Halifaxtiger

. Well said indeed If its any consolation (and it won't be) he is anything but the only one who is like that. I didn't think it was a bad meeting and had a bit of sympathy for the track staff given that it was a very warm sunny afternoon and evening and there was a breeze blowing across the track. There was enough passing to suggest that it could be done. Rye House were solid with no stand out performer, although Ben Morley's important win in heat 8 deserves credit. Thomsen was hugely impressive but the rest of the Tigers were not. Harrison did a job and Marc Owen should not be criticised but heat 13 aside, Wolbert beat only Morley and a slowing Kennett and Compton and Henry took almost all their points from Brendan Johnson. Given the weakness of the Rye team, they should have got a lot closer.

Yes, that's right. Its signposted when you get off the A38 so you won't go far wrong. Cracking little track.

Stoke have had such breaks for years - I can certainly remember it happening at least 10 seasons ago. It is annoying but I don't think anything can be done about it because I don't think some sort of sunglasses are the answer. They might lessen the impact of direct sunlight but they don't stop it altogether and there's clearly a risk to rider safety. The only answer is if you have such a break is to ensure that the rest of meeting proceeds as speedily as possible. Very few like standing around necessarily.

Eastbourne & Plymouth too.

The racing wasn't brilliant by any means (although I certainly take GC's point above - it was a sunny, windy day and they are always a nightmare for track curators) but the improvement in the track surface was a very visible one. I daresay many people do have issues with the promotion, but it seems that a lot of that stems from what I regard as an unavoidable drop into the NL. True, on occasion comments made on here haven't helped the situation but the fact that the gate was way, way bigger than last season suggests that some people might put their support of the team above their dislike of the management and that the improved track and team have tempted quite a few back. The blame for poor teams and poor tracks can reasonably be laid at the door of the promotion, but equally they should get the credit if matters are turned round, as here. If it was the case that attendance of speedway meetings was defined first by respect for members of the BSPA I suspect that there would be a few stadiums that would be very light on paying spectators.

It seems to me that its a financial gamble not to try and improve the track. I think everyone realised that the poor surface last season was at least partly due to the lack of time available to build a proper racing circuit. This season, there's no excuse whatsoever. If the meeting I saw against Mildenhall on Bank Holiday Monday is typical, then I am surprised that Kent still attract the numbers that they do because it reflected everything that is wrong with speedway in this country. A 3 hour meeting punctuated by ridiculous and unnecessary delays (although once there was a threat of the curfew being breached things went along at a very brisk pace), a simply dreadful track surface with the chalk base showing after a few races, crap racing and the appalling sight of a rider involved in a crash being forced to walk the length of the straight because the ambulance could not be taken out on to the track. That, to me, was compounded by the arrogant and patronising refusal to comment on the criticism made on the pages of this forum by the club's press officer. While I probably don't have the same reasons for not going again as Nikko, the result is exactly the same.

The newsman and the boozer spring to mind but I am sure they are not alone. Lets put it this way and see how many of those who have been critical will now come on and give the Stoke promotion the credit for putting some hard work in on the track and putting a decent side out. Then of course they'd be commenting on the fact that the gate on Saturday was massively increased on last season. That, surely, marks out those who are fair and objective in their remarks from those who are unreasonable and subjective. In my view, those in the first category are worth listening to, those in the second are not.

No, you're not, mate - in my experience, you're like me in that you call it how you see it. That might be praise or criticism, but at least its objective and unbiased. There's no way one of those intent on bashing the Stoke promotion will give them the slightest bit of credit about anything and that's what means their opinions are absolutely valueless. At the moment, I suspect, they are choking on their own venom.

All the Stoke axe to grind knockers look away now. They have a good side and one that I would say is only going to improve - definitely play off material. Very impressed with Shuttleworth, given his lack of experience. Mildenhall - Jacobs aside, who never looked like being beaten - were disappointing. That's the second time I have seen them under achieve. There wasn't much passing but the track was way, way better than some of the occasions when I have been in the past and I am sure I heard one of the Mildenhall riders ask what had happened to the bumps. Bit more of a racing surface for the future, but all credit to the Stoke promotion as they certainly seem to have put some effort in to addressing the criticism they have received. Definitely worth another visit Perhaps the promise of the team and the improved track was why the attendance was probably 3 times bigger than the last time I went. On a final note, best wishes to James McBain. That crash was a bad one, and a head injury is always the one that gives most cause for concern.

I don't think for one second that teams 'are keen on murdering Scunny every week' at all. I think it is more a case of an inevitable result of the team that Scunthorpe put out. They aren't reaping what they have sown. They are reaping what Scunthorpe have sown. I have little doubt that next season there will be a minimum points limit in the NL to prevent the financial damage that the Stags are inflicting on the rest of the league. I don't agree with what Scunthorpe are doing and maintain that they are doing it at the expense of the rest of the league and at little cost - and almost certainly at a profit - to themselves. Its very difficult to argue with what you have said there, though. The use of two guests was absolutely unnecessary and at least one MDL rider should have been given an opportunity.

Mr Godfrey. Done it a few times when I have been at EWR...........without any effect on the official whatsoever.

If Ostergaard hadn't taken out Dryml twice Peterborough would have won. Cracking meeting, with the highlight a brilliant heat 15

I wasn't aware that watching the NL meeting was compulsory. So for £1 more than Peterborough you can leave after the PL match.

Having done a bit of texting myself, I can appreciate DD's point to a degree. When you provide a service (and it does affect your enjoyment of a match) and then someone disagrees with your view it is somewhat annoying. That is particularly the case where Plymouth is concerned, because I know Sue has had trouble getting texters in the past. Having said that, when someone has taken issue with one of my texts in the past I have simply put it down to them having a different opinion (which is anything but unheard of) and don't regard it as a big issue.

I certainly don't think that the strength of the comments made by the individual concerned was justified but, to me, you have to look not just at those comments but the person making them. What he is is so rabidly and viciously biased against Stoke Speedway that, again to me, his remarks count for very little. Lets face it, f Stoke swept the board in the NL, won all the awards available regarding the track, announced a huge stadium development, a massive sponsorship and their elevation to the EL, he still wouldn't have a good thing to say about them. True, there maybe some who aren't aware just how big an axe he has to grind but anyone who reads a Stoke thread or knows about NL speedway almost certainly will. When my old mate Vog is critical of any aspect of Stoke Speedway the promotion should listen and, if possible, respond. He's a passionate fan without an agenda and just wants the best for his team. Comments by Mr Newsman, however, can be ignored, ridiculed or laughed at for the subjective spite that they are. I am not sure what I am taking for granted but I fully take (and agree with) your point about supporting the team and not the management. I certainly wouldn't go to Mildenhall, for example, if my choice was based solely upon my view of the promotion. I don't agree totally about just having a club that runs because that takes away the responsibility of the promotion to do their best to ensure that the track is a success. All too readily in British Speedway, promotions have an arrogant and contemptuous 'take what you are given and be grateful' attitude towards paying spectators and that's not on - speedway is not just entertainment, its a business and, as in all businesses, those running it should make every effort to attract paying customers and I am not convinced - and I have many examples of this - that they all do. I would say Stoke have been guilty of that in the past but the past is just that - the past. It is very pleasing to read Malcolm's comments about the track and their attempts to tackle it because Loomer Road can be one of the best in the country. Throw in a good team - and they are dark horses for me - and you have the ingredients for a very successful season indeed. Leicester, however, is an example of a promotion not just disagreeing with the overwhelming opinion of spectators that there is a problem with the track but refusing to accept that the problem exists at all. That, to me, is a one way ticket to disaster and should the track close it would be totally unreasonable to point fingers at those who have stopped or refused to attend whilst absolving the promotion of any responsibility at all.

And yet is the promotion that put that team out and, according to what I am told, the track at the meeting at Loomer Road the other week was much improved. Lets cut them a bit of slack. I have been pretty critical of Stoke but if they turn things around a bit I'll certainly give credit where credit is due and its a pity that others can't do the same. I am actually quite looking forward to getting down there at some point. I think what people have to realise is that the level at what a team races is dictated largely by the gates they attract. I doubt if there has been a team that has dropped down a level that hasn't had to, so Stoke's move to the NL was almost certainly forced upon them by circumstances. While I can understand people not attending if they have an issue with the promotion, I really don't know why some will not go simply because the speedway is at NL rather than PL level. NL speedway is just as good as PL and, on many occasions, a lot better.

There was certainly a serious hole on the first bend and ones on the second and third bends too, I think. The only thing is I didn't think it affected the quality of the racing too much - that's definitely one of the best meetings I have seen this season. One think I didn't mention was the quality of the presentation. Graham Hambly has always been one of the more professional announcers (apart that slip in heat 4 when he outraged everyone) but I thought the chap on the centre green was also pretty good although his choice of music - 'What shall we do with a drunken sailor ?' - might not be to everyone's taste. I have little time for mascots but at least Neville the Devil gets involved. The sight of him riding round on a Chopper with a big flag on the back during the parade lap brought a smile even to my taciturn features. What with the excellent presentation, the kids all getting involved, the big effort by the promotion to attract fans and some very good entertainment Plymouth deserve to succeed. Fingers crossed they do.

They have been inconsistent - you only have to look at Rasmus Jensen's scores to see that - but I think they are improving. Simota will benefit from riding at no 2 and having the pressure of a heat leader role taken off him, Roynon hopefully will get some confidence back (good from the starts last night but hesitant after that) and Benko will be way better than Webster, who wasn't just poor but looked out of control. Whatever the case, I think there will be some top quality entertainment at SBA this season. If you haven't been, my advice is to give it a try because it is one of the best racing tracks in the country

I could be very sarcastic here but won't. Yes, I did. He did fine and will give you the top end power you have been lacking. You have to remember that that was King's first visit to SBA, Barker has ridden it for 3 seasons. Barker got the jump on him from the tapes in all three races (there were some real elbows at the start of heat 13) and King couldn't catch him. The one who caused Barker most problems was Robson. He beat him in heat 10 and was all over him in heat 15, a cracker of a race.

Cracking meeting I'd forgotten just what a superb race track SBA is and the amazing first corners that are produced by that short run from the tapes. Those who say that they don't like Plymouth because of its size have surely never been. Brilliant to see a big crowd after recent troubles, they ran out of programmes and the start had to be delayed to get everyone in. Fair result in the end with Newcastle getting a point.

The BSF is anything but bankrupt because it remains completely out of the control of speedway promotions, with people able to be strongly critical without being hounded out of club pages or forums by officials unable to stomach or conclusively rebut justifiable comment. There is absolutely no reason why you couldn't put the E mail response on here, you just choose not to - and, being uncharacteristically cynical, I think that the reason for refusal is nonsense, suspecting its more a case of being running scared about the responses you will get. I say again - the BSF does have a problem with personal abuse, trolls and wind up merchants but if the alternative is official forums where criticism is not permitted and the only posters are apologists or promotion stooges give me the BSF any time.

I certainly didn't tear you to shreds and its a pity that others have resorted to abuse. I merely questioned your opinion and that's precisely what a forum is for. As I said, its up to you what you do with your money but I just do not accept this 'use it or lose it' argument because it totally absolves the promotion of any responsibility to actually attract people by putting on a good show. It means that they can run meetings like that shambles on Monday and still expect people to turn up, and that's not on. I'd say it is beholden on a promotion to put on something that people want to see or at least to give it their best shot. If they don't and punters get crap racing, stupidly drawn out meetings and little or no value for money and subsequently the track closes it would be nothing less than ridiculous to say that that is solely the fans fault. This thread is full of absolutely justifiable and entirely reasonable (if very strong) critical comment, so the feedback is there. If Kent Kings refuse to acknowledge, answer or respond to it (and their press officer has said that that is precisely what they will do), more fool them.

I think you're right, it does come with the territory (Peterborough, believe me, was just the main course for me after the starter at Kent on Monday). But it bloody well shouldn't do and just accepting the situation is simply more likely to encourage such behaviour in the future. You are also right that I (and others) will not get our time or money back. But having lost that time and money, aren't why entitled to a reasonable explanation as to why that was the case so that we can determine whether we want to use more time and money in the future ? Not doing so leads to speculation and the suspicion that the promotion are at least partly at fault and, from that, that they are unreliable and that this will happen again. From Mitch's comments, Edinburgh's real problem is that they don't really know why. I can see their point and, indeed, agree with it. At the end of the day, in such circumstances most people appreciate honesty and building up a reputation for that will do no harm whatsoever. The truth here will come out and if this is down to Peterborough they are going to look like clowns no matter what. Better to be a honest clown than a deceitful one, I'd say. Is it ? Didn't Peterborough have a meeting abandoned the other week because of light failure and isn't this virtually the same promotion that were responsible for the appalling shambles at the ELRC, where they allowed people to pay to come in in the full knowledge that the curator had said that the track wasn't rideable ? I make that 3 incidents in about 8 weeks. Mildenhall was a one off on Sunday. In the absence of the trackman they sodded the track up and there was a delay while it dried out. Kevin Jolly admitted responsibility immediately and apologised. Because of the difference in reaction, Mildenhall will continue to get my money, Peterborough won't. I would say its one of the best but who's to say when he spends his £50 to get there next time the same thing (or something similar) won't happen again ? On an occasion like that, its not the best race track but a dead loss and a waste of money.

Its not a question of 'getting excited'. Its a question of fans who have paid out money both to travel and/or to stay over getting a better reason for cancellation than 'a health and safety issue'. That's patronising, avoids the issue of who is precisely responsible for the call off and, yet again, treats speedway fans as a cross between imbeciles and children. Almost inevitably, there is the suspicion that the Peterborough promotion have made some sort of balls up that they don't want everyone to know about and, following on from the appalling ELRC call off , getting a reputation for slackness and incompetence.

I am not sure you are totally right.............but you're definitely not completely wrong. You did manage the impossible - putting a on my face