Humphrey Appleby

That website is an interesting work of fiction...

It would depend. When James I (or VI if you're Scottish) ascended to the throne of England, he became King of Great Britain, France and Ireland although arguably he was separately King of England, King of Scotland and King of Ireland (although the Crown of Ireland was somewhat titular, and France nothing but a legal fiction). It became a moot point upon the political union of England and Scotland, and then later Ireland, but the current Queen is actually separately Queen of the individual Commonwealth Realms as well as the UK. So I'd imagine the Queen would become Queen of Scotland in addition to being Queen of the United Kingdom, along with all her other Commonwealth queenships. Despite what the Scottish nationalists claim, the UK would not cease to exist if Scotland left - there were Acts of Union with Wales prior to Scotland, and there were Acts of Union with Ireland which are still in force (although the latter now only applies to Northern Ireland). Some Irish get miffed even with the British Isles, and woe betide you calling the country 'Eire' even though it's the name of the country in Gaelic. I think the politically correct term is 'Western European Isles' or some such nonsense...

Well except the UK is not Great Britain per se. It so happens that all of Great Britain along with Northern Ireland is part of the UK, and if we're being really pedantic, you could argue the Isle of Wight and other off-shore islands are not Great Britain in the strictest geographical sense but still part of the UK. The official full name of the country is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, but it was once United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and could just as easily be the United Kingdom of England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Going back to the 1950s, and there were apparently serious overtures to make Malta an integral part of the UK, which presumably would have meant another change to the name. As for being 'British' or otherwise - the term could apply both geographically or politically. There are British people in Gibraltar, but they're clearly not Great Britain, but equally Scotland will always be part of Great Britain (unless there's some dramatic geological event, in which case nationality will probably be moot anyway).

I think it's splitting hairs. Scotland would still be on the island of Great Britain, so would still be British from that perspective. Berwick Rangers are members of the Scottish FA despite being located in England, and nobody really cares.

Polish womens' basketball on a GP weekend... ;-)

Horsey stuff is surprisingly popular. I've been dragged to a few events by Mrs Appleby and it draws quite large crowds and a lot of sponsorship for a sport that's largely not in the mainstream.

Anyone can get a Polish licence though.

I don't think they do. Didn't they have to change the rule to say U21 riders on Polish licenses?

Better than most speedway GPs, isn't it?

No doubt still working on information from 20 years ago when it would have been a decent wage, even though such facts can very easily be checked online.

The allocations will be to the national federation (FMN) - in this case the ACU. Presumably the ACU would normally delegate nominations to the BSPA, but I'd think they can nominate any British licence holder they wish. In individual competitions, eligibility is determined by the licence held, not citizenship.

Anything can be achieved in Russia if the Russians want it to happen. Just need the right contacts.

The price demanded by BSI has obviously been the sticking point until now.

Wouldn't normally associate Olsen and good racing tracks in the same sentence, but I'd accept there may be local constraints and difficulties that make it difficult to achieve consistency with temporary tracks. However, as others have pointed out, the track for the Finnish GP was laid for some time, and it must have been apparent there would have been concerns with the shape. More to the point though, BSI seem very happy to claim credit for a good GP, but are quick to blame the locals for a bad one. BSI are responsible for the series, the buck should stop with them, and you as a journalist should be querying what the problems were that lead to such rubbish being served up. Finland was a golden opportunity to promote the sport in a country that actually has a reasonably developed speedway scene. Sadly, as with New Zealand, it looks like it might have been a missed opportunity.

Maybe here...

It's not entirely comparable as motorcycle race on permanent tarmac that generally provides a consistent smooth surface. Speedway used a dirt composition which has many more variables such as choice of material, compaction, moisture and so on... F1 and MotoGP have of course had their fiascos too - F1 with the tyres at Indianapolis some years ago, and then MotoGP having to make pit stops at Philip Island because their tyres were discovered to not last the distance.

The difference is the glamour and the sight of the cars racing around the harbour and casino under (usually) azure blue skies. With all due respect to the Finns, Tampere does not have quite the same appeal...!

Right, so Olsen was in charge. Someone who's been building temporary tracks for years and is supposed to be a leading authority in the matter. Yet 'local incompetence' still gets blamed. You can't do a lot about the track shape and is diificult to get reliable temporary tracks, even if this one had actually been laid for months. However, the series organisers should take responsibility rather than passing the buck as ever...

And who was responsible for doing the track, and how long have they been doing it?

Would rank around 50th position below the Philipines and Egypt.

No it's not - it's the responsibility of BSI as it had been since the rules were changed some years ago.

All that's needed is a rule excluding Harris forever...

Would likely be in the EEA though, so wouldn't make a lot of difference, and of course there was always free movement with Ireland.

Many years ago, the ACU ran motorcycling throughout the Commonwealth, which is the historical origin of the likes of Mauger and Briggs riding in the British team. Conversely, I don't think it was ever responsible for Ireland, which has always been run under the all-Ireland MCUI. Berwick Rangers is based in England but plays in Scotland, whereas Gretna for many years played in English leagues. Several Welsh teams playing in English competitions to this day, and Derry City (Northern Ireland) play in the Republic League or Ireland. Loads of examples of speedway teams from one country racing in another national league, as others have pointed out. There's already a Scottish ACU which would likely affiliate directly to the FIM if independence came, but why would that preclude cross-border racing?

And here we see the reality of it, but over on other threads, some of the same people as on this thread are demanding that the government keep out immigrants and urging us to vote UKIP. It seems that as with crime though, the same rules aren't expected to apply to speedway riders...