Humphrey Appleby

The bottom line is that the rise of anti-immigration sentiment in the UK means that every industry sector has come under scrutiny from a government that has promised to cut the number of immigrants. Speedway is of course very small beer in terms of the handful of professional riders involved, but it also has little case to be exempted either as it has virtually no impact on the national economy in the way (say) the English Premier League does. If an Australian rider is depriving a British rider of employment, then it's arguably no different than if they were a chef or car mechanic. Added to this, the BSPA (or at least some members of it) were for years abusing the existing immigration rules for speedway riders, which is what led to the clampdown earlier in the year. I doubt the BSPA think far enough ahead to consider the state of the developing rider pool, and I suspect would generally prefer to have a free-for-all rather than a restricted choice of riders, so I'm sure the immigration rules for speedway are largely determined by the responsible government department. I think we all understand the historic importance of Australian riders in British speedway, but I think the regulations are already quite generous for Australians compared to other countries in the sense of allowing qualification through state titles, some of which are little more than glorified open meetings. Personally I'd like to see total freedom of movement between the UK and Australia (and New Zealand) for qualified citizens, but it's not going to happen in the current climate. Brits also get no real special privileges over anyone else in terms of Australian work permits, notwithstanding very part-time speedway participation, so it's a two-way thing.

I fully understand the problem, but the fact of the matter is that Elite League speedway is a poor value product. I was able to pay the equivalent of 16 quid (and the cheapest adult tickets were about a tenner) because the Big Bash can pull 30,000 spectators to a run-of-the-mill match, as well as leverage decent sponsorship because sponsors want to be associated with the product. Regardless of whether riders are getting to be millionaires or not, they're unfortunately not worth what they're being paid in terms of the crowds they're pulling. And if the majority of 18 quid is wages, then something is badly wrong with the economic structure of the sport.

I think speedway would still be happy with the attendances that test cricket gets though. The simple fact though, is that first class cricket should never have existed as a professional sport given how long it takes to play, the fact the action takes place some distance away from the spectators, and there's large gaps between the action. However, it still became very popular despite that, and even today pulls decent crowds at an international level. I think both T20 and test cricket have their place (although I'm less enamoured with one day cricket which is a pig-in-a-poke to me) and for different reasons. I like passing the time of day at Lords or wherever, whereas the full-on 'experience' at the likes of the Big Bash (where I went yesterday) would hurt my head before long. Equally though, I paid less to watch some of the best players in the world in one of the best cricket stadiums in the world, than I would to watch so-called Elite League speedway in a ramshackle stadium. So with respect to speedway, I don't think it's a matter of comparing test cricket to T20, but improving the value of the product and the general experience. It's also a matter of having decent marketing that properly leverages social media and the modern app world, rather than handing over the commercial rights to an old mate who doesn't know the first thing about how to exploit them properly.

As Pinny says, it's not that straightforward to get a visa beyond the working holiday thing. You either need a sponsor and/or need to be in an approved occupation plus have all sorts of qualifications. With respect to the sports visa, there's far fewer opportunities for professional employment in Australia than the UK, whether speedway or otherwise. You could probably make a full-time living in English football down to the 7th to 8th tier, whereas there's really only about 40 full-time professional teams across all sports in Australia.

There's a market for both traditional and other types of pub. The problem is that the market is no longer big enough to sustain them in the same numbers because people are simply drinking out less. The smoking ban was the final nail in the coffin for most pubs that relied heavily on a few hardcore drinkers.

Go to Australia and try to get a work permit.

Maybe. Has been around the speedway community and seems to command respect, but I've never really heard Eric Boocock expound any wide reaching vision on how the sport should progress, particularly commercially. Probably would be an acceptable choice, but not really sure he'd be someone to lead the sport into a new era then or now. I think a supremo is more likely to be a former referee, or a young commercial manager with some involvement in speedway. I wouldn't preclude a youngish ambitious outsider with a wider grasp of sports promotion, but speedway is so unique and inward looking that I suspect no-one outside the sport would really understand it, far less want to touch it with a bargepole. Generally I'd never suggest riders for such jobs, but Jan Staechmann might be worth a punt. He comes over as sensible, rational and seems to have some grasp of the bigger picture.

I didn't say I objected to him - simply that I don't think he'd have worked out as supremo. I think plenty did object to him though - e.g. Ian Thomas slated him in his autobiography - and the fact he wasn't eventually appointed supremo by his (former) fellow promoters is probably evidence of that. I'd also be the last to say he didn't know what he was doing, but as I said, you have to convince everyone else. Whilst I'd agree the BSPA can be a short-sighted bunch and it was probably very frustrating for man of John Berry's ability to have to deal with, the sheer number of falling outs with business partners, promoters and others suggests it can't always have been down to other people.

Whilst John Berry was clearly an excellent promoter, deep thinker and probably even visionary, I think him in any sort of supremo role would only have ended in disaster. He obviously didn't suffer fools gladly, but seemed to fall out with just about everyone at various times over the most trivial matters. That simply wouldn't work in a supremo role. It requires firm leadership but equally a diplomatic touch, and you have to most people buying into the vision which isn't going to work if you make enemies over silly things. I think in the end though, even John Berry didn't think speedway was salvageable.

Again though, this demonstrates the thinking in the sport. Whilst I'd agree that filling in the programme used to be part of the appeal for me, it's perfectly possible in 2015 to relay results directly to an app, so no filling in is necessary. And if wifi was made available in the stadium, maybe kids would be more willing to come along if they can do whatever they do on their phones in between the indeterminable delays between heats.

I've nothing against athletics, but it's just not of much interest to the average member of public most of the time, and long distance track is especially dull. Unfortunately, there's also the widespread doping that does go on, which casts suspicion on every athlete. Froome is just riding under a flag of convenience. Not born in Britain, didn't grow up in Britain, and seemingly hardly ever comes to Britain. Plus cycling is full of drug cheats. At least Mo Farah grew up in Britain, even though he apparently doesn't spent much time here anymore for tax reasons. Would say the guy is hardly known outside the sport.

There's no entitlement for the fans to turn up and pay their money either. Part of being in the entertainment industry is indulging the patrons interests, just as some people follow the lives of actors beyond watching their films, the NFL draft, or speculate on football transfers. None of it's really important, but it generates interest in those sectors and good promoters would indulge it. Sure it can be argued that the heat leader list is mostly only of interest to a few sad stattoes who probably don't even pay to watch the sport, but it's part of a wider problem in that team building rules are not seen to be transparent or consistent, along with the perception of manipulation by promotions with more political clout. I started to lose interest in the sport even before I left the UK because it just came over as an increasing farce where the paying public were treated with contempt. So whilst I don't particularly think the public have an entitlement to know about the business details of speedway, I don't think it's unreasonable to have the competition rules explained. Yes, I'd accept that rulebooks may not be officially published, but teams are put together before it does come out, so clearly the team building rules are agreed and known, not to mention a promoter seeing fit to make barbed comments about fans pointing out all the inconsistencies. It would have been easier to just put forward a rationale explanation (if there is one) which may not have satisfied some, but would certainly have not alienated everyone.

Yes, but the Davis Cup on the BBC... Without wishing to knock the achievement of the team, Andy Murray was involved in 11 of the 12 rubbers that Great Britain won during the David Cup campaign. In fact, he won 8 of the 12 single handedly. The Davis Cup seems to be more of a Best Pairs than team competition.

We're not talking about a commercial enterprise where some things may need to be kept confidential. We're talking about the team building rules for a spectator sport.

Of course not, but the public don't have to watch the sport either. Team building restrictions are an important aspect of the speedway, and indeed are part of the interest for some, so I don't think it's unreasonable that consideration should be given to the public in this respect. I think in most sports, the rules for squad and team building are publicly available. There's no direct equivalent with speedway in terms of the complexity of team building restrictions, but certainly the rules of the NFL draft are known and it's a public process.

They wouldn't hardly be a reserve choice, which is exactly the point. A team manager could use them tactically in particular heats rather in a pre-programmed order. I'm not going to argue the toss about it - I was merely pointing reasons you might put your best rider at reserve if there are no restrictions. I think in the past team managers have occasionally done precisely that, but you know best...

I'm giving you reasons why the best rider might be programmed at reserve. Why would the other top riders already have a heat or two - you could put your reserve in Heat 1 if you want?

I don't know why people dignify SPOTY by discussing it. The whole thing is a total farce, and even though no-one would deny the visibility of speedway is very low these days, to not highlight a British World Champion of a professional sport is a total disgrace.

Well yes, but it also showed that promoters think they can run a sport in such an un-transparent manner in the 21st century. Promoters secretly voting for which riders go on a list affecting team make-ups is somehow acceptable. It's another reason why people just can't be bothered with the sport anymore, and if certain promoters don't get it, then they're just thick or biased...

The flexibility to bring them out against the top riders from the other teams, rather than have pre-programmed races.

I think to be a great rider you need to occasionally be a hard rider, and Nielsen was good enough to pull it off most of the time. I felt that Tatum always did have a bit of a tendency to crumple under pressure, and Nielsen did exactly what required at Bradford. However, Tatum did exactly the same thing to Nielsen in the Intercontinental Final the previous year, so it's difficult to have a lot of sympathy. You win some you lose some.

Won't you both have to take up cudgels at the new stadium next season? Allegedly...

No-one's mentioned Jimmy Nilsen. Wasn't he quite handy for a while?

Havelock also had his brush with authority and got banned for a year. Difference was that he came back better, kept his nose clean, and was probably a deserving winner in 1992. Few riders ever had the ability of Lee, but it's what you make of it.

John Jorgensen was a multiple World Team Champion by virtue of being in victorious Danish teams, but I'm afraid few outside of Coventry would put him on any list of great riders. Team events can't really be used in judgement of a rider's standing. Billy Sanders didn't even qualify for three of the World Finals that Nielsen was in, so I'm not sure how he was stopping Nielsen from winning it.