cyclone

Look here

Would his dad be Malcolm Riddell who rode for the Diamonds c. 1951 ?

Some of us are not viewing this forum all the time so you erroneously presumed I had been following events. Rather than admit that you made up porkies about what I stated, you come up with the above drivel. No wonder it is hard to sympathise with Tigers plight when you turn your jealous venom on Merlin for mentioning the fact that Wolbert had been asked before Sunday about his availability for Monday if needed. It is also speaks volumes of your knowledge of the regs by being strung along by Abbott who knew fully well that Wolbert could only replace McGowan if another Tiger in 2 - 5 was also missing Well he certainly hooked a dumb Weegie this time

Aye X-Man just make up porkies as you go along. Like to quote which alleged earlier post I made regarding the highlighted ? Or should we make allowances for you being unable to comprehend the truth

It was plainly and unambiguously stated in my post :- Glasgow were unsure earlier last week about whether McGowan and Branney would be available, hence why they took the precaution to enquire as to Wolbert's availability should both be unable to ride. But rather than accept this you go wittering on with petty insinuations about Merlin. Why not accept the reason why Kevin Wolbert mentioned this before Sunday. There was nothing improper in Glasgow making contingency enquiries in advance, what was coincidental was that Wolbert was drafted in as a guest for a different reason (Screen's concussion). What a sour faced lot some Glasgow fans on here really are, a Monarchs riders is drafted in to assist, and a respected Edinburgh fan gets accused of implying there "was something sinister going on." I'm afraid Wendy the only thing sinister here is your warped interpretation of what Merlin actually stated. Still I suppose it's only forums that Tigers fans believe they are capable of point scoring these days

Nothing sinister at all in Merlin's post, just as usual some paranoid Weegie ready to slag off Edinburgh again. Glasgow were unsure earlier last week about whether McGowan and Branney would be available, hence why they took the precaution to enquire as to Wolbert's availability should both be unable to ride. Of course Abbott conveniently ignores that Branney was also doubtful (perhaps still smarting from being found out about Andrew Tully's apology, that never was ) so stirs it and an X-rated Weegie takes the bait

Do not agree that you can overly interfere with riders accepting guest bookings - after all Wethers is guesting for Wolves on Monday, so it would be unfair to deny Wolbert earnings because you do not fancy the teams invovlved at Brough. I can appreciate where a rider has heavy schedule that it might put too much strain on man and machinery, but at the end of the day, the rider should be given option whether or not to accept a guest booking.

Afraid Birmingham at Brough on 6/9, so Lyons ruled out on 7 day rule

Unless he has had hamburgers for his supper tonight, perhaps Tigers should go for Kevin Wolbert as a guest replacement

Typical Weegie wimps - the Mighty have home a mtg on 3rd, then Stoke on 4th, before gate & go Borefield on 5th, and we aint complaining

Tony Childs in his early days second halving at Norwich was listed in the programmes as Anthony Childs and IIRC came on the scene in the late 1950s.

Stand by to receive pelters from the visiting fans this week

It has been reported that Ryan Fisher was unable to obtain a travel visa for Russia in time and has therefore withdrawn from Togliatti also. Noticed that Legault has been listed for all three of Newport's fixtures for 2/7 - 4/7

The athletics track was indeed the adjacent New Meadowbank stadium (nb it was called New Meadowbank in the sixties before the Commonwealth Stadium was developed later) and if you stood on the apex of the third/fourth bend you would see athletes practising whilst the rest of us were enjoying the speedway.

Apologies, I should have deliberated over the copy longer Alf Medcalf is indeed listed (reg no. 34 on a Douglas) and 34.92 has been pencilled next to his name. And to think I had double rations of carrot with my lunch yesterday !!

I assume that was a tongue in cheek comment I would imagine that there could be instances where a rider who overcooks a bend would be able to rectify the situation with the aid of rear brakes. If rear brakes were not going to be used, why have them fitted in the first place ? My personal criteria is anti-clockwise, loose surface (material is immaterial ) , oval/round shape, less than 601 yards per lap, motorcycles with no brakes, under 500cc. As thing stand, I still favour High Beech on 7/4/1928 as the first Speedway meeting in the U.K.

A friend has kindly provided me with a copy of the programme for the High Beech meeting held on 9th April at 3pm. The notes/information printed for both 7/4 & 9/4 programmes are identical, save for the “next meeting” dates. The list of officials are also identical. Mr W. P. B. Pugh(Digger ??) was designated as Machine Inspector, and I wonder if it would have been feasible to combine this duty with a riding role during meetings. The event format is also the same, except that whereas for 7/4, 5 laps were specified, there is no indication in 9/4 as to the number of laps per race. For 9/4 events, the additional annotation “and Championships” has been printed for each class. Regarding the list of competitors, neither Digger Pugh nor Alf Medcalf are listed for the 3pm meeting, nor have they been included in the pencilled results entered.The only notable addition to the 9/4 card appears to be P.L.B. Wills (Lionel ?) in the up to 500cc Championships. Do not know if this clarifies or confuses matters further, but it does provide further documentary evidence.

Personally whilst I can go along with your view regarding surface and anti-clockwise direction, I would not classify it as Speedway if the machines are fitted with brakes, which you ignore to mention, as was the case at Droylsden. Oh and btw, 4 valve machines did appear in the early days in the UK and I think Ian Paterson, the proprietor of the finest Speedway Museum (Cinder to Shale), might have one

Colin Watson was amongst the competitors on 7/4 and in fact won the 500cc final. Whether he refrained from broadsiding in that meeting but decided to change his style two days later can neither be proved or disproved, but what do you think ? Likewise is it not possible that the Motor Cycle journalist who posted the report for 9/4, was not present at 7/4 ? FYI the programme of 7/4 states that "Kings Oak Speedway have secured the services of Mr W. P. B. Pugh of Australia as Trainer, Instructor and Technical Advisor on the track; he is also retained as rider. " Perhaps one could surmise that the likes of some of those who appeared on 7/4 (Colin Watson, Gus Khun, Bill Bragg, Fred Ralph, Jimmy Stevens) had already received guidance/training prior to this meeting on how to broadside from Pugh ? The event format for the meeting of 7/4 was the template used in subsequent meetings, namely:- 5 lap races, up to 250 c.c. Class, Up to 350 c.c. Class (heats, semi finals & final), Up to 500 c.c. Class (heats, semi finals & final), Sidecar Classes. There was a S. T. Glandfield listed for the 500 c. c. events. I was wondering if this was actually Stanley Glanfield (despite different spelling) who is referred to by yourself as being present at a meeting held at Davies Park on 17/12/1927. If so, one would have expected him to attempt broadsiding based on his Australian experience. I understand why you are basing your assumption on the Motor Cycle report. However based on the documentary evidence of the actual programme of 7/4, I cannot see any validation of your presumption that this was a practice. From my knowledge of Speedway practices, they do not have the panoply of officials required for an actual officially sanctioned meeting, nor do they issue an official programme in the same format as used for normal public meetings and charge for it.

Afraid I am not convinced by the article that the Easter meeting at High Beech was the first real speedway meeting held in Britain. Why am I sceptical ? Well Mr Jacobs acknowledges that the first meeting held on the newly redesigned track took place on Saturday 7th April (at 3pm btw). Furthermore an Official Programme was issued for this event, which as far as I am aware does not refer to it as being a practice !!. A full list of officials are listed (timekeeper, judges, machine inspector, track stewards, marshalls, clerk of the course, etc.), together with comprehensive details of competitors and events which were printed. It also carries the following :- "Next Meetings :-Monday April 9th at 10 a.m. and 3 p.m" I also believe there was a brief reference in "Motor Cycling" of 11th April to the meeting of 7th April, 1928. Even if this meeting was less publicised than the Easter Monday events, I am puzzled as to why Mr Jacobs concludes that this was probably a practice event. IMO the existence of a Programme for 7/4/1928 which is of the same design/layout as subsequent issues at High Beech in 1928, and was also sold for twopence, would indicate that the first real speedway meeting in Britain was held at High Beech on April 7, not April 9 as referred to in the article in the Speedway Star.

Was the article in the FIM publication attributed to a named fiction writer ? Perhaps the FIM should be made aware of the error of their ways by a well respected historian on here

Was there not a different Andy Buck who rode for Teesside, mainly at reserve ? Just wondered as he was based in the North East if it could be him instead. Think the was a guy called Trevor Buswell who rode for non league Brafield, circa 1966, who was a serving PC at the time.

Think Mann rode for Glasgow 1929/30 edit: confirmed Arthur Mann rode for Glasgow 1929 & 30, and probably 1931 also

Probably one the most "unfortunate" names for a speedway rider would be Ken Last who rode for Norwich in the 60's

I was also at that meeting. tbh he was so far off the pace that I was not surprised that he never appeared again.