Humphrey Appleby

In the car park most likely.

What's the minimum number of points needed to qualify for the Semi-Finals? Probably something like 7, and then another 2 for reaching the Final, so that's 9. The maximum points a rider reaching the Final can score is 15 + 3, so 18. So award points in the Final - 1st = 30, 2nd = 20, 3rd = 10 and 4th = 0 - and add them to the heat and semi-final points. That way the top 3 will always score the most points...

In many motor sports, being within 10% of the track record is considered to be an acceptable speed. The 3 minute time limit is just there to ensure that a race can't last indefinitely, such as if a rider is pushing around. You could however, equally achieve the same effect by excluding riders if they are no longer under power, or if they fail to finish within a certain percentage of time after the winner (assuming there is a winner!).

Depends how you interpret 'racing' but in its strictest application you'd probably say taking the most optimal racing line at usual race speeds. I remember the Rick Miller case and it was over-zealous nonsense from the referee in the circumstances, but probably correct to the letter of the regulations. He was far from the only rider excluded for pulling wheelies whilst 'leading' though.

Quite aside from 'not making a bona-fide attempt to race', a heat has a time limit of 3 minutes. So the last rider could have an engine failure and not have time to push home, although not sure whether that would be actually classified as an exclusion or 'retired'. The last rider might also miss the two minute warning or touch the tapes with no reserve replacement available. In fact, all four riders in a race could conceivably be excluded this way. Another way would be for the last rider to fall themselves whilst 'genuinely making an attempt to race' and thereby be excluded as the primary cause of the stoppage.

Fans don't really come into it for the organisers. It's about finding enough venues willing to front up fees whilst taking the financial risk on the events, and ensuring there's sufficient television coverage to keep (potential) sponsors happy. And where there aren't enough willing victims to stage a GP, then a cheap venue is needed to keep the costs down even if that's in the middle of field...

Yes, Frisian canal vaulting was also never the same afterwards...

We communicated for quite a few years in the run up to his books being published, not least because I had some information he was interested in. He was perfectly fine until one day out of the blue I got an abrupt and rude message basically cutting off communication (although a year or so later made a conciliatory approach). I've no idea what I did, but it's pretty clear he did this to plenty of people so I don't lose sleep about it. Undoubtedly a great promoter, great thinker and good writer too, and knowing what I know now, someone probably someone who carried a significant amount of worry. But I don't buy into the hagiography.

Whilst John Berry was a very good promoter and clearly a great thinker about the sport, he was absolutely the wrong sort of person to be running the BSPA. He fell out with people at the drop of a hat and didn't talk to them for years, didn't tolerate fools glady and could be incredibly caustic. All very well when you're running your own show, but absolutely not the patient diplomatic qualities needed for dealing with different interests and building consensus. I suspect he'd have quickly got frustrated with the job and fallen out with everyone. Plus we've really only heard his perspective about those events down the years. His books and various articles were undoubtedly amongst the better reads in the speedway vernacular, but I'm sure there's another side to the story which largely seems to have gone untold, although it was hinted about in the Ian Thomas autobiography which was also a surprisingly good read.

Not exactly millions - a couple of million a year, and the exact amount appears to be linked to certain earnings. It certainly also used to be the case that the FIM paid the prize money out of this as well.

I'm sure lessons were learned.

It was the slogan of a recruiting poster for the International Brigades during the Spanish Civil War, inspiring many British volunteers to sign-up (including George Orwell who can hardly be described as a communist). WW2 broke out not long after, making it all very prescient. It's of course better known these days as the title of the Manic Street Preachers song about the subject.

If you tolerate this, then your children will be next turned out to be quite poignant...

Yes, but all the cars in an F1 GP are on-track at the same time, so it's the same for everyone at any given moment. That's not the case with a Speedway GP.

They hoped to get some of the big oval racing events, like Indycar and NASCAR, and I remember going to the first race there some years ago. Don't think those lasted long though. I've been back a few times since for test days, but whilst its a great facility, it always seemed woefully underused. There only seemed to be 2 or 3 cars driving round the track at any given time during the week.

I suspect Steve Purchase wishes he'd never heard of speedway given the subsequent developments...

I can't understand why people are thinking this is so complicated. How do they think it works in F1 (answer = one transponder located in standard position at front of car, and backup transponder located in standard position at back of car*)? Just put the transponder in a standard position on the front of the bike, most likely under the fork cover. The difference in positioning from bike-to-bike will be millimetres, but will have no consequences for timed qualifying because it'll all be relative. For racing, if there's an extremely close finish, most good timing systems have an option for a photo finish which I think is determined by a beam across the track of some sort. So if there's any discrepancy because of minute differences in the positioning of transponders, that should be able to sort it out, and is also what happens in F1. Obviously in a race, the clock needs to start when the tapes go up (or when the green light goes out if that's used). The race begins at that moment, not when a rider crosses the start line (which potentially they may never do) - it would be utterly daft to base the results of a race on how quickly someone rode around the circuit if they finished behind someone else. * It's not unknown for one of the transponders in an F1 car to fail, so sometimes times will only be recorded from the rear transponder.

There obviously are teams (normally ex-Football League) that can command decent attendances at that level, but it's really only a small handful. Look at the average attendances of other clubs in that league and they're far more akin to speedway ones.

It's not entirely their fault as some things have been beyond their control, and the sport lacks influential patronage as leverage. And speedway has suffered from changing lifestyles and interests along with many other businesses. But promoters can be blamed for collectively failing to control rider wages which are probably the biggest cost and are something they absolutely can influence.

It happens a fair bit at non-league level, where some glory-hunter throws money at a club to climb the pyramid, despite the fact it's never going to be sustainable once they stop subsidising the club. Almost unheard of at Football League level though because generally there's more history and sustainable interest behind the clubs there, plus there's arguably more due diligence checks. But even the top level of British speedway is probably equivalent to only the 6th tier (Vanarama League North or South) of English football these days.

I'd guess a speedway club could legally be run as a sole proprietorship. The designated promoter does not necessarily have to be the owner of the club, so this is just defining that promoter is a compulsory role. The text could be better constructed, but it does make sense in a roundabout way. Of course, the lack of consistency over the board members is just sloppy.

In football, there's almost always another sucker/gloryhunter who'll come along and pay off the debts of the previous sucker/gloryhunter.

Transponders are long overdue. Race times are not all that important in speedway, but if you're going to record them then it's ridiculous that speedway is still using old fashioned methods. Transponders are also advantageous for determining close finishes though, and would allow unreliable starting tapes to be done away with. As for 'qualifying' in speedway - pretty pointless. Speedway isn't about lap times, but position in a race, and the audience knowing that a rider has gone one-tenth quicker than another during the last lap doesn't really tell you anything when you can see all the riders out on track for yourself. If the riders really do want it, then it just proves you should never ask sportspeople on how to run their sport. If you want to make qualifying exciting (or force riders to turn up), then have a few races to determines who gets the favourable starting positions.

They already did a long time ago - just with much smaller crowds, less money, and much less public interest.

Try Skyscanner - I'm sure they have to use the same airlines as everyone else... But fares from UK to Australia depend on when you travel, the route you take, and how long you're prepared to sit in a transit lounge. Leaving in early November and returning late February, maybe as cheap as 600 quid return, going up to 1,300. The closer to Christmas you travel the more expensive it generally becomes. You can ship 60 kgs by sea freight for about 200 quid or less, but then it takes several weeks. However, I wouldn't stick a race engine in a shipping container.