Halifaxtiger

One of the best in the business. Redcar has rarely been the same since he left and went from one of the best racing tracks in the country to one of the worst. It has improved in recent seasons, but its still nowhere near as good as when Glyn was there. The problem with that point of view is that it means that it excuses a promoter putting out a crap team, a crap track and crap presentation when in actual fact they should be doing the complete opposite. If a track closes because the racing is rubbish fingers should not be pointed at fans for not going but at the promotion because of what they had been offering. You have been very fortunate. When I have been they have almost always been rubbish.

Compared to what you have they are

In my experience, good choice An attractive team, good presentation and I'd say one of the best race tracks in the EL. I think you're wrong. True, the BSF has its share (more than its share) of wind up merchants, trolls and abuse but it represents free speech for the speedway community. To me, I am quite prepared to put up with the former for the sake of the latter and give me the BSF any time over an official forum or facebook page. The BSF has a bad name with those that run the sport because it is both out of their control and comment is frequently critical. The fact that that criticism is often completely justified - at least based upon the facts available to the fans on the terraces - cuts no ice with them whatsoever. There are some excellent posters on here who care deeply about speedway and engage in fair and reasoned debate about all aspects of the sport. They offer informed opinion, make positive and considered suggestions and have only the best interests of speedway in mind. The way I see it, the fact that such persons are disregarded or lumped in with the minority of wind up artists and trolls here by the BSPA says more about that organisation than it does about the members of this forum.

Yes and no. I regard someone who says they are a speedway fan but never goes as akin to someone who says they love ice cream but never eats it (although I do take on board the fair point about cost). The thing is if you don't go you can't comment on a significant range of important factors other than by hearsay (or watching it on the box, which gives only a small snapshot). Quality of racing across the tracks, presentation at meetings and condition of stadiums and their facilities are all vitally important to the sport in this country; I can give honest and fair opinions on all of them, you can't.

And that's the real problem - a promoter who can't (or, more likely, won't) admit there is something wrong despite the overwhelming opinion expressed by fans across the country. If there's nothing wrong, why spend money fixing it ?

If you ask me, based upon the last TV meeting held at Shielfield the Bandits thoroughly deserve another one.

I must admit that sometimes I draw the conclusion that the majority of posters on this forum don't actually attend meetings at all.

I don't think that even the most optimistic fan thinks that everything is fine, and putting dirt down on tracks isn't the answer to my mind. I think you have to start with the basics and that is ensuring that the product is as good as it can be on as many occasions as it can be. Tracks can't always be perfect for racing but I am simply not convinced that everything is done to ensure that is the case as often as it should be. 'Good enough is good enough' seems to be the way to do things on occasion, with the long suffering fan taken for granted. I also get annoyed when I hear riders complaining and promoters setting tracks up for them. In which other business do the needs of paid employees come before paying customers ? Set the tracks up for what customers want: racing, and then take it from there. That's fair point and one which I overlooked in my initial analysis. Would there be riders averaging over 10 now if the old heat 13 meeting system was in force ? Possibly. Over 11 ? Doubt it very much. I'd still maintain, though, that the gap between the top riders and the others has narrowed - not because the top riders have got worse, but because of the others getting better. That means that the two races in one is something we have pretty much always had and is indeed less likely these days than before. As Cityrebel has said, Jim Tebby beating Ivan Mauger was headline news. A second string beating a top rider today is anything but.

I suspect the answer to all of those questions is nowhere. But the comparison is, I would say, an unfair one. Its a bit like making a comparison between American baseball and its British equivalent, or Canadian Ice Hockey and that in this country.........or football in this country and football in Poland. Its simply the biggest sport out there and with that comes all the trappings you have mentioned. In Britain speedway is a minority sport and even back in the 1970's when it was far more popular than it is now it was still a minority sport, at least in terms of the press coverage. From what I have seen of Polish speedway on the internet on Sunday afternoons, the quality of the racing is in general no better than that over here. The attraction therefore is not the racing, but everything that goes with it. Trees has, for me, made two excellent points. For a start, success is cyclical. In the 1970's, the top Polish riders - Plech, Jancarz, Cieslak, Proch, Huszcza - all rode in this country. Poland, then, was a back water just as Britain is now. There's nothing to say that things won't change back again. But most importantly, she has pointed out why most people go to speedway (possibly after the fact that they like the sport anyway) : to support their team. How many of us can get truly passionate about a team that is in another country when we can watch our own local one every week and just down the road ? Speaking as someone who doesn't follow a team but did a while ago (and may indeed do so again) being a neutral just isn't the same whatever the other circumstances might be. Great post, Vince. My Dad went in the 1950's to watch a teenage Ronnie Moore ride. When he heard I was going his comment was 'first out of the gate always wins'. I must admit I think this 'two races in one' argument is rubbish, too. Looking at my 1979 year book, we had 8 riders averaging over 10 points a much and 13 over 9.5. Currently, we have 1 over 9.5.There were no less than 51 averaging less than 4.5 (albeit that many only rode in about half the matches). What do think happened when heat leaders of that strength and second strings or reserves on those averages were in the same race ? Go back a bit further and you had the likes of Briggs, Mauger, Olsen & Boocock averaging over 11 for a season - the only people who beat them were each other. If anything, I'd say the gap between the top riders and the bottom ones has narrowed.

Nonsense. It is quite clear in the sports regulations that riders on assessed averages can't double up. You'd think that your promoter (who is also on the MC) would know that, so if anyone had an agenda it was him. Proctor started disastrously for Plymouth last season but after a few weeks was the No1 they signed him to be. I think he can turn it around.

The track shouldn't be dusty from the start but otherwise TMW is right. A hot, breezy day is every track curators nightmare.

Star shooter either was a paramedic or was in the support crew, so I can understand her reaction. I'd say its pretty serious to publicly accuse a paramedic of being plastered in the course of his duties and some on here seem to have taken Lawson's word as the truth when it could be anything but. I certainly didn't think that most of those remarks made were in jest.

Can take bloody ages. In the Rye House case above, the hospital is only a few miles from the track and it is my understanding why that is why it took so long (although, to be fair, the track ambulance actually went to the hospital)

What I meant was they have no control over him prior to the meeting at all. Further, I am not so sure that what you have said is true and would suggest that the responsibility would lie with the paramedic. Only if the promotion were aware that he was unfit are they then culpable. If they were not aware (or had no reason to be suspicious) I would say it would be an unreasonable expectation for them to take proactive measures to find out.

I think you will be proved right. If I were John Anderson, though, I'd be furious if Lawson's remarks were untrue. They are not responsible for the paramedic getting plastered (if indeed that was the case). However, if they ran a meeting knowing that he was I would say they should be more than heavily fined - although I would be both surprised and shocked if they did. The loss to paying customers is irrelevant compared to the totally inadequate cover for the riders.

When Ash Birks was injured at Plymouth last season (seriously, as it turned out) the meeting was delayed for 15 minutes while they repaired the fence. Plymouth are one of the teams who have additional cover. I can imagine that the wait at Berwick would be horrendous. Doesn't the county ambulance come from/go to Galashiels ?

As usual, you make fair point but I do think the consequences of not having adequate cover need to be considered. Incidents like the one at Workington - where the meeting was called off prior to heat 10 - are rare but the cost to the promotion of re-running that meeting would probably pay for additional cover for an entire season. The effect on fans also needs to be considered. As a die hard, I find it annoying but just about tolerable. A newbie, though, sat around waiting for ages - at Rye House last year, it was about 90 minutes delay - would probably be put off altogether and to those who are already becoming disenchanted it would merely hasten their departure. Just because he looked drunk doesn't mean he was drunk and its extremely serious to make such an allegation without knowing it for sure. It could easily be that his behaviour was due to illness. He almost certainly wasn't swigging medical alcohol during the meeting, so if what Lawson has said is true he must have been inebriated before hand. You would have thought that others would have noticed it and reported it to the match referee given the potentially lethal consequences. Screm is right. This needs to be looked into and a public announcement made. As with the 'health and safety' issue at Peterborough, I somehow doubt if that will happen - especially if it reflects badly on the promotion. If it is the case that Lawson is wrong, he should be heavily fined.

You changed your name !! Agree about the sun delay. Its always annoying and frustrating but the simple fact is it was shining very brightly down the track from the first bend to the fourth and hence concerns about safety were completely understandable. It wasn't a good meeting by any standards which is a shame because NA can be an excellent track. Then again, I always did say Lakeside was better I knew there was something to laugh about I didn't see anything wrong with Cook's move either. And I thought I had a late night !

That's true, Screm, but didn't he also say that he has gone missing and there had been a hunt for him ? I took it that the Comets had not been allowed to use reserves simply because he had ruled himself out, rather than being ruled out by the track doctor.

He turned up alright. He then apparently withdrew from the meeting without telling anyone.

Its true to say that Coventry, Devon & King's Lynn were seriously understrength. In Coventry's case (at least) that was totally understandable and this won't be the first or last event hit by withdrawals. Who would have predicted that Stoke would win after Mildenhall got a 6-2 over them in the final or that Buxton would team ride Halsey out of it ? There was some cracking racing from the likes of Carr, Worrall, Halsey, Armstrong & Lambert - get the recording if you don't believe me. At the risk of repeating myself, its worth it simply for Armstrong's move on Carr & Atkin - I won't see better this season. It says everything that the crowd and, indeed, other riders rose to him afterwards. I think Spanner might be right. It was an 'awful' meeting simply because Cradley didn't even qualify for the final and it is a pity that those who were not there get an inaccurate opinion from a biased view. PS Good to see my old mate Main Man in the pink and as insanely enthusiastic as ever. Stay safe, fella.

I am not sure what meeting he was at, because it wasn't the one at Mildenhall. Armstrong's stunning ride to pass Atkin & Carr was worth the entrance fee by itself.

It was Buxton that team rode Danny Halsey into last place (although I agree it was excellent team riding). Very entertaining meeting with the highlight surely John Armstrong's stunning move through the middle of the Atkin/Carr pairing. Anyone who considers NL racing inferior should take a look at that.

Most meetings stop - as did Workington - if one rider is injured, basically because the paramedic must stay with them until the county ambulance arrives. Then there is the handover time. Adding the two together, the delay can be considerable. Its true to say that a track ambulance going off to hospital is rare, but it happens. What you say about the additional cost is fair point, but how much will last nights abandonment cost Workington and how much does a delay of an hour or more cost in terms of lost fans ?

I don't think there's any evidence that Workington don't provide the level of care required by the sports regulations. In my experience, most (if not all) tracks use some sort of private medical services. Peakmedicare, for example, do Belle Vue and Buxton. I think the point is that Plymouth and Newcastle (and there maybe others) have sufficient medical staff to ensure that if a rider has to be taken to hospital the meeting can still continue. If they can do it, so can everyone else. That's not a criticism of Workington as such; Newcastle & Plymouth are very much the exceptions in having the level of care that they do, but all credit to them for having it.