OK so far this year.

Should've excluded and fined Doyle for not racing, if both options are within the rules. Send a message that we don't want to see this and it isn't going to be tolerated. Better still, scrap the joker option completely.

We know that, but New Science doesn't appear to......

British Speedway Regulations 2016 - 5.4.4 No Motorcycle may be ridden on the Infield nor in the Pits (except the designated area)

Which grandstand? We were on the start / finish straight and as soon as Perks made his "move" we could only see one outcome, the one the ref called correctly in our view. As was the exclusion of Danny Ayres in Heat 13, (which was shaping up to be the best race of the night). A very entertaining meeting, Eagles weren't at their best from the gate, not usually a problem but Jake Knight seemed to be down on power and Adam Ellis should have moved to the outside a lap earlier when challenging Shanes, he would have got him, but far play to James Shanes, a great win for him. Also pleased for Tom Brennan, some smart moves from the youngster and he looked quite comfortable and stylish on the bike. Now, a couple of gripes - I like the riders coming round on the concrete stock car track, high fiving or a gentle wave with the fans at a speed of something just above tick over pace. The last few meetings have seen riders coming round at too great a speed, sometimes with reduced upper body protection, and last night Ellis Perks thought it a good idea to pull a wheelie by the busy start / finish line - really ? Consider if anything had gone wrong, the barriers would offer what protection to spectators ? I'll not say much more, only that someone, management, referee, clerk of the course, whoever need to seriously look at this. Young men, adrenaline and powerful machines, combined, are all good reasons to have a sensible rule about this. Our announcer is not without confidence and it is nice that he is building a rapport with fans but I feel a bit more seriousness (the heat 15 incident) and bit less "bloke-ishness" (where's Coventry ? / Birmingham ?) on occasions would help. Finally if he could just ease up on the vocal HRT it would make a massive difference. (The high rising terminal (HRT), also known as upspeak, uptalk, rising inflection, or high rising intonation (HRI), is a feature of some variants of English where declarative sentence clauses end with a rising-pitch intonation). Oh, and just for our Birmingham friend, (you know who you are), Rye House, Birmingham and Kent have all taken a point from Eastbourne at Arlington so I don't think Eastbourne as NL champions due to our "trick track" advantage is as much as a forgone conclusion as you would like to believe.

Good to hear that Jade is OK, there were some awkward moments immediately after the incident which were quite alarming. I was impressed with Danny Ayres, have always thought he would be a useful addition to the Eagles if an opportunity arose. Less impressive was the reaction of some of the Eastbourne crowd when he hit the fence yards from the finish line in heat 15, particularly the 2 chaps at the back of the start / finish grandstand giving the vigorous "handshakes" towards him as he rode past. Given what we had witnessed earlier in the evening I think the gestures said more about themselves than anything else.

And who might the 6 be that turned down the opportunity to be No 1 at Eastbourne? Wonder why?

Would be nice if you could give it a rest now mate, we get the picture. Of course it would also be nice to known who proposed play off's for the NL and what the voting for accepting the proposal was.

Precisely why the rules need need to be specific and re-written - why not say 'non -Commonwealth' and 'foreign professional league' in the rules, it's not a lot to change is it ? Past practice .....hmmm, you just know that phrase, when referring to a rule, is going to cause a problem somewhere along the line, and here it is. 19.9.2.5 is a requirement relevant to the NL - I thought we were talking about riders moving up from the NL to the PL?

OK, let's try again. Cat in the Hat - I can't see where Speedway Regulations 18.6 refer to English or English passports, so where is this 'Englishman on a 3.00 pt average' coming from ? Halifax - how do you get that 'every rider coming out of the NL could be a 7'? To be a 7 you need to have either ridden in a Professional Speedway League (Cat 2) or be Commonwealth or USA and new to British Speedway (Cat 3b). On the basis that the NL isn't a Professional Speedway League it's clear that Cat 2 can't apply, and the riders coming out of the NL wouldn't be 'new to British Speedway' (Cat 3b) would they? I am glad you accept it needs to be more specific, that's why we have a problem here (and probably why similar issues arise regarding other rules). Playing devils advocate, you are using Cat 4 (NL rider) quite legitimately, to say it's a 3 pt average, other promoters are using Cat 3a, (not ridden in a Professional League), quite legitimately to argue for a 5 pt average. Unfortunately it's not clear cut however much you argue it. The rules need to be specific and so should be re-written.

Let's look at this logically- Cat 1 does not apply (averages) and Cat 2 probably does not apply (on the basis that the National League is not a Professional Speedway League) Cat 3b refers to riders "new to British Speedway" - so that's not the case is it ? Now, this is where Speedway rules are poorly drafted because 3a and 4 overlap. Cat 4 is clear in that it applies to riders who have riden in the National Development League, (which is not a Professional Speedway League?) Cat 3a applies to riders not riding in a Professional Speedway League (Have we established that the National Development League is not a Professional Speedway League?) It would therefore appear that Cat 3a can apply to riders who have riden in the National Development League as well as them being classified as a Cat 4. You take your choice.... Confusing?

It certainly did, a big bang as he came over the start/finish line, no power to get round turn 1, so nowhere to go but the air fence. Real shame as he was flying and certainly going to smash the NL track record. Although there was a smattering of hoorays they were in response to the point dropped and nothing to do with Adam falling. Where I was there was genuine admiration for the way he was riding and the pace he was on, all from Eastbourne fans..

Can't believe you'd risk the future of live speedway at Arlington for speedway on TV. It's on satellite TV so presumably you have the recording facility, why not record the GP and watch it the next day, it also gives you the option of fast forwarding through the adverts, track grading, analysis and repeats if you wish. No brainier, Saturday evening easily preferable to dusty, drawn out Sunday afternoons.

Still waiting to here what the "something or other" was ?

The new guy on the microphone is quite good, he is consistent in delivering the line up, results and race time....... BUT he doesn't need to SHOUT ALL THE TIME !! ....the microphone does a perfectly good job in amplifying the voice you know.