BWitcher

So what you're basically saying is that Woffinden has rejected a package that would make him financially better off, just to spite a few keyboard warriors in the UK?

Yes I have, but not for a service that is available to me normally.

Nail on head.

Completely irrelevant, unless you and a few others want to take a pop at any of those others who raise money for charity but have decided to change employer in the past for better pay and/or work/social life balance.

No there aren't. Fans are irrelevant in the scheme of things. Next you'll be saying Nicki Pedersen must not be such a hard rider as it upsets fans...

Rubbish is it a matter of principle. Speedway is his career, his job. It's a short career that could end tomorrow. It is up to him to make as much money as he can during that period, be as successful as he can whilst maintaining some form of balance to actually enjoy it. Would you want someone dictating to you who you should work for, where you should work? Telling you that you should still be working for your first employer because they helped train you, even though it might be for much less money, with far more travelling and costs involved? Of course you wouldn't!

All semantics really.. parasites anyway

He is stealing a service others are paying for.

Just saying as it is

Some folk are still clinging to the belief it is just the money that prevents riders from racing in the UK. It isn't. It is the schedule. The news that an attractive package was offered to Tai pretty much confirms that.

Nobody gives you that much credit.

Just talking about UK.

Wolves is just the home straight now, but back when you would have attended you could go home straight, 3rd/4th bends and back straight.

Nor do they know who Tony Rickardsson was, or Mark Loram, or Nicki Pedersen, or Jason Crump. Tai has had more media coverage than any of those, so by your book they are bigger 'under achievers'.

Yeah you are right! He's really under achieving. If only he had a better team around him, you never know he might amount to something!

In certain seasons.. but 2009 is still pretty recent in the context of this discussion. The racing in the early 90's which my head tells me was unbelievable, because all I remember is Sam etc... upon rewatching as I've said many times, is full of very strung out races.

No you have lost the plot and you're becoming tiresome. Racing IS less exciting when there is a small crowd. That is 100% bona fide fact. Racing IS more exciting when there is a large crowd. Again, that is 100% bona fide fact. If you're not adult enough to understand basic things, don't debate. Folk enjoyed the Wembley World Finals because there was an incredible atmosphere, regardless of the racing. Good races were a bonus. Folk enjoy Cardiff because of the atmosphere, regardless of the racing. Again good races are a bonus. The same calibre of meeting in front of a sparse crowd, most would find it boring. It really isn't a difficult concept to grasp but you steadfastly refuse too because you still have this incorrect belief that racing was so much better in the past. Unfortunately for you there is evidence quite to the contrary that can now be viewed across various media forms. It won't stop you banging on though and trying to re-invent history.

Why not? It's this sort of outside the box thinking that is required. Nothing is being lost, plenty to gain.

We're never going to agree because you are wrong and all available evidence shows you to be wrong, you just won't admit it. You're even giving the reasons why you are wrong in your own post yet you STILL don't get it. You've admitted that an exciting race in a big group of people is better than in a small group. Therefore its simple, its not the race.. that hasn't changed, its the people watching it and the atmosphere. You've heard people say they don't go anymore because the racing is boring because when there is no atmosphere around it, it will be more boring! You've admitted that yourself numerous times. You've even admitted that watching these meetings from the past on tv, which you say were amazing, are boring as you don't get the atmosphere. Again, destroying your own argument. Another example.. Darts. Put Phil Taylor v Michael Van Gerwen in one of the old pubs/clubs they used to stage darts tournaments in, many would find it boring... put them in the O2 Arena or one of the venues for Premier League darts and its the best night out going to many! Same players, same game, same rules. Different ATMOSPHERE.

It's all about branding. No more of the 'family sport' business. Needs to be marketed as an Extreme Sport.. it is after all one of the most extreme sports there is.. that means promoting the thrills and spills, the danger and the crashes. We are debating, quite a few of us. You're the only one who isn't, still rambling on with the same cut and paste post you make over and over till your next ban. Stop polluting the thread please, the adults are talking amicably.

Yep, a fair few announcers did that.. but again, it works when there is a good crowd in.. as after his announcement it's accompanied by loud cheers or shouts of "Rubbish!" (or worse)... nowadays they still do it, but its greeted mostly by silence.

Thanks Steve, again this is exactly the point I am making. Atmosphere makes the sport. In the early 80's the sport lost some glamour with riders like Penhall departing the scene.. then there was the 'fixed' races scandal after which the media began to cover the sport less and less. Less media coverage meant it began to fade away from the eyes of the general public and in particular the youngsters required to replace the natural wastage of fans drifting away, dying. As the crowds gradually dropped, the atmosphere began to drop, good races didn't seem as good or thrilling.. Average races became poor races and so on. Year on year the problems gradually have got worse. However, the sport can still produce.. when the playoffs come along and you have a big crowd, it suddenly becomes brilliant again. Same riders, same tracks, same bikes.. its just the ATMOSPHERE.

I've given you the reason why it was all better in the past and that was the atmosphere. Nothing more, nothing less. Take exactly the same meetings from the past, stage them now in front of a few hundred people, you'd have the same 'throttle control, tracks, racing lines' but you'd think it was dull.

Why do you contradict yourself so much? You've agreed the racing wasn't any better.. Then whitter on about lack of opportunities to pass nowadays. I've explained the reasons why it SEEMED better back then, reasons you have AGREED with. Your argument about less exciting racing, holds no credence.. why? One because you've already destroyed it yourself by admitting that the racing wasn't any better... and secondly, there are tracks now that produce brilliant racing... but very few people go to them...

That completely backs up what I've said as well Gemini.