Fourentee

Apologies for being off-topic, but to address that specific point two things made the Pink untenable (it was the last surviving West Midlands publication of its type anyway when it closed after the 2008-09 season): the internet and Sky. More and more people were migrating online to get their news and Sky moved kick-off times away from the traditional Saturday 3pm. In the Pink's final season, West Bromwich Albion (then as now in the Premier League) played 14 matches in September, October and December and fewer than half started at 3pm on a Saturday. Great days working on the Pink, mind, absolutely manic but a lot of fun. And a 90-year run for a publication is not bad going, surely?

And that's the simplified version. You should have seen the draft! Rather think that's why it's online, where there's a bit of space, rather than in the newspaper!

Honest, though!

E&S also had a piece on Wolves team building in which Adams felt the play-offs were "a distinct possibility". Asked about whether the side represented a Plan A, Plan B, Plan C or whatever (presumably like most promotions, Wolves in the winter have what they consider to be an optimum line-up if they land all their targets, then the next best thing and so forth) he said it was a Plan B from which he hoped to get Plan A results. Plus online, CVS view on the heat leader list: http://www.expressandstar.com/sport/other-sport/speedway/2016/01/13/wolves-owner-defends-heat-leader-list/

CVS view on the heat leader list: http://www.expressandstar.com/sport/other-sport/speedway/2016/01/13/wolves-owner-defends-heat-leader-list/

Depends on the remit (I appreciate you're talking specifically about next year's final). In general terms, and this is not a kick against Rosco because I don't know how the parameters of the job were put to him, I would like to think the job enabled -- nay, required -- the manager to have strong and coherent views across the board concerning the organisation and structure of British speedway, how to develop British riders and somehow return the national team to the top of the tree. That's a far-reaching brief and the GB manager, for me, who seemed to have the surest hand on the tiller was Rob Lyon.

Hostage to fortune there, Steve!

Not to my knowledge, which is rather the point.

Gosh, I think my irony meter just went off...

Must have been my doppelganger!

I think in that case one would need to hold a relatively benevolent view of the word at the centre of the issue, which I certainly do not. But I take the point you make.

I'd been wondering when someone might point that out!

Precisely why one should pick one's words with some care. One wouldn't want others to misinterpret the meaning, would one?

Well, as mentioned earlier, we will have to agree to differ on it. I suspect that neither of us is going to shift from our current position and at least we've had a calm and rational discussion about it ('calm' and 'rational' not being words I bandy about too often on these pages!).

I think it fair to say that it's hardly my interpretation alone. Surely you must acknowledge the widespread pejorative overtones? As a rule of thumb, is it a term you'd be happy to use to somebody's face? Edited for iffy spelling.

Well mate, and much as I respect you, I'm afraid that on this one we're going to have to differ. Context, as you rightly remark, is everything. The context in this case is that SCB, by his own admission -- actually declaration would be a more accurate term -- chose a specific term for his thread title purely to draw attention to it. I certainly got worked up about it. I set out my argument in post 291 in the Jon Cook thread and at times became so emotional that I found it difficult to type accurately; if that makes me an attention seeker, so be it. For the record, I don't support a ban. The term used was, in my opinion, gratuitous, insulting, boorish and has no place in a modern society. Its use has lowered SCB in my estimation (not, rightly, that he should care about that).Through gritted teeth I defend his right to use it. Just don't expect me to be happy about it.

As posted above by bruno they did, but it was a blink and you missed it moment.

I think you'll find SCB has indicated that he deliberately used the title he did in order to attract attention to the thread. I find it highly unlikely, to put it at its mildest, that he would have chosen the term in ignorance of the pejorative use it attracts. Edited for spelling.

I won't be joining the howl of outrage over SCB's use of what I consider to be an obnoxious term of abuse. I won't be joining the demands for a 'holiday'. I understand (but disagree with) the reason he put forward for his original choice of title thread. Take a read through his output down the years and it is surely clear that he loves the sport and has strong views on it. And I defend his right to free speech. That being so, I trust he and others may appreciate the genuine pain caused by his choice of language. As the adoptive father of a blind 23-year-old with Downs Syndrome, I take the greatest exception to the term under discussion. I am not looking for pity or sympathy -- my son enjoys a happy and fulfilling life, has a work placement on a farm, is learning the piano, attends drama and dance sessions and plays a lot of organised sport. But what I will say is that when out with him in public I watch like the proverbial hawk how other people interact with him. The vast majority are fine and a pleasure to meet. Society has, in my opinion, moved on hugely in its attitude to the disabled. But rudeness and slights will be challenged by me on his behalf because he cannot do so himself. I don't want to be po-faced, sanctimonious, holier-than-thou or take some kind of facile moral high ground. But I should be failing my son were I not to take issue with the gratuitous use of the term as an insult. And failing my son is something I try to avoid.

Fair point. I remain hopeful.

A character for all the right reasons. I well recall the day at Workington when Glasgow were the visitors. The centre green had a number of nations' flags planted in it and during the parade and rider introductions he walked up to each flag and inspected it carefully. Upon arriving at the Scottish saltire he removed it, carefully spread it out on the grass...and wiped his boots on it.

Which, presumably, is why only two of the side survive for the 2016 version...

A much maligned rider. I think I recall a less than whole-hearted effort at Monmore once when he was about to be axed by his side (Lakeside? My memory is very untrustworthy). But on the whole I always regarded KK as a confidence rider, one for whom the first ride set the tone.

He does in some quarters: This is January 2009 which turned out to be quite a year for Wolves. http://www.expressandstar.com/news/2009/01/13/freddie-has-ace-up-his-sleeve/

Good point well made. Hamill had a very good 2006 and actually by no means a bad 2007, despite injuries finally catching up with him. Always excellent in the pits too; the kind of rider who enthuses his teammates. Wolves 2006 were a fascinating team, a "very nearly" side. PK had an imperious season, Hamill was classy and Lindgren beginning to emerge. It really needed just one from the second strings/reserves to come through a little more and it could have been quite something. Mind you, without going all nostalgic, there were some tremendous riders around in other sides then as well. Ten years on the whole British speedway product is looking rather devalued, but that's another story for another thread.