Halifaxtiger

Unless he's stepped up big time in the close season, Payne is just about a number 7 in the PL. He's not a top rider in the NL. Having said that, I think Redcar might just be better than some are making out even if Havelock did sod up the mathematics completely. See you tomorrow night.

or Jack Holder. He would just love EWR.

Bit optimistic with 1,000 I think but I can't disagree about the timing. A freezing cold night and a half hearted open meeting isn't likely to pull the punters in, so 450 was almost certainly way under what a normal attendance would be. Its easy for me to say it, but couldn't one team meeting have been run ?

This is simply awful. Any speedway track closing is a disaster, but Plymouth have some fantastic fans and a superb track. I have a lot of time for Ashley Taylor, but you have to question why they chose to say they were going to compete this season with such financial difficulties. I really hope that they can be resurrected at some stage, perhaps in the NL.

Cracking meeting After last nights debacle, some superb racing, a close match, a brilliant last heat decider................and all in less than 90 minutes. Scunthorpe yet again showing how it should be done. I am sure that the result wasn't quite that the VC wanted, but take a bow anyway Mr Godfrey.

Interesting. The question is whether those who were there have preferred to see a poor meeting or an abandonment and nothing at all. If its the case - as I believe - that they were there more for the occasion, there's only one answer to that.

That's unfair. He clearly refers to safety first. I think the whole crux of this issue is whether necks were on the line any more than at most meetings.

Lets face it, poor meetings on poor tracks are hardly unheard of. Not the norm, maybe, but common enough. Read the barrage of criticism that Ipswich got on Thursday, or the updates from Leicester (4 passes in 15 heats) yesterday afternoon. Those meetings were on 'proper' tracks and at Leicester the shape has apparently been adapted during the winter to improve the quality of the racing. Would such a meeting from Belle Vue have been so much worse ? I believe most were there for the occasion, not the racing. The real point is of course that had it gone ahead it would be most difficult indeed to blame the riders in anyway whatsoever. As it is, reading this thread, facebook and twitter I am anything but the only one who - at this stage at least - believes that while the poor track is down to Belle Vue, the abandonment is down to them. Under normal circumstances, I'd agree. But this isn't normal circumstances. Its an open meeting with a huge attendance for what is a unique occasion. While the quality of the field would have attracted some, as I have said I suspect most would simply have been wanted to be part of the occasion and the quality of the speedway would have been secondary. In that, its similar to the GP at Cardiff; I know people who won't go to another meeting all season but go there simply because of the atmosphere. Would they ? The question is whether monetary refunds would have been given in the event of postponement or whether tickets would have been valid for a future occasion - the latter, after all, is far more normal practice in speedway. Even if the meeting had been cancelled two weeks ago, some would still have lost hotel deposits and payments. If it was a case of tickets valid for a future meeting only, many could not have gone and the field would be nowhere near the same calibre. Finally, it would not be the first meeting at the new stadium. As I have said, my suspicion is many would just have wanted to be there for the first meeting. Huge attendances for opening meetings at places like Kent and Redcar prove that. Better to just get your money back than see a poor meeting but be able to say you were there ? That's debatable at best.

Totally agree. But better that than nothing at all., especially taking into account the importance of this meeting. According to the above post, only 3 riders thought it was unsafe. What will make it very clear is what comes out in the next few weeks about who was prepared to give it a go and who wasn't. I'll make a more informed judgement then. No doubt you will continue to say - whatever comes out - that it is all down to Belle Vue.

I haven't said what Belle Vue have done is OK at all. They deserve a great deal of criticism for the fact that the track was not ready. However, the track was rideable. What you have said is what happened is entirely down to Belle Vue and that the riders are not to blame in the slightest when this could have gone ahead. Simple truth is that a crap meeting would have been down to Belle Vue, but total abandonment is down to the riders.

Fair point Iris - we don't know what they thought although I for one would like to know. From quotes from the track, though, Harris was spokesperson for the riders. Its reasonable to say that he represented a collective view. Had this been a normal weekly meeting I would have completely agreed. But it isn't. Its an opening meeting with 6,000 people at the track. This could have gone ahead - crap maybe, but it could. The riders chose not to ride on a track that was rideable. The abandonment of the meeting was down to them. Had it gone ahead, Belle Vue would rightly have been significantly criticised for the fact that it simply wasn't ready and the riders praised for the fact that they were willing to have a go. I completely agree that it should have been a top class meeting, but the reason there was no meeting at all is not down to Belle Vue.

Harris said the track was rideable. If so, why didn't they ride it ?

You're right. I was there too that night. Belle Vue have to take some blame, but to my mind (and based solely upon what Chris Harris has said) this could have been run and the riders are the ones who should be getting the flak.

Harris said the track was rideable. In the circumstances (huge crowd, opening meeting etc) the meeting should have gone ahead. The fact that the meeting would have been crap is down to the promotion. The fact that it was abandoned is down to the riders.

Its rare I side with the promotion against the riders, but I think you are right (albeit solely based upon what Chris Harris has said). When Newcastle opened up in the late 1990's, they used ash waste as a track surface. It immediately began to break up at the opening meeting, and the riders were reluctant to ride. The late Ian Thomas pointed out that there was a huge crowd, it was an opening meeting and that they should go out and do their best without taking any risks at all. They did, and the meeting was run. While it doesn't excuse the fact that the track should have been ready, if the surface was rideable the meeting should have gone ahead. Shame on those - and I'd like to know who they were, too- who refused to give it a go.

Just had a text from a mate at Rye House. Meeting delayed by 30 minutes due to starting gate malfunction, programme is in EL format and the riders are complaining about the track.

If that's true, someone wants their private parts chopping off for not postponing it - whatever the cost. Better to look fools for postponement than to look clowns for abandonment. If that's true, in the circumstances the meeting should have gone ahead and the riders are to blame for the abandonment.

I went over two weeks ago (5th March) and put these comments on face book: Short (very short) inspection this morning. Not surprised they are working today, given that it opens in 2 weeks and two bends do not exist, the back straight terracing is not finished and one end is a mud heap. While safety is paramount and the track should have been ready, to my mind it would have been better for the riders to go through the motions than abandon the meeting.

That's what's on updates. Bends 3 & 4 apparently.

I often think that advertising is seen by some as a cure to all speedway's ills when I really don't think it is. If you are interested in the sport and new to an area you'd make enquiries. If you're not, you probably wouldn't go even if the town was bedecked with banners. Its a matter of targeting. That means putting the message out on special occasions (Berwick did a fantastic job when they had televised meetings) or you have a large influx of people into the area (Isle of Wight, for example). For a place like Redcar, blanket advertising would probably be a waste of money.

I had a pretty good view of it as I was on the back straight near the exit to the second turn. I thought it was a stupid move by Bates. Stead was only a short distance from the kerb but Bates tried to go through it, picked up grip and wiped Stead out, Stead clattering into the unprotected part of the safety fence. It would have been unnecessary if it hadn't been the captain of his own team who has just returned from serious injury.

I am with Islander on that one. He's better than 6.00 in the NL and a good signing on that average. The one I am looking forward to seeing again, though, is George Wood. I was hugely impressed with him last season and rated him - with Zach Wajtknecht - my novice of the year. I'd thought he was pretty good until he pulled off an absolutely astonishing ride at Rye House late in the season, going past both home riders - including Luke Priest - like they weren't there. Wouldn't be surprised to see him get a go in the PL this season.

Perhaps a little surprisingly, but so am I. I really hope you're right about this season and think that you just might be. I last saw him ride at Lakeside in 2014 and he was on fire that night, best I have seen him ride by far.

Newcastle as well ?

1 Mountain (Mildenhall) 2 Wood (Eastbourne) 3 Ayres (Kent) 4 Coles (Mildenhall) 5 Knight (Eastbourne) 6 Bacon (Birmingham) 7 Parkinson-Blackburn (Birmingham)