Humphrey Appleby

FIM Europe's competencies are to run European Championships, which is what they've done. Presumably they can run those as single or multi-round events, so in one sense they haven't done anything wrong. The problem is that speedway is a Euro-centric sport, so any European competition is invariably going to involve much the same riders as World Championships. That the FIM didn't think of that in advance says much about it's own (in)competencies.

It's a fair point to discuss what BSI have done for speedway because I'd certainly agree they're not everything they're cracked up to be. With respect to Harris though, I'm sure many British fans were also frustrated to see him included year-after-year. It's perfectly obvious why he was there though. Britain is still one of the 'big three' speedway markets and probably generated significant television revenues, so there needed to be local interest. I doubt he was selected because BSI are a 'British' company, and I'm sure if the situation were reversed, a Polish version of Harris would be getting the gig.

How does it suggest that? FIM may have decided to introduce something, and BSI asked them to reconsider. BSI may well be involved in making decisions about the SGP - it would be naive to believe otherwise - but there does seem to be some sort of agenda going on here.

I'd see it run by the promoters/club associations of the countries where speedway is professionally staged - Britain. Denmark, Poland and Sweden at least. They might well have to involve a professional partner though.

It would possibly better off under its own federation, although I'd more like to see a delegation of rights to an international promoters group along the lines of the FIA and F1. F1 nominally remains under the auspices of the FIA, but the F1 teams effectively run the sport. FIM Europe should have nothing to do with track racing.

They have. I seem to recall Nigel Mansell got a landmark ruling quashing a noise abatement order on his track a couple of years ago.

Which is what some on here have been suggesting all along, to scepticism from those who were saying it was all imminent. I think every speedway fan hopes this will happen, but many have seen and heard it all before.

Yes, but Switzerland has signed up to a lot of the EU legislation anyway. I'd guess it would also depend under what law the SGP contracts are signed. BSI is a UK company.

The inscription fee isn't really going to be the stumbling block. Recouping what they're paying to the FIM maybe, but presumably that's what they agreed to, and doesn't the prize money come out of that anyway?

There are a lot of logistical difficulties in organising things in Russia, although it's usually easier if you have official support. Aside from that though, Togliatti is as good a venue as some on the SGP circuit. The SGP and SEC, BSI and Onesport are Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dee as far as I'm concerned though.

And yet the SEC see some value in having a Russian round. Yes, inscription fees might be higher for FIM competitions, but you can only really think that Togliatti didn't want to pay BSI's asking price. Another one of the list of proposed GPs that never happened.

DOUBT even the FIM can act unilaterally change the conditions under which a contract was originally agreed.

I think BSI started around 1999, and the first time Cardiff was staged was in 2001. However, they did also get Stockholm and Berlin the same year, and I think Gothenburg (and Sydney) the following year. So they made a decent start, even if some of the major stadiums didn't last long on the circuit. Most of the other venues were the same old sort of places that had always staged GP/WC rounds though, much as SEC is now.

I read the whole article and I don't feel the taster snippets were especially out of context. If you analyse the article in depth then you can point to some contradictions, but I think it should be viewed as an interesting narrative of the Travel Plus 'empire' and one of the better known 'back room' characters. I think it's clear people have had their run-ins with James Easter - on here, through his business dealings, and no doubt within the sport, but obviously an article needs to say some controversial things in order to sell the publication it appear in.

Did they though? From reading Backtrack and various autobiographies over the years, many promoters even during the 'golden era' would appear to have led a very hand-to-mouth and often marginal existence. Even if they had successful periods, that could be wiped out because of a bad season or over-expansion. For every Ochiltree and JB, there would appear to be many others who fell by the wayside. Indeed, even the Len Silvers and Ian Thomas's don't seem to have got immensely rich from the sport. That tracks came and went even during the most successful periods, would suggest there wasn't as much money in it as people popularly believe.

All very well in a perfect world, but financial reality is quite another thing. I think I once worked out that all the BEL tracks (at the time) could run on either a Wednesday or Thursday, but they're rarely the days when you'll get the best crowds (with the odd exception). Forcing tracks out of business to suit the international calendar doesn't strike me as being very sensible either. Why should the prime race days be automatically given over to the SGP or SEC without them paying anything in 'compensation' for the privilege?

Journalists used to go out and find evidence, but we're hardly asking for Watergate here. What's needed is an appraisal of the situation - what's behind this, why are the Poles/OneSport suddenly wanting to run the sport now and not previously, what's the issue between the FIM and FIM Europe and so on... I doubt any of it is salacious gossip, or FIFA-style corruption. I don't think I've ever suggested that OneSport are any better, but let's not spin that Bydgoszcz is being done for the fans' sake...

Yes, but what happens when one team can afford all the best riders, or a team happens to need a particular rider to fit the points limit and there's no-one else available? Whilst a level playing field is never going to be entirely achievable, most teams at least need to start out competitive. Whilst on the one hand I can see the riders point about being able to get what they can, the practical reality is absurd wages being paid compared to the revenue coming in. There's surely got to be a balance somewhere.

In other words, the tracks they know they can rent cheaply and at short notice....

Seems others are telling it in a slightly different way, but whatever...

Interesting spin. The Warsaw GP falls through, perhaps because the PZM wants to throw in its lot with SEC, and everyone else has got wise to paying silly amounts to BSI. So they're forced into organising a GP themselves at Bydgoszcz at short notice...?

The situation between the SGP and SEC is really more analogous to the European Champions League and UEFA Cup (I refuse to call it the Europa League).

Years ago, the main leagues should have got together and agreed on their race dates, which would probably have meant Britain settling on just a couple of race days. They should also have set-up a joint company to run the SGP and other international competitions, so they could share out any proceeds from these. It would not really have solved the problem of Britain and the GP as Saturdays and probably Fridays have always been the most lucrative nights to which to run. However, the proceeds from the GP could have been used to compensate those teams who had to run on an off-night. The problem though, is that the main leagues have competed with each other rather than working together, which has allowed a third-party to come in and take the 'crown jewels'. Even if they didn't themselves have the commercial aptitude to leverage revenue from the SGP, they could have sub-contracted a company like BSI or Onesport and pay them a percentage of the proceeds.

I think in fairness, if some promoters didn't do that then there wouldn't be any speedway. I think it's very difficult to know whether a particular track will be viable unless it's been established for some time, and even then speedway is very susceptible to things beyond its control. I do think some promoters take an excessive amount of flak when they are putting their money on the line (and often losing it), but neither do many help themselves in their dealings with the public. It's particularly the case with the fan promoters who might have been successful in their day-to-day business dealings, but fail to understand that sports requires an entirely different approach. So I can sort of see where he's coming from, and he does point out that promoters themselves are also responsible for their own downfall. However, it would be more interesting if those promoters were named and shamed... Regarding the issue with Sanders, why shouldn't a rider get the best deal he can? That is typical of the mindset of some promoters - my way or the highway. If Billy wanted to negotiate a better deal, then he should have been able to. I am happy in my job, but if I felt a change was in my interests and could get a similar position elsewhere with more pay, why should I not try to? And should my employer be able to control what other potential employers would offer me? And we wonder why speedway is in a mess. Honestly.

Then more fool them to agreeing to pay it. They should have done their sums and worked what was a reasonable fee, or even based it on a percentage of the profits.