Halifaxtiger

Heat 8 at Belle Vue, Wednesday, NL Grand Final. 3 15 year olds and a 16 year old. One 15 year old scored a 5 ride paid maximum.

I am wondering why WP is so surprised (if he is surprised). Stoke couldn't fulfil their fixtures in 2013, 2014 or 2016 either.

I think to still win a tie after going down on aggregate, on an away track and against a team of Belle Vue's strength (and absolutely regardless of who was or wasn't riding) is a massive achievement, so all credit to the Fen Tigers .

The Colts made hard work of their win with Smith blowing an engine, Shuttleworth falling and Bewley binning it when miles ahead and causing a nasty crash. Otherwise, the top four was all unbeaten by the opposition. Bickley was the MOM for me. Compared with Bewley's bull in a china shop style, he is incredibly smooth and its difficult to believe that he is still just 15. A shout for Woodhull, too. His battling third place in the crucial heat 12 convinced me Belle Vue were going to win. Kemp was impressive but Eastbourne's top man was Bailey for me - he was the only one prepared (or able) to mix it with Smith and Bewley and his efforts in heats 13 & 15 meant that we had two races that would grace any league. Hard to accept he scored just 5 because he deserved more. It was indeed a fine advert for NL speedway. A big crowd, cracking racing and two teams of (mostly) young British riders going for it

What should not be forgotten is that it is likely that IOW will finish bottom of the NL having lost half of their home meetings. Such is the enthusiasm and the feel good factor about the club is that really doesn't seem to matter much, but there's no doubt that better on track performances will increase attendances still further. The furious attempts to promote the Speedway are like nothing I have ever seen before, in a holiday area or not and signs are that once people come they stay. There's no 'sod you then' attitude. Its all about listening, improving and giving the punter what they want. Its not rocket science or expensive, either. Some might be able to teach IOW one or two things (which they might well copy) but no-one can teach them a single thing about how to treat the paying fan or how to get people in, and they could teach a lot of others a great deal.

In the last season under the previous owners, Isle of Wight's average gates were under 100 per meeting. This season, out of the holiday weeks they have averaged 300 and in the holiday weeks 5-600. That's pretty much a five fold up Just proves what a determined, customer-focussed and enthusiastic promotion can do.

I'll take a little exception to what you have said here. Meetings should start on time but we can all forgive a one off because they happen in the best promoted clubs. To my knowledge, Workington haven't had another one like Saturday this season. While I think that the organisation and running of meetings could definitely be better, Workington's track is better than many, so you almost always see decent racing. Pricing is as cheap as any other Championship club. The team at the start of the season looked good to me, and Hoggy is as good as any and better than most. Overall, its definitely one of my favourite tracks. If all the above isn't enough, I could question precisely what the people of Workington want from their speedway club.

I think you are dead right here but I have never heard of this ban being applied before. Unless it was a new rule introduced for this season, its difficult to imagine that someone hasn't broken it in the past so you have to question whether it is being applied consistently (as Richard says above). The thing is the NL has been so rife with crooked rulings this season its pretty reasonable that some will think that the application on this occasion is not because it is there but because someone will gain from it.

I didn't understand that one but apparently there are those who complain if there is no parade. Damned if you, damned if you don't. The ironic thing about the delayed start is if Cookie hadn't crashed the meeting would have been completed in 90 minutes, easily the quickest I have seen at Derwent Park. I'd maintain that Workington have everything right to be a successful track. It was another cracking meeting last night and the team selection at the start of the season was a good one. You can't help but think, however, that it really needs someone to come in, get hold of meetings by the scruff of the neck and make sure that they run to time and without the annoying little issues that seem to come up far more often than they should. I really hope, though, that the Comets come to the tapes in 2018 because I have thoroughly enjoyed coming up this season. Don't doubt your word for a single second, but a burger van that doesn't do chips is nothing less than bizarre.

Tatum might be a busy man but missing the teams most important meeting of the season is p1ss poor.

Weather forecast looks very good for one final trip through the North Yorkshire Dales and across the Lake District. I think everyone is aware that the future of the Comets is in the balance so if ever there is a time to show that they are wanted and needed this is it.

Its not the whole story because the Colts have a very talented young team and that certainly shouldn't be overshadowed by any home track advantage they might have. After all, they did pretty well away, too. But I'd maintain that the Colts lads have motors that are set up for NSS and the others simply do not have means to produce the sort of power and speed necessary. With the greatest of respect to Andy Mellish, its hard to accept that he has more skills in riding fast than Ben Morley, Paul Hurry, Max Clegg or any of the other NL's top riders who have struggled at NSS this season. Very pleased about the dates because I should be able to make them all.

That is undeniably true. I think its more to do with the size and shape. Quite simply, NSS is substantially about speed and for that you need a powerful motor. Most of the top boys have them, which makes it such a brilliant track for Premiership racing. The NL lads (excepting the Colts) do not and consequently there is a significant advantage at that level for the home side. Having said that, I still didn't expect the Colts to win by such a margin. I am happy they did, though, because the thought of Lakeside's crooked team winning anything would have been hard to stomach and yet more damage to credibility of British Speedway in general and the NL in particular.

The thing is your reference to the specific rule in the rulebook changes my view - to a degree at least - as it draws a distinction between ordinary league meetings and the NLRC. As such, on this case and within the letter of the law, the ban is correct. The only thing I am asking myself is whether it has been consistently applied over the years and somehow I doubt it.

Completely agree If it suits Wolves, suits their fans and suits Woffinden I see no reason why they should not have done so had the regulations been different. You could probably make a better case to an outsider that you were drafting in a Wolves rider to replace a Wolves rider than replacing a Wolves rider with a Rye House one.

Red and black coat, yes, but its not an Aces one. Aces cap.

Just one final point. I wonder where all those saying that rider replacement should be at No 2 are hiding ?

Hoggy told me there was no contact and Bacon simply lost it when Sarjeant passed him. To be fair to the referee, at the time I thought his decision was correct. Cracking meeting , with Cook's ride off 15 metres being the highlight. Big shout for Sarjeant. He was bloody awful the last time I saw him against Edinburgh and deserved the flak he got from home supporters. Even though he had a tapes offence last night, he still bust a gut in every race and that's what people want - a fact that was reflected in the reaction he got from the stand after he had fallen in heat 11.

That really is the point here. Despite numerous withdrawals over the years, I have never heard of anyone suffering similar punishment. Connor Dugard states on the Eastbourne website that other riders had 'certificates' that allowed them to be absent.

I could argue that Knight's excuse was too. My beef, though, isn't about riders getting pulled up for missing meetings without reasonable cause - where that's concerned, I agree with your view. However, until we have a consistent procedure that is applied across the board Knight's punishment is wrong and, given that he rides for a team who are in the play offs, was made quite possibly to deliberately weaken Eastbourne's chances. Given the record of crooked, incompetent and vicious decisions we have seen in the NL, can anyone actually say otherwise ?

The decision can be immediately criticised because two riders pulled out on the day but only one has been banned. Just how can that be the case ? Could the fact that Knight is involved in the play offs but Davey isn't have something to do with it ?

It is very wrong for a rider to miss a meeting for no reason at all. However, didn't Mildenhall go nuts last season when Luke Chessell pulled out of a meeting because he had no machinery and Cradley brought in Matt Williamson instead? The reasoning is the same but on one occasion you get a ban and on the other a guest ? . As others have said what about Davey ? He rode Saturday night, so why hasn't he been banned ? You can argue all you want about riders withdrawing but that still doesn't excuse in any way the crass standard of rulings we have seen in the NL this season. Harland Cook, Paul Hurry, Adam Roynon, Matt Marson and now Jake Knight. Every single one inconsistent, incompetent, biased or vicious (or all four). Its not beyond the realms of possibility that major honours in this seasons NL will go to clubs whose teams are either illegal within the rules of the sport or who have benefited from appalling and completely unjustifiable decisions. Nothing will damage the credibility of the sport in general and the NL in particular more than that. Been saying it for years and will repeat it now. Thing is, I don't think any of the above decisions are particularly difficult. Should Harland Cook have got an average reduction after years out of the sport ? Of course he should. Should Paul Hurry's average have been reduced by 3 points ? Of course not. We simply have to have someone who is not linked to any club, has a very sound grasp of the rules and can follow and make precedent. Chances of the BSPA allowing that to happen are absolutely zero, because they want the opportunity to cheat, manipulate and do things 'in the interests of the sport'.

Of the original line up, 10 were present. Smith & Mountain were injured. Ayres pulled out some time ago and the only ones to pull out on the day were Knight and Davey. From my (limited) experience of Leicester this season, its definitely better than at any time since it opened.

​That's just about spot on . I wonder how many of those declaring it a shambles were actually there .

Armstrong for Mountain. Quite agree about the field. Having 10 riders representing clubs and 6 wild card picks seems a reasonable idea but surely they should be the highest in average regardless of team ? Having said that, I still think it is an attractive line up.