TonyE

No surprise for me. Still feeling a great loss though.

Unfortunately the future of virtually all tracks is at risk from 'developers'. The Showground in particular from what I have heard.

You were doing reasonably well until that last bit. Riders averages are based on 4 rides, 7 riders per team equals 28 rides equals 14 heats - so 42.50 should win you the meeting!

I could ask the same question of you. You are entitled to your opinion of course and there has already been a rebuttal of a couple of your viewpoints. Watching from a little further back allows a greater field of vision, especially when we have 'the two races in one' scenario and, also, in my opinion Arena was a much safer track. Rye House is too narrow and had Nick Morris had the same type of incident as happened in the first attempt to run Heat 15 against Glasgow, he would have piled into the fence - no wrap around the corners airbags at RH! As for the quality of racing, I find it really difficult to even put RH in same league as Arena which at least offered riders options on the lines they take rather than just open the throttle and blast round for four laps.

I dread to think just how much money Stuart has pumped into Lakeside. He makes light, in his comments, of the 'battles' he has encountered during his spell of ownership (in fact he is quite restrained) and it comes as no surprise that he is calling it a day. Thank you, Stuart, for giving it go at least and best wishes for the future.

If the Hammers do stay at RH, then they will almost certainly have to change their name to help 'locals' identify with the team and build support . It remains a huge gamble though.

We will have to agree to differ then - Arena offered, in my opinion, far better all round viewing. Yes, you can get closer at Rye but that isn't everything - agreed the seating is a bonus but seems haphazard in placement. Cannot comment on the influence of the trackman ( I would hope he was heeding what the riders wanted)). I just do not think anyone is going to stump up the money for the necessary improvements to both track and the poor lighting.

Agreed, it reads like an obituary/farewell. So sad.

For what it is worth, I believe the Hammers will effectively cease to exist having now completed the season. Rye House was merely an expedient - I still do not understand the logic of the authorities in ruling we had to switch all remaining fixtures to RH rather than just run the ones we could not fit in at Arena - but then this is speedway , often devoid of any logic. RH is much, much worse than Arena - poor viewing, poor racing, poor lighting and, as others have said, not really a viable option without major and costly changes. Thanks for the memories.

The Hammers were effectively 'screwed' when they had to move and have done well to get this far. Having said that, I expected them to put up more of a fight tonight but it is what it is.

It's over.

My second visit to Rye since the move -I just cannot take to the place. Yes there are stands/seating but it doesn't appear co-ordinated in any way. Plenty of lights around the track but, in my opinion, they do not illuminate the track effectively: I was watching the riders enter bend one from the tapes and had no idea who was whom. I counted three passes last night (there may have been more that I missed in the dark). For a meeting of this importance, there was little to no atmosphere - what do you expect on a cold damp late October evening on a track not renowned for good racing? I agree with others, the powers that be have made a complete cods of this season and, realistically, I hold out no hope that they won't do it again. Good to see that two Friday night impacted teams made it to the final notwithstanding the 'difficulties' placed in their way. Best wishes to both teams tonight and hope everyone stays safe. Whoever wins will be worthy champions.

Just wish the tie was at Arena as it would make for a much more competitive pair of meetings overall.

According to the preview on Hammers' website - he rides.

I can't of course but the general feeling from various sources is that they do. Why else would promotions continue them?

That is only four meetings in total. The present system gives you six (unless Lakeside and Peterborough are involved). The whole point of the play-offs is to draw in the punters in greater numbers than usual.

It is a totally different scenario in conceding a tie which took place, albeit abandoned, and not running the meeting at all. Yes, I know that in official terms the abandoned meeting never took place but, given the circumstances, and they were plentiful, a common sense approach was necessary. As it is, both promotions have been subjected to considerable expense only to end up with the same result - Lakeside progress to the final. Perhaps I am a fantasist to believe that common sense could ever play a part in how speedway is run.

I can see the Hammers trying a season at least there whilst keeping tabs on the 'new stadium' issue. It is for the promotion to talk to the stadium owners regarding their appetite for 'improving' certain issues. A fan base certainly exists in the area and a percentage of Hammers fans will get their fix at RH albeit, perhaps, not so frequently. It keeps the club alive at least. The attendance last night cannot be seen as indicative in any way, mid-week, meeting overload, opponent overload. Next Saturday will be a totally different experience.

Peterborough wanted it re-staged that much is obvious. I do not believe there would have been much resistance if they had elected to concede the tie.

A more than familiar comment when a team finishing top does not go on to win or even make the final. if Peterborough had to race the league match at Arena rather than Rye House, then they would most certainly not have got four points and if Workington had managed to get all their home meetings in on time etc - it may well have been Worky top of the table. 'If' - little word, large implications!

Justice would appear to have been served.

It seems that 'getting it in writing' means nothing nowadays - Lakeside 'had it in writing' re Adam & Zach's averages only to be forced into a change of their previously declared team! There is, as stated, a precedent regarding the Ulrich scenario and it has been applied in this case. It just seems the people initially being asked to 'rule' on issues are not up to the job and the more savvy ultimately challenge the interpretation. Should Ged have mentioned to Jon that he intended/wanted to include Ulrich - perhaps - it might have settled the issue at an earlier stage. Once again, speedway shoots itself in the foot (or both of them). A 'play-off semi-final second leg' should be something of an occasion but this one is as far from that ideal as it gets.

Sunday is probably the key word here - a mid-week evening is a totally different scenario. Perhaps the thought that this could be the Panthers last ever appearance (I sincerely hope it is not) may play a part too.

The usual double standards in speedway with the decisions seemingly being based on who/what team is involved. Who decides on Hammers' objection and when? If UO rides and is then deemed to be ineligible, his points would be deducted as is the norm. What a farce this season is turning out to be.

It is a decision that is, in effect, a fine on Lakeside. The mid week fixture will be a financial disaster for the promotion as I doubt the attendance will even merit manning the turnstiles!