2026 and beyond

[mikebv]

8 minutes ago, IanBrannan said:

Speedway is fighting in the face of extremely challenging and unhelpful outside forces too. The list above kind of suggests it is speedway's fault or a lack of interest causing these clubs to shut down. I believe were it not for the lure of land development or one particular greyhound operator who dislikes speedway with a passion, the majority of those would still be running today. Wolves for example you cannot in a million years suggest was a failing prospect as a speedway team. Yes there are many things in speedway which could be improved, but the biggest and most complex issue is stadium ownership / land to race speedway.

Taking that list:

ARC Greyhound Racing have effectively shut down Wolves, Birmingham & Newcastle for various excuses. 

Land being sold for development has claimed: Coventry, Cradley, Lakeside, Rye House, Peterborough, Swindon, Stoke and Covid brought things to a head with Somerset which has also now been developed on part of the land. 

Eastbourne - Owners down want to run speedway

There are still tracks at Mildenhall and IOW, that's down to other decisions and personal arguments as to why they are not in the league, but the tracks are there. 

So as we can see, the big issue here before we get into the sport itself is land ownership. That is the reason why most of these clubs are no longer here. Birmingham would absolutely be running next year if the stadium hadn't been taken away, as for most of the rest of that list.  It is a massive problem, however just saying use it or lose it doesn't make a difference, the developers do not care even a tiny bit. They also don't  care about the letters of support or petitions which are sent in when a track is under threat. 

But there is good news, the Coventry appeal ruling is now a significant piece of case law, and it is going to make life an awful lot harder for people to do what they have done in the past again, without first providing a suitable alternative for a sporting venue. And that means not just whacking a 5 a side court down in place of a 100 year old speedway stadium. 

To this effect, I have only this week recorded a podcast with a man called Brian Connolly, he is a speedway fan but also a former solicitor and planning expert. He played a significant role in getting the team together to defend Coventry, and he's also had some success this week with Peterborough. He's also working on Rye House, Lakeside and Swindon.  

You can listen to it here https://pod.fo/e/3430a4  it is the 2nd part after the Poole stuff. 

It is interesting and shows the realities of what has gone on, and how there can be a way back for these tracks, but speedway has to learn to outsmart the developers, and we are getting there thanks to people like Brian and his contacts. 

There are many battles to be had in speedway but this is the biggest one, and hopefully the tide is turning, slowly. 

 

 

I accept all that Ian,

My point was more about how the sport would manage to fill these teams with riders of any decent standard nowadays, than if there was enough fan interest to keep the track going ..

However, on that point, it has to be recognised that at most of those tracks no more than 1500 regulars would have been impacted by any closure (and well under 1000 at some), which doesn't help the cause when it comes to gaining the traction needed to deliver a large level of local protest, and engaging those big numbers to get maximum publicity...

We can only hope that the last decade doesn't get repeated and Speedway can turn it's current fortunes around...

[IanBrannan]

2 hours ago, PersonalResponsibility said:

I have to say I didn't get the impression that the original post was suggesting it was speedway's fault, it was simply stating the reality.

While I agree with your general point, I don't think we should completely disregard "use it or lose it". Ultimately, it's been so easy for developers to claim the land and build on it, because we are a minority sport with a dwindling number of attendees.

It's not to say that they wouldn't have done the same anyway - it's their land after all - but how many tracks would've closed down if they had genuinely good attendances and were profitable for their landlords? I'm confident Newcastle would've survived, and would Eastbourne's owners turn down a healthy financial stream if it was available?

The sport just doesn't have the financial or political clout to even begin fending off any of these developers, never mind winning the battle against them. When you compare the number of football stadia that's been closed down and built on against the club's will, the difference is stark.

It sounds like some positive progress is being made with what you've mentioned, I would love more than anything for a real difference to be made. Ultimately, though, while it might not entirely be speedway's fault, or due to a lack of interest, that the clubs shut down, it's hard to say it didn't play a pretty big role. A successful, thriving sport is less likely to have their stadia and facilities taken away than one that's struggling.

 

But I think this is the root issue. People are talking about promoters and league structure and marketing, but the base cost of a stadium owned by someone else certainly impacts profitability, which impacts the budget so marketing and promotion take a hit, which these days is a considerable cost. Even getting leaflets printed isn't cheap, but reality is with social media you need to be on Meta platforms and there are no deals to be had, you pay what it costs. And then the owner shuts it down to sell it for housing. Newcastle the cost of stadium hire was astronomical, ARC wanted speedway out, they did it with Wolves which had great crowds. They are taking massive betting money from China, they don't care how many people come through the doors.
Perhaps speedway needs to embrace betting in some way. People talk endlessly about a "Barry Hearn figure", but there is absolutely no way he is going anywhere near speedway without betting being involved in some form. That is where the money is, and if you want to open to other markets, then that is an obvious route really.  

Edited 4 hours ago by IanBrannan

[PersonalResponsibility]

27 minutes ago, IanBrannan said:

But I think this is the root issue. People are talking about promoters and league structure and marketing, but the base cost of a stadium owned by someone else certainly impacts profitability. And then they shut it down to sell it for housing. Newcastle the cost of stadium hire was astronomical, ARC wanted speedway out, they did it with Wolves which had great crowds. They are taking massive betting money from China, they don't care how many people come through the doors.
Perhaps speedway needs to embrace betting in some way. People talk endlessly about a "Barry Hearn figure", but there is absolutely no way he is going anywhere near speedway without betting being involved in some form. That is where the money is, and if you want to open to other markets, then that is an obvious route really.  

I completely agree re. betting. I've said before that we have a sport that seems perfectly tailored for the modern generation, and I think that equally applies to betting. 4 riders, 15(+) races, so many opportunities to bet.

That Bet365 have gone to the time and expense of creating Virtual Speedway to allow people to gamble suggests that there is clearly some interest somewhere. Even a minority % levy flowing through into British speedway would surely be useful?

[IainB]

Betting was introduced some time back (noughties?) but just seemed to peter out for some reason probably another case of the sports authorities not grasping that particular nettle and working with the betting companies to onboard them as partners?

[IanBrannan]

1 hour ago, PersonalResponsibility said:

I completely agree re. betting. I've said before that we have a sport that seems perfectly tailored for the modern generation, and I think that equally applies to betting. 4 riders, 15(+) races, so many opportunities to bet.

That Bet365 have gone to the time and expense of creating Virtual Speedway to allow people to gamble suggests that there is clearly some interest somewhere. Even a minority % levy flowing through into British speedway would surely be useful?

I believe that was the whole reason the green helmet colour was introduced in the Sky days, the idea being you could use the Sky remote to bet on a helmet colour. But it never really went anywhere. I think it will happen sometime sooner or later, it's just how it all works and I guess safeguards as well towards people trying to rig it or play the system. As inevitably somebody will be along to ruin it for everyone at some point. 

[RS50]

1 hour ago, IainB said:

Betting was introduced some time back (noughties?) but just seemed to peter out for some reason probably another case of the sports authorities not grasping that particular nettle and working with the betting companies to onboard them as partners?

I can remember some betting at a track, many years ago. You had to guess the finishing order, by helmet colour, and the decimal point of the race time.

Always seemed like, although speedway knowledge would help for the first part, the second was just random luck.

Was not a success so the bookies gave it up.

I personally thought at the time, that if races got delayed, so bets could be put on, that I would give up following speedway.

[mikebv]

17 minutes ago, RS50 said:

I can remember some betting at a track, many years ago. You had to guess the finishing order, by helmet colour, and the decimal point of the race time.

Always seemed like, although speedway knowledge would help for the first part, the second was just random luck.

Was not a success so the bookies gave it up.

I personally thought at the time, that if races got delayed, so bets could be put on, that I would give up following speedway.

The dog bowl at Belle Vue had a betting box where you could bet on each race...

Wasn't a well known betting company from what I remember...

Didn't last too long, so presume not enough interest. 

[IainB]

1 hour ago, RS50 said:

I can remember some betting at a track, many years ago. You had to guess the finishing order, by helmet colour, and the decimal point of the race time.

Always seemed like, although speedway knowledge would help for the first part, the second was just random luck.

Was not a success so the bookies gave it up.

I personally thought at the time, that if races got delayed, so bets could be put on, that I would give up following speedway.

 

48 minutes ago, mikebv said:

The dog bowl at Belle Vue had a betting box where you could bet on each race...

Wasn't a well known betting company from what I remember...

Didn't last too long, so presume not enough interest. 

I remember on course betting at Cov and Sheffield... and Bees were sponsored by Victor Chandler for a while and SkyBet were also league sponsors for a short time