Halifaxtiger

Lets hope Ipswich do the business tonight, then

As always, Mr M, good point and entirely believable (especially the coin toss ). The only thing is in the Mildenhall press release they don't mention a re-declaration with Bates in the side (although they do with Isherwood). Given the situation, you'd have thought they would, wouldn't you ? I can appreciate the remarks about moving on, but once again we have a far deeper issue than Mildenhall, Dudley and the fate of the honours in the NL this season. Its about us all being satisfied that due process has taken place and that the outcome is entirely in accordance with the rules of the sport. This is yet another example when speedway fans of whatever persuasion are left doubting that that is the case and that happens far too much.

Does anyone know what meeting will be on next Friday ? As far as I can see, it can't be the play off final because Edinburgh entertain Workington that night.

Have they ? Bates could certainly return to the team, that's unquestionable taking into account the particular rule stated earlier on this thread. However, according to Gary Patchett's latest list of team declarations, Bates is not stated in the Mildenhall line up. That means that the team on Sunday was not their declared side and was therefore illegal within the rules of the sport. To be honest (along with many others) I thought that that was where the issue was raised, not on the fact that he could not ride at all even if re-declared (which was quite clearly rubbish). For what its worth, I don't think Mildenhall have cheated, they have just been sloppy. Finally, while BSPA rulings might be decisive knowing how utterly corrupt they can be it would not surprise me in the slightest that they have ruled that Mildenhall are right in the full knowledge that they are not.

Actually, 21CH has been pretty fair in his posts on the subject. I didn't think Dudley's protest was about the fact that Bates could not ride but that he had not been re-declared.........

I actually think that having one man making all the decisions (and everyone knowing that that is the case) is a good thing..........providing that the decisions are made in accordance with the laid down legislation applicable to the NL (which are available for all to view) and that man is competent. Consequently, what the NL has is rubbish. I have to say that its seems astonishing to me that the referee seems to have been well aware that the Mildenhall line up was illegal yet he allowed Bates to ride. Dudley have stated that they did not raise the matter before or during the meeting and Mildenhall can redeclare Bates in the team as that is specifically confirmed in NL regulations. Absolutely agree on your point regarding the two promotions. Dudley look like they have deliberately waited to say something and, at the risk of opening up an issue again and referring to the previous meeting between the clubs, its not so much that Mildenhall told Dudley that they were riding at 3pm as to whether the match could have been ridden at that time - which, aside from constantly altering start times, would have been in the best interests of all concerned, in particular the spectators. Speaking to Bob Ellis a week or so ago, he told me he can prepare a speedway track in 4 hours - and that's after a stock car meeting. As such, Michael Lee's statement at the time that the track could not be sorted in time was blatantly untruthful, and suggests to me that the only motivation for not changing the time was that Mildenhall were indeed running scared (completely unnecessarily, it seems) of a full strength Dudley team. Lee's subsequent indication that attempting to allow riders to compete in two meetings on one day is just not workable is, however, far more persuasive. If he had said that at the time instead of talking nonsense about track preparation Mildenhall would have come out of this a lot better than they have.

John Anderson has been pretty forthright in his comments regarding the financial situation not just at Berwick but elsewhere and all credit to him for not pulling his punches. For what its worth, I'd say Berwick have upped their game in terms of the quality of the product more than any other British track in the last few seasons - new safety fence, new lighting, better shale, better racing - and they certainly deserve to reap some reward as a result. Everything went wrong for them last season, fingers crossed for the Bandits in 2013.

Its a question of whether the BSPA said Bates could not ride because he had not been re-declared or whether he could not ride even if that was the case. If its the former, Mildenhall are definitely at fault. If its the latter, then they (and we) are entitled to some answers as to why that was the case. I suspect, however, that if it is the latter we will be met with a wall of silence because it is yet another direction that is directly contrary to the rule book.

So its 'dirty tricks' to object to a rider just before the meeting, but not to do so after he has ridden and scored a bucket full of points ? Laughable. Second point, spot on. If Dudley knew that Bates was ineligible well in advance (and I really can't see how that was not the case) then they are guilty of dirty tricks because they said nothing until after the meeting had been run and that can only be to take advantage of the situation. Perhaps the question is not who said Bates couldn't ride but why that was the case. Its clear that both Baseby and Isherwood were replacements for him and he was returning from injury. Per the above rule stated by JL above, he most certainly could and that suggests that the Mildenhall view of the situation holds a lot more water than the Dudley one. As to punishment, the worst Mildenhall have been guilty of is sloppy practice by not updating their declared line up. Phil K is usually right and he is here; no more action than deducting Bates points is necessary.

I think Mildenhall's lack of strength at reserve evens it up a little - if Bates and Stoneman were fit, I'd have them odds on to win. Makes it all the more exciting and we could have a repeat of last years amazing final. I only saw the first meeting but thoroughly enjoyed it, West Row always being one of my favourite tracks. The starting gate malfunction was both annoying and frustrating, but these things do happen occasionally and in all my visits to Mildenhall I am unaware of any sort of similar delay so I wasn't bothered.

Thoroughly enjoyed the meeting apart from the village idiot stood in front of me, Norwichkev & Rum Old Bird. His celebrations when Ward came off in the final had to be seen to be believed - and at a meeting honouring a rider who lost his life in a track accident. I just don't understand the mentality of such people. The best thing of all is this was one of those all too rare occasions when I was enormously proud of the sport as a whole - the riders, the fans and the management - as everyone rallied round for an exceptional cause.

I agree. Not a brilliant meeting but not a bad one either and enough to keep me entertained, particularly with Tom Perry about. Some very sporting comments made by Garrity at Mildenhall on Sunday regarding the run off; all credit to him.

Thanks for putting me straight. I misread a post on facebook about Swindon. Pretty much agree with everything you have said here, although as I said I gave the promotion the benefit of the doubt regarding the delay. As to the air fence (and I stand to be corrected) Sheffield I believe aren't permitted to use one. With regard to the food situation, I am sure that is down to the stadium owners, not the council or the Sheffield promotion. King's Lynn certainly used to have a similar policy (although I have never known it to be enforced) and I agree with Shadders on that one - boycott the food and drink sales altogether.

Have to say I didn't think what happened was too bad or deserving of serious criticism. Yes, they could have got on with the racing a bit quicker but we'd still have had an abandonment and its easy to be wise in hindsight about the raining not stopping. If it had there would have been complaints about an unnecessary postponement. Couldn't do right for doing wrong, I'd say. The only criticism I'd make is about the terms of refund. I can appreciate no cash, but why can't fans simply go to one meeting anywhere in the country ? Much better than the re-run (which apparently is at Swindon) or nothing. Big thanks to Spinny for organising the drinking session - even if he did take an unnecessary degree of sadistic pleasure in making me pay up our bet. Same amount & terms again next season, mate ?

Thansk for that......passed on to the bus coming up from Plymouth.

I doubt if Kev is going to lose much sleep over the quality of your posts.

I really don't think that Dudley are any more 'win at all costs' than Mildenhall are or, for that matter, pretty much any club in the country that have a chance of success. I agree with Kev about getting the BSPA involved; not so much because Dudley have influence there but because Mildenhall will probably ignore them like they did last time. It was only down to the Dudley promotion behaving with a sense of realism and compromise (something their fans could learn from) that the match went ahead at the later time and certainly nothing to do with Mildenhall's ridiculous excuses about being unable to prepare a track in time and non existent training sessions. From a personal point of view, the Dudley promotion came out of that business way, way ahead of their Mildenhall counterparts. Dudley & Stoke have agreed two Tuesday dates for their semi finals. No clashes with PL tracks, both teams at full strength, total co-operation betwen the two sides. I have seen speedway at Mildenhall on Tuesday nights before and while I accept that that would be less than ideal in terms of attendances, why not ?

Sod off. I'll pay up tomorrow you mercenary git. On a (slightly) more serious note, I think that the interests of speedway itself and what is good for the sport matter more than our individual preferences and where that's concerned I'd say the play offs are better than the league system. For a start, speedway is anything but alone in deciding matters this way, rugby league being the most obvious other example with even football having such a method for promotion. It was the absolutely astonishing NL play off last season that swung my view this way, a truly fantastic final with the match at Mildenhall being the best I have ever seen and one I will never forget. I really don't believe that the sport is any state to turn down the undoubted increased gates that the play offs produce (unlike the end of the last PL season, with many meaningless matches played out in front of sparse attendances) given the parlous state of many clubs finances. There is the prospect of a significant financial bonus for Workington, a club on the brink of closure and I doubt if any of the others involved will be unhappy at the chance of a few more through the turnstiles. I read a report that in 2006 as a result of a huge play off final gate Peterborough finished in the black rather than substantially in the red and it surprises me that the play off is so easily dismissed and ridiculed with that in mind. Perhaps it is more that there seems to be very little reward for finishing at the top of the league (and that is where rugby league differs) that is part of the problem. There should at least be a trophy for that, with perhaps a weighting system depending on who you draw in the play offs.

I think I prefer XC weather (they have an uncanny knack of being correct). http://www.xcweather.co.uk/forecast/sheffield

Brilliant news not just for Plymouth but for the PL as a whole. Terrific little club with a terrific track and some terrific supporters. All the best for 2013.

Does anyone know when a possible restaging would be ? The forecast is awful.

Yes and no. The thing is if your way upsets punters unnecessarily you can't then bleat about financial losses and the business failing. While no promoter can control the weather, riders getting injured and numerous other situations or acts that cause people to stop going, they can behave decently and respectfully towards the paying public. From comments on here, it appears that that hasn't always been the case with Keith Denham. As an example, a friend of mine used to go regularly to speedway at a track near his home. When the conditions for racing were particularly bad at one meeting (and with no obvious reason why that was the case) and he and others were critical, the track boss's response was 'if you don't like it, don't come'. How arrogant and uncaring can you get and its little wonder that that fan hasn't been back to the track since. While all speedway fans should be grateful that individuals prop up their tracks financially, that gratitude is not unlimited and does not allow promoters to behave exactly as they wish to their customers.

It would be interesting to see what kind of changes that you and Jayne would like, Dale. I am pleased that you personally have an intention to be part of speedway for at least the immediate future as it would be a bad day for the sport in this country if someone with your integrity and passion became so disillusioned that you decided to quit. No chance of Plymouth dropping down - their gates are still among the highest in the PL and when (rather than if) Bowden goes they will increase still further. Cornwall go for planning permission next month and (touch wood) might be operational by May and I have heard a noise that Sittingbourne might be coming back (at Iwade). Rob Godfrey has confirmed Scunny are running next season and I doubt very much that Rye House will shut. I do think there has at least got to be dialogue about what the likes of Buxton and King's Lynn want because they are an integral part of the NL and the league needs all its members to remain operational. Better 8 teams than 5.

Fine post Not sure you will get the chance to read it, but there was a terrific article about promoters in last Friday's Edinburgh programme.

I am not so sure. Rumour was he was ready to sign this season until he was ridiculously ruled out by the BSPA. A doubling up role would be pretty lucrative (they said at Swindon that he works in his father's car show room to make ends meet) and no doubt restore some of his lost confidence. He's apparently a cracking lad, lives locally and would come in on a bargain average. I really hope Squall's got it wrong.