Humphrey Appleby

Didn't speedway briefly use squad numbers a few years ago? So riders had both a squad and riding number...

Under the 'old' 13-heat format, the order of 1, 3, 4, 5 probably didn't really matter so much provided a strong rider was paired with a weaker one in each heat. With the 'new' 15-heat format, putting your No.1 at 2 or 4 would unbalance what are intended to be heats for weaker riders, and then mean that Heat 13 wouldn't feature the strongest riders as intended. The issue of needing your best riders in the last heat doesn't really apply to the 15-heat format as the last 3 programmed heats are essentially the same riding positions pitted against each other, followed by the nominated which you can put your two preferred riders in anyway.

And even more ignored in practice, despite being supposedly stricter.

Would involve a lot of writing in the programme... For Heat 15, I'd also leave the choice to the losing team, or the away team if the scores are level. However, I think I'd have 6-rider teams with 5 & 6 as the reserves and 1-4 can be named in any order. I'd then pair 1 & 2 and 3 & 4 and have them all ride against each other, separated by a reserves race (5 races). Then pair 1 & 5, 3 & 6 and 2 & 4, and have them ride against each other (9 races). So Nos 1-4 would ride against each other twice, and against the opposition reserves once. Nos 5 & 6 would ride against the opposition reserves twice (including in the reserves races), and against the opposition 1-4 twice. Heat 15 could be nominated. I'd look at a handicap scoring system for replacing a No. 1 or even heat leader, so that guests would not be necessary.

Surely at some point, it would actually be easier to build a basic stadium and then either let it go bust naturally, or be forced out of business by the noise complaints from the neighbours. How much is the current charade costing...?

Sort of... 1 meets 1 twice, 2, 3, 4, 5 twice and 6 (missing 7) 2 meets 1, 2 twice, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 3 home meets 1, 2, 3 twice, 4, 5, 6 twice (missing 7) / 3 away meets 1, 2, 3 twice, 4, 5, 6, 7 4 meets 1, 2, 3, 4 twice, 5, 6, 7 / 4 away meets 1, 2, 3, 4 twice, 5, 6 twice (missing 7) 5 meets 1 twice, 2 3, 4, 5 twice, 6, 7 6 home meets 1, 2, 3, 4 twice, 6, 7 twice (missing 5) / 6 away meets 1, 2, 3 twice, 4, 6, 7 twice (missing 5) 7 home meets 2, 3, 5, 6 twice, 7 three times (missing 1 & 4) / 7 away meets 2, 4, 5, 6 twice, 7 three times (missing 1 & 3)

It's not really possible to give a well balanced format with 7 rider teams over 15 heats. The 13-heat format was a bit better, although the No.2 position was a bit of quirk. It can be done with 6 rider teams, but that causes issues with riders having too many rides too close together, especially if rider replacement and/or tactical substitutions are used. It can also be done with 7 rider teams over 18 heats, as with the old test match format, but that makes for too long a match and the format is a bit repetitive and boring.

As I remember, there was a similar rule before fixed gate positions were introduced around 1988 - albeit the choice was 1 and 3 or 2 and 4. A team 6 points behind could choose gate positions and/or bring in a tactical substitute.

Under the old 13-heat format, the line-ups for Heats 12 and 13 were naturally more balanced even if you arranged Nos 1, 3, 5 and 4 in different way, based on how things would need to be for the initial heats - 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10 and 11. With the 15-heat format, Heats 8 and 14 were designed to be weaker heats for the second strings and reserves, based on the fact that you'll usually want one of your strongest riders at No. 5 as that position is paired with a reserve three times. The 15-heat format is a bit of a kludge really, even though the traditional 13-heat format had its quirks.

The problem may be that the floppy is no longer readable if it's more than a few years old and depending on how it was stored.

The 13-heat format was more balanced than the current 15-heat format for the top 5 riders, except ironically the No. 2 position. But I suspect the idea may have been to ensure a stronger Heat 8 in the obvious place to make a tactical substitution.

Why would anyone want to continue to work for an employer that failed to pay them?

One could argue that it was always traditional in speedway to have the support event during the 'second half'...

Because he was an exceptionally good driver from a relatively middle class background who couldn't be ignored. I honestly don't think there's any particular racism in motorsport, but the fact remains there are very few ethnic minorities who participate for whatever reason. That is changing a bit - maybe because of Lewis Hamilton - but it can't simply be down to money.

The SCB is not really an independent body, nor is its role to be running the sport. It's there as a sort of regulatory and judicial body. An independent body would something that which oversees the day-to-day running of the sport in line with agreed principles, and whose members have no (longer any) affiliation with any track. Most major sports have moved in that direction, although some have mix of independent directors and club representatives. Ideally it would also make recommendations as towards the best way to run the sport, with some experienced financial and marketing people on board. However, a major issue is that speedway just doesn't have the money or cachet to attract such people.

We've discussed before, but the narrative has tended to be written from the John Berry perspective. We don't fully know what the demands and conditions were, and I don't think it's realistic to expect complete autonomy as has been alluded to. John Berry was undoubtedly a good promoter, certainly had good if not visionary ideas on how the wider sport should be run, and was familiar with US sports practices which he suggested should been the model for speedway. However, any multi-stakeholder organisation needs a leader who is patient and persuasive, not one that quickly gets frustrated and falls out with people at the drop of hat. He also appears to have been reactionary about developments in other sports (e.g. World Series Cricket) that arguably revolutionised them (even if his underlying point about the demise of existing competitions was correct), so how things like the advent of satellite/cable television and the SGP would have been handled would have been interesting. I do think much of his vision for the way forward was correct, but i don't think his tenure would have lasted that long in that sort of role though. Plus speedway had already started on its long road to decline at that point, so it would have been in an environment of long under-capitalisation and increasing financial pressures.

I may have remembered this wrong, but I think it was closer to 50k per track per year. Terence got his cut of course, and I think I heard that aside from the fixed amount paid to each promotion, additional payments were made to teams when they were shown live to compensate for lower crowds.

Speedway had, and probably still could have basic appeal as it can be viewed on different levels - from 4 riders racing for 4 laps, to the different match tactics, to the intricacies of team building and heat formulas. It clearly got me interested at some point, although looking back the presentation was a bit dated even in the 1980s, and some of the rules have always been a joke. It's hard to know at what point it lost youth interest, but I suspect it's a combination of becoming somewhat expensive whilst the stadiums and presentation stayed the same (or even got worse). The rise of football along with its generally improved stadiums may also have had something to do with it, although that's also suffering from an increasing aged viewership. The loss of urban tracks probably didn't help. My father probably didn't even know about speedway so if I hadn't been able to cycle to the local track with all the kids that also went from my neighbourhood, then I may never have got interested in the first place. The same when I later went to Hackney and Rye House - only because I could get there on public transport.

I think many venues were tried and were financial failures. Others certainly disappeared due to development, being kicked out by the dogs or other sports.

The number of tracks that have disappeared over the years would suggest that the good old days were not always as good as popularly remembered...

The answer is probably nearly a hundred. I've probably even missed a few tracks from this list (permanent tracks only), but it gives an indication of how many venues have staged speedway in the British Isles (at least 111 by my count). Some were of course very short lived or only raced a handful of open meetings, whilst other tracks were effectively replaced by another track. However, there are still quite a few on the list that staged regular racing for many years that are no longer with us... Aldershot Tongham Armadale Armadale Stadium Ashington Portland Park Barrow Holker Street Barrow Park Road Belle Vue Hyde Road Belle Vue Kirkmanshulme Lane Belle Vue National Speedway Stadium Berwick Shielfield Park Berwick Berrington Lough Birmingham Alexander Stadium Birmingham Bordesley Green Birmingham Perry Barr Boston New Hammond Beck Road Bradford Odsal Stadium Bradford Greenfield Stadium Brafield Brafield on the Green Bristol Knowle Stadium Bristol Eastville Buxton High Edge 1 Buxton High Edge 2 California Wokingham Canterbury Kingsmead Carmarthen United Counties Showground Castleford Whitewood Stadium Coatbridge Cliftonhill Stadium Coventry Brandon Stadium Cowdenbeath Central Park Cradley Heath Dudley Wood Crayford Crayford Stadium Crewe Earle Street Doncaster York Road Eastbourne Arlington Edinburgh Meadowbank Edinburgh Powerhall Ellesmore Port Thornton Road Exeter County Ground Glasgow Ibrox Glasgow Hampden Park Glasgow Blantyre Greyhound Stadium Glasgow Rutherglen Glasgow Ashfield Stadium Glasgow White City Hackney Waterden Road Halifax The Shay Harringay Green Lanes Highbridge Oak Tree Arena Hull The Boulevard Hull Craven Park Ipswich Foxhall Heath Ryde Smallbrook Iwade Ferry Road Kings Lynn Saddlebow Road Leicester Blackbird Road Leicester Beaumont Park Linlithgow Heathersfield Stadium Liverpool Stanley Stadium Long Eaton Station Road Lydd Belgar Farm Middlesbrough Cleveland Park Mildenhall West Row Milton Keynes Groveway Stadium Milton Keynes Elfield Park Motherwell Milton Street Neath Neath Abbey Nelson Seedhill Stadium New Cross Old Kent Road Stadium Newcastle Brough Park Newport Somerton Road Newport Queensway Meadows Newtongrange Victoria Park Norwich Firs Stadium Oxford Cowley Paisley Love Street Peterborough East of England Showground Plymouth Pennycross Stadium Plymouth Plymouth Coliseum Poole Poole Stadium Purfleet Arena Essex Rayleigh Arterial Road Reading Tilehurst Reading Smallmead Redcar South Tees Motorsport Park Ringwood Matchams Park Rochdale Athletic Ground Romford Brooklands Stadium Rye House Hoddesdon Scunthorpe Quibell Park Scunthorpe Normanby Road Scunthorpe Ashby Ville Sheffield Owlerton Shelbourne Shelbourne Park Sittingbourne Central Park Skegness Marsh Lane Southampton Banister Court St Austell Cornish Stadium Stoke Sun Street Stoke Loomer Road Sunderland East Bolden Swindon Abbey Stadium Trelawny Clay Country Moto Parc Wembley Wembley Stadium West Ham Custom House Weymouth Radipole Lane White City White City Stadium Wigan Poolstock Wimbledon Plough Lane Wolverhampton Monmore Green Wombwell Station Road Workington Derwent Park Yarmouth Caister Road

You did state an opinion about 'wokes' and 'snowflakes', and you've just repeated it regardless of what the thread was originally about. That was in response to HackneyHawk stating an opinion which you disagreed with.

I will just quickly say, the trouble with anti-'wokes' is that they seem to think that no-one should disagree with their opinion. No-one has stopped you stating your opinion on here, but others equally have the right to take issue with it.

I think the key point though, is those stadiums no longer became viable for running speedway. I'd agree much of it is down to the dogs, erm... going to the dogs, but the fact that speedway is often symbiotic with another sport and can't sustain venues by itself, sums up much of the issue. In particular, the loss of Coventry which was the 'jewel' in the speedway crown, really demonstrates how far the sport has fallen, and the loss of 'urban' venues such as Swindon shows the sport is unable to resist demand for re-development. I'd suggest the loss of those long-standing circuits is far more significant than circuits that have tended to come-and-go over the years. Even though new venues have been considered because of inadequacies of their inner city sites, no-one would serious suggest closing down Goodison Park, Aston Villa, Chelsea or Fulham even if their clubs are in debt. There's still too much at stake for it to be a realistic prospect. Which is no model for any sport to follow. By comparison, I think over half the NFL teams are able to make a profit, and probably only 25% of those make ongoing losses.

Yes, because it wasn't offensive in Australia in the past because it wasn't used in an offensive way. The term really isn't used though now as the media there has become more aware of the international connotations. I'm sure you know very well that the P-word is a highly derogatory term in the UK, and has been for at least 50 years. What makes any word offensive - who knows - but the fact that some are trying to argue that it's just some sort of endearment really demonstrates a lot of the issue.