Halifaxtiger

See you there

The thing is that the Speedy Star article quoted from two of those involved : David Gordon & MCC. You have confirmed on here that Chris Morton & Gordon Pairman wouldn't say anything, the SCB gave a brief remark and that the BSPA will be asked for their view later (although I have to say I am not sure why). It seems to me that if that had been mentioned in the article you'd be getting a lot less flak about 'investigative journalism' because you did actually try to cover all the angles. I don't think for one moment that Buster Chapman wanted the Aces to close. But, from some of the posts on here, it appears that he wanted them to remain open on his terms and may have risked the existence of the club in doing so. I believe Gordon Pairman stated on here that if Speedy Star did not state why he was not to be part of the Belle Vue set up (and I don't think they did) he'd say so himself. I don't think he has yet.

To me, its more a question of whether the racing is worth the money, not the riders. Even if the riders are brilliant if the racing is rubbish its not worth a light. As to whether the racing is worth the money, that depends where you go. I'd say if you want value try Scunthorpe, Belle Vue, Isle Of Wight, Lakeside, Poole, Cradley & Workington for starters.

Good point David Gordon said in his statement regarding the Aces last year that the BSPA went behind his back regarding the use of the stadium. I did ask the question why Buster Chapman wasn't requested to comment on the Stadium thread but didn't get a response. Post 1756 Is there any reason why you didn't approach the BSPA ? David Gordon's allegation of underhand action, while little to do with the construction, is a pretty strong one. Definitely Thing is, will Speedy Star ask them ?

I thought he was impressive full stop. Lot better than some of the tedious or star of the show presenters out there.

The one at King's Lynn when riding with Cradley was extraordinary. Depending on who's view you might accept, he collected Nielsen coming off the corner, Nielsen came off and his out of control bike bounced off the fence and smashed into Roynon near the starting gate.

Not unduly concerned yet - about 6 weeks before the Aces first meeting. Can't remember what point they made up after the 2010 winter but it was nigh on start time. What doesn't help are these 'you might be told tomorrow' posts. By all means say that things are still progressing but make an announcement about everyone being told when and only when you can make that announcement.

Coming out the other side (almost) of this whole debacle, Belle Vue Aces and Colts are still in existence and have new, high powered owners. Its almost as though the off track events of 2016 never happened. They also have a magnificent, brand new stadium with a truly world class racing track. Nowhere else in Britain even comes closeto matching it and I really don't see how it might be termed a 'folly'. There's no doubt that David Gordon & Chris Morton have been the real losers of the whole debacle but it should also not be forgotten that without their persistence and determination in the face of scepticism, cynicism and down right ridicule - which extends from the terrace fan to highest reaches of the BSPA - the NSS almost certainly would not exist. 'Gordon's Legacy' would be far more appropriate.

I suppose no-one gets it as such, the council just don't pay as much for the stadium as they should have done. You can see very much why the thing David Gordon seriously regrets is not taking ISG through the courts. While the council have been deceitful and protected their own interests at the expense of Belle Vue, the real culprits are the cowboy constructors. They are currently undertaking work for Calderdale Council in Halifax and my understanding is it is months behind schedule.

Answers our friend again, doesn't it ?

The way I see it once it was clear that there were major issues Belle Vue had two options : ride at NSS in its incomplete state or close down. David Gordon said many times that there was no future at Kirky Lane and given the state of the stadium and the dwindling gates I think he was right. He would almost certainly not have been able to return to the dog track in 2016. The thing is closure might not have been for just one season. There were rumours at the end of 2016 that NSS was to be turned into an athletics track (and it wouldn't take much). You can imagine how the council would have reacted to a refusal to move in. You can argue that Morton & Gordon were foolish to run in the circumstances but before doing so it is necessary to stand in their shoes. Closing the most famous name in speedway (possibly for good) isn't something to be taken lightly. The stadium was incomplete but it can't be said that it wasn't fit for purpose because meetings actually ran. My initial view was that some rent should have been paid considering the fact that it was used, but David Gordon has made it clear that had he done so it would have been an acceptance of the stadium as it was. You can't blame him for not doing so given 158 pages of faults.

I think the significant difference will be that the new promotion will be entirely aware of the state of the stadium before they enter into any agreement. Furthermore, the council doesn't have them over any sort of a barrel regarding the future of the Aces. Given the calibre of the businessmen involved, I doubt very much if they will have their pants pulled down.

While what you say is true, it need not have stopped Speedy Star asking Chris Morton for his opinion. I greatly appreciate Phil's contributions to this forum but that doesn't mean that he is beyond criticism. Indeed, as a member of the speedway establishment (for want of a better word and I apologise to him in advance) he must realise that he is more likely to get it than most. In the case you point out, though, the criticism is absolutely baseless and wholly unreasonable. I believe that Speedy Star could have made a more comprehensive and wide ranging investigation, but I don't for one minute think it is a whitewash or a put up job to support David Gordon.

Me too, Gem. There's a quite a few that do that - that dreadful bloke at Sheffield is one. Announcers are announcers and presenters are presenters. We don't need commentators at a live meeting and its a matter of debate whether we need them on the box.

Where would British Speedway be if it packed its bottom tier with 35 year olds ? I do have some sympathy here because there is a need to at least try and be competitive and its difficult to see just who else they might have signed.For all the talk about preferring to watch a team of youngsters get stuffed, people just don't because they won't pay to watch a one sided hammering every week I do wonder, however, just how attractive this team will be both at home and on its travels.

I'd ignore him the way he is ignoring my point - because he can't answer it - about your asking MCC for their views. Is there any reason why you didn't approach the BSPA ? David Gordon's allegation of underhand action, while little to do with the construction, is a pretty strong one.

Go back over the thread and you will find no-one questions it before July 2015. Given that it is after the announcement of construction and indeed after (if memory serves me correctly) work had commenced, you would think there would be. Gordon makes it very clear why he didn't pay the rent. To do so would have been an acceptance that the stadium was fit for purpose and I fail to see what not paying the riders has to do with the construction of the stadium. I repeat : if the article was a put up job to support David Gordon why (repeatedly) ask for the views of the council ?

Look at this thread (Unfortunately there is a big chunk missing from July 2015 to April 2016). There's an awful lot of people saying it will never happen at all (and one or two recanting when it does). After the announcement that construction will start there's not one post that says it will end in tears. Fast forward to April, and there are dozens that say they knew it all along. But that isn't totally the point here. The real question is in January 2016 what would any of us done in Gordon & Morton's shoes, because the way I see it they had two options : move or close (possibly for a long time or even for good). If you wanted a biased article, there's no way on this earth you would have continued to approach Manchester City Council for their side of the story.

Entirely your choice. But there's no way on this earth that the loss of a rider (any rider) would lead to me to stop going to a track where the quality of the speedway at the end of the season was just superb - I can pay it no finer compliment than to say it was rivalling Scunthorpe. Adding that to arguably the most exciting young team I have ever seen - the rumoured Colts line up - means that if I have to pick a stadium that I am looking forward to going to this season, its NSS (Isle Of Wight and Scunthorpe are close runners up).

You'd have lost already. Faced with a counter claim against their demands for rent, the council backed down. You also greatly overrate the council's ability where legal matters are concerned and their willingness to pour a fortune in fees into a case when they are subject to public scrutiny. They can reasonably ignore a small scale publication that represents a minority sport. The Manchester Evening News is very different.

I don't recall anyone questioning or being critical before the opening night (although I went over about a month before hand and suggested they needed to get a move on). There's a large chunk of this thread missing for some reason, but not one post questions anything up to July 2015. What is clear is that Manchester Council were paying for construction, Belle Vue were not (as such Aces51's analogy of first tenant is almost spot on (the difference being that the tenants had nowhere else to go)). That means that the Aces rights of demanding what should or should not be done were small at best. According to Phil the Ace, Colin Meredith was asked to leave the site by ISG and I have no doubt that he could have been forced. So, its clear that Belle Vue were being prevented from ensuring that the construction was up to scratch and had very little rights in auditing or inspecting the work. Given that that was the case, what should they have done ? Staying at Kirky Land was a non starter, even for part of a season. The only other option (other than moving in) was closure, with the possibility that the stadium would then be taken over by others and speedway booted out for good. So, in a nutshell, what one or two would have done in David Gordon and Chris Morton's shoes is shut the Aces down - quite possibly for a very long time - when they were on the verge of achieving something that was, quite literally, a dream come true and which they had been constantly assured would be completed on time and as per specification. I can just imagine how that would have been perceived by the speedway world. In this case, 'hindsight is a wonderful thing' is neither daft nor inapplicable. That's harsh. As I have said, I agree with GC's point that Speedy Star could have had more input into the article from others who were involved. But you simply won't get a balanced report if one party to the dispute refuses to comment. If it comes across as an exercise in vindicating David Gordon, that's not Speedy Star's fault.

I agree with GC up to a point because it simply isn't a case of 'nobody else is prepared to comment'. It carries David Gordon's view and says that MCC disagree with him but they won't say why. So, of all the players in this basically two have had their say and the rest haven't been asked. Crucially, that includes the BSPA & SCB because they are accused of some pretty underhand tactics. It could also have included Gordon Pairman (whose bid was rejected), Alan Bridgett(who inspected the track) and even the real culprits, ISG. Having said that, I found it informative and given the documentary evidence have little doubt that David Gordon's view is substantially the truth. It'll be interesting to see the council's report on the subject when (and indeed if) it is published.

I agree with almost all of this but Beowulf makes an excellent point (which you seem to have ignored): If it is of 'shocking quality' why are you still watching it ? I could point out that if the viewing figures stay reasonably good (according to flagrag, anyway) there is no motivation to change the way things are. That means that those who think its crap but continue watching anyway are doing absolutely nothing to assist the likes of me (and may others) who are critical and think that more could be done to improve live meetings.

Wild horses wouldn't drag him away from that, Chris

Famous last words Reading my updates from mid May last season, I commented that it was colder for the Mildenhall meeting than the 'Russian Front'. Wrap up well is my advice if you are going early season. Its one of the few tracks where I have had a 'fog off' as well - and that was in July . My old mate Mr Brading still blames me for that I'll be surprised if the whole experience isn't one of your best. By far and away my promotion of the year in 2016.