Halifaxtiger

Doing very nicely at the moment it seems. A friend of mine - who has been going since it opened on the Island - said last night's attendance was the biggest he has seen for 'a very long time'. Anyone else fancy dumping the BSPL....................

Word I have [from two different sources] is that the attendance was slightly up on usual league meetings

Not sure if this of any use but the track record at Aldershot on 02/07/1960 was 71.0, established on 21/05/1960 by Eric Hockaday.

In attending hundreds of meetings at all tracks across the country I never once considered that I was risking any money because I got to see a meeting in return for payment and despite the fact that on a lot of occasions the product barely justified the cost I continued going. The time I did take a risk was when I became a Mildenhall shareholder back in 2007 - basically, because I knew that I would probably get nothing for it other than a certificate and the knowledge that I had helped the club survive. Based upon fans views on the pages of this forum, whether speedway would prosper taking into account those views is a moot point. Some are very reasonable and practical, some are total nonsense - ignoring weather forecasts when determining weather a meeting should go ahead or not being definitely one of the latter, meetings for as long as I remember justifiably being called off on the strength of them - but one thing is absolutely definite, and that is that I have never heard someone putting forward an idea also saying that they will put up the money to support it. Brilliant, can't fail ideas but any gamble will be made on the basis of a promoters money, not theirs. In your own case, then, I suggest you notify the promoter of your local track that he need not consider weather forecasts any longer because if he suffers any financial loss as a result of doing so you will meet it. Yeah, right

That's completely unfair. Coventry Speedway closed because of the landlord, not the promotion, and its entirely possible that if the landlords attitude had been different it would still be in existence today. Indeed, in most cases those who close tracks down do so for the most legitimate of reasons - either loss - or potential loss - of the stadium [Lakeside, Stoke, Exeter] or financial loss [Workington, Rye House, Newport].

I value Neil's contributions on here - whether I agree with them or not - for the simple reason that he has been at the sharp end of speedway promotion and, for all my experience of the sport, I have not. There are an awful lot of people - most of whom have never risked a single penny of their money running a speedway track - out there who think they know better and, frankly, they don't. A rain off with riders at the track costs even an NL club at least three grand [and possibly as much as 5] so any speedway promoter that ignores weather forecasts is worse than a fool. I should say, though, that I have occasionally considered that some postponements take place a little too early for comfort. 36 hours, in my view, is excessive.

They'll never learn. They might work out one day (although somehow I doubt it) that the £20 (and more) that a paying customer shells out every week pays their wages and therefore to keep their stupid comments to themselves. The rules of speedway - and in particular averages - are important to every single person who supports a team and, in the case of Rowe's guest appearance, something that has been mentioned several times here and on social media. After all, we are well aware just how crooked speedway can be. Thanks to Neil Watson for his clarification, and whether the rule is contradictory or not it exists.

Having sat through the scintillating displays of England's football team for the last three matches, it is difficult for me to accept that speedway does not give better value for money, at least on occasion. Not entirely true. Up to 2017, I attended about 80 matches a season at tracks all across the country without supporting any of them. Based upon his posts here, Cityrebel is the same. Completely agree. Unless exceptional circumstances apply, a meeting should take no longer than 90 minutes and I have no problem if it takes an hour as I go to watch racing, nothing else. I can recall going to an early season meeting at Birmingham a few years ago. It took over 2 hours on a freezing cold night, with fans standing around getting frostbite. You could almost hear the anger when it was announced that there would be 'a short interval'. Another was a bank holiday one at Kent against Mildenhall (which remains probably the worst I have ever seen - it was when, infamously, they refused to bring the ambulance on to the track to treat an injured rider) that took almost 3 hours. What compounded that was how things dramatically speeded up when they realised they might break the curfew. Unnecessary delay is, in my view, a total disaster. Riders put before fans yet again. Its one of speedway's greatest failings. They are paid to perform, I am paying to watch so what I want comes first every time. As I said above, I go along to watch racing, nothing else (a bonus is the opportunity to see friends). There are enough gaps between heats without creating any other and which give requisite time for announcements and interviews. Give me a meeting over in half an hour any day (although the shortest I can recall is about 75 minutes) over one that takes five times as long as that with endless tractor racing, totally unnecessary intervals, announcers and presenters who think they are the star of the show and riders doing precisely what they like.

One thing's certain here. If Cityrebel has indeed fallen out of love with speedway, its in deep trouble. I'm not quite sure how many meetings he attended every season, but it was a lot.

I have heard that before. Then again, I couldn't care less what riders think (providing the track is not dangerous). Surfaces should be prepared for the benefit of paying customers, not paid employees. I didn't go today, but all accounts it was a brilliant meeting so we could do with more track preparation like that not less.

On the face of it, what you say is undoubtedly correct - run meetings when you are more likely to attract paying customers. Unfortunately, its not as simple as that. For a start, three quarters of British Speedway clubs do not own their own stadiums and are therefore at the directions of landlords (Peterborough, for example, would have absolutely no hope of getting a regular weekend race night). Consequently, they take what they can get. Even those that do either own or have substantial control over stadiums (such as Belle Vue) may decide that other uses - such as stock car racing or greyhounds - are more likely to be profitable (BAGS contracts for greyhounds are extremely lucrative). Others - such as Kent - may have planning issues, while Isle of Wight could not possibly run on Fridays, Saturdays or Sundays due to the situation with the ferries. Secondly, experience suggests that switching to weekends isn't always the solution. When Sheffield switched from Thursdays to Sundays it was so disastrous the club almost folded and I haven't noticed a significant change to Redcar's crowds since they changed from Thursday to Friday. When Ashley Taylor was considering opening a track in Cornwall, he told me that the days he would not run were Friday or Saturday as people were coming or going from holidays (possibly as many as half of our clubs might take this into account) and Adrian Smith advised at a Belle Vue fans forum some years ago that aside from school holidays attendances at Belle Vue were higher on Mondays than Fridays. Football's attendances certainly do not seem to be affected by playing midweek. When Plymouth switched from Friday to Tuesday they gave a statement why : Plymouth Gladiators Club Statement - Plymouth Gladiators Speedway (plymouth-speedway.com). As can be seen, it wasn't all about the number of Championship clubs that ride on that night (although that is clearly another factor as to why clubs do not run at weekends). Mike BV has made the point that the sport seems to be run for the benefit of riders (up to a point at least) and I agree. However, what they require cannot simply be completely ignored. Some consideration has to be given to what they need because we can't have speedway without them. I am not saying you are wrong so much as pointing out that putting your solution into practice is anything but easy or guaranteed to be successful.

An equal - if not greater - loss is the Isle of Wight promotion of Barry Bishop and Martin Widman. Don't take my word for just how forward thinking, innovative and customer focussed these two guys have been - read the comments of the likes of Peter Oakes, James Easter, Bert Harkins and more. The way they were treated - and are still being treated - was and remains shameful.

Its not an easy problem to solve but some of the decisions - that concerning the NL and the loss of Isle of Wight as a result springs to mind - are a matter of pure incompetence and could have been avoided. The failure to engage with the Warriors management is inexcusable.

From your posts on here, you clearly have been a passionate fan in the past. Its sad to see that you are losing interest. I have made no secret of my admiration for the Isle of Wight promotion and the way they have been treated has left me disillusioned and angry. There are other reasons, but that is a major one why my enthusiasm has waned and I haven't been this year at all. I can only trust that when I do attend the old buzz comes back.

Spiegal is dead right; it is a clear case of restraint of trade. The problem might be that riders simply aren't willing to risk any potential action, however illegal it might be. In addition, there could be under the table sanctions taken in that riders might not be offered contracts in the future. The way I see it, if one rider does agree to ride on the Island we could well see the flood gates open. Isle of Wight are running meetings this summer, so I will take the opportunity to wish them every success. They deserve it.

My suspicion is Isle of Wight will only go back if there is a major change in the leadership of the BSPL - because their real issue is just how this seasons changes were imposed on NDL clubs - or, at the very least, a guarantee that NDL teams will be allowed to decide their own rules, regulations and procedures without interference from those who have no financial involvement in that league whatsoever. To me, the former is reasonable but unlikely; the latter should be nailed on. I must admit I can't see anything in Martin's posts about 'unreasonably withheld' but I am certain that in Speedy Star Rob Godfrey made it clear that it is a matter for clubs and not the BSPL. It looks to me that Isle of Wight have just possibly called a bluff there, and it will be interesting to see if any attached riders do take the offer up and what the reaction - if any - will be.

I think that in calling meetings off clubs are on a hiding to nothing. An early call off and a change in the weather forecast and they get criticised. Call it off late because of the same change and they still get criticised. Don't call it off at all and get an abandoned meeting and there is even more criticism.

Therein lies one of the main reasons why speedway has declined so badly : taking its supporters for granted (not allowing patrons to take food in, taking heavy handed action to stop them and charging ridiculous prices for appalling food and drink remains one of my few complaints about Belle Vue). I am certain that a lot of your issues (while remaining totally valid) were the fault of the stadium owners but there's doubt that similar circumstances have applied at virtually every track in the country, including those who own their own stadiums. I have certainly heard such accounts many, many times and, indeed, have experienced them myself. Worse still, when we do get a track that is remarkably customer focussed the BSPL make their position so untenable that they withdraw. That would be funny if it wasn't so serious, Humph. It was still possible only a few years ago, albeit travelling a bit further afield. I used to do Birmingham or Kings Lynn (Wednesday), Ipswich, Peterborough, Swindon or Isle of Wight (Thursday), Plymouth, Somerset, Lakeside or Weymouth (Friday), Eastbourne or Rye House (Saturday), Mildenhall (Sunday) and, on occasion (or a bank holiday) Wolverhampton, Kent or a TV match on Monday. Then there was Redcar (Thursday), Edinburgh (Friday), Berwick or Workington (Saturday) and Glasgow (Sunday). The thing that used to annoy me was that Weymouth, Plymouth and Somerset all rode on the same night

You're right. The method of running a weak NL team as a double header was, of course, pioneered by a certain Mr Godfrey (who was totally against low points limits when he ran a stand alone CL team). Problem is, stand alone NL clubs don't have the advantage of a Championship meeting before hand. Sings is also right. £14 for an NL match with a 34pt limit is just too much.

As I have said before. its s matter of perception rather than reality. The Speedway will be just as good but lower points limits almost always mean lower attendances.....and the NL clubs without a Championship team don't have the opportunity to double head.

Less than 200 tickets sold for Leicester v Mildenhall. Always a major risk running with a low points limit that people simply won't go to the stand alone NL meetings.

Not sure that's true THJ. There's a great deal of difference between the likes of Barry Bishop, Jittendra Duffil and Adrian Smith and certain other promoters that could be mentioned.

I think you're right, and if there was a chance of a change of management I'd agree. That's simply not going to happen though, because there would have to be an acknowledgement that the present leadership have got it badly wrong. More chance of you and Alan becoming Mackem supporters I don't know Jittendra Duffil at all but I have rarely - if ever - heard a bad word about him. Sounds like he and Barry Bishop have a lot in common.

Based upon opinions here and elsewhere, it looks to me that everyone wants Isle of Wight to stage their planned meetings - all except a few members of the BSPL, that is (I am far from convinced that it applies to all of them). With one track suspending fixtures, another reporting heavy losses and a very real possibility that the 21 June deadline will be extended, you would think they would have more important matters to consider and being doing everything possible to ensure as much Speedway as possible takes place.

On their terms. Had they acted with due process and in the best interests of the sport rather than pure selfishness, this situation almost certainly would not have occurred.