Aces51

Let's just imagine that following the SCB investigation they had said that the track was not fit for racing on the Friday and the meeting should have been abandoned. Those too prejudiced to accept the truth now staring them in the face would have been quoting that at every opportunity they had and claiming it as proof positive that Belle Vue were totally to blame for the cancellation on the Saturday. Unfortunately for them, the SCB didn't say that. What they said is that on the Friday the track looked as if it would come good for the Saturday. So what do they do, they ignore that clear impartial evidence because it doesn't not just support their case, it destroys it. Instead they continue to rely solely on rumours spread before a lot of work was done on the track resulting in the track being raceable on the Friday. As for Orion, he knows he is being economical with the truth accusing me of blindly supporting the management of Belle Vue regardless of the issue. Why? Because he knows and was reminded of it by me recently, that I condemned Belle Vue over the hosepipe incident and said the punishment was fully deserved.

Looking forward to Friday but the forecast isn't good. It's not brilliant for Monday either but hopefully, more time for that to change.

I must admit I did see one of two crows about at the opening meeting, couldn't tell if they were from Stoke though, didn't get close enough.

So that's you and George Washington then, being sanctimonious is not a virtue. If that's your test, one mistake and you're condemned for life, you must lead a miserable existence not trusting anybody. Most of us are grown up enough to admit we have made mistakes and know our friends and acquaintances will have done so as well. Most of us are wise enough and generous enough to forgive and forget unless we discover someone seriously betrays that trust on more than one occasions. Intelligent people also look for proof if they have concerns and if you put your well known prejudices aside and looked objectively you might just see that on this particular occasion even the SCB have admitted that the track looked as if it would be ok for the Saturday.

According to Google maps it is 35 miles from Belle Vue to Stoke speedway. I can't imagine many, if any, fans who will attend Belle Vue would have gone to Stoke or vice versa.

Tsunami. It is not dismissive it is common sense. The cause of the cancellation was the interaction of the defective base and the inclement weather. Nobody knew about the defective base and the assumption was that it was a problem with the top surface. Work was done and on the Friday the problem appeared to be solved. The test on the Friday showed the track to be raceable and the comments by the Chairman of the SCB, that the track looked as if it would come good on the Saturday, were nothing to do with the granting of the licence, they followed the investigation and obviously related to the condition of the track for racing. Richie Worrall was even trying to persuade the others to ride on the Saturday. Again, according to the SCB following the investigation, Colin Meredith at no time expressed an opinion that the track would not be ready for the meeting despite the Chairman of the SCB closely monitoring the situation from the Tuesday. In short, the track was raceable on the Friday, the SCB have confirmed there was no reason to call it off at that time and the eventual cancellation was because of the interaction of the defective base and the inclement weather on the Saturday. It's not those of us who are basing our opinions on the evidence who are burying our heads, it is those who listen to rumour and make 2+2 =5 who need to stand back and consider the facts. You can't expect people to give weight to the usual I've been told, can't say by whom and can't tell everything. That is not evidence by any standard.

Tsunami. Did any of the things you heard refer to the sub base on the third and fourth bends being defective? If not they have no significance because that was the cause of the cancellation, nothing else. We all read the joint statement by Chapman and the SCB, which many thought outrageous and which clearly showed they had prejudged the matter and decided that the promotion was totally to blame. It seems odd therfore that what the Chairman of the SCB said following their investigation makes no mention of the matters to which you refer. It is obvious that they would have made much of anything that justified their ill thought out joint statement and would have taken evidence from anyone with credible and relevant information. Presumably, you and those spreading this information contacted them knowing the importance of what you knew? The truth is that far from giving credence to any rumours you heard they had to concede that on the Friday the track looked as if it would come good on the Saturday. Nobody denies there were problems in the week leading up to meeting. I have mentioned it numerous times. However, Belle Vue have a very experienced track curator, work was done and the result was that on the Friday the track was fit for racing. Belle Vue thought so and so did the SCB. As I have said before, who would call off a meeting in those circumstances?

As I predicted. Those with issues with Belle Vue and those incapable of objectivity or, of of understanding the evidence will never be persuaded. There is no hope If you can't grasp that nobody knew of the problem with the base prior to the opening meeting. If you can't understand that it was believed the problems were with the track surface, which was worked on resulting in the successful practice on the Friday, and the SCB admitting that it looked as if of it would come good for the Saturday. If you cannot see that there was no visual evidence of a problem on the Saturday and that the change from a raceable track on Friday to the problems on Saturday was due solely to a combination of the defective base and the inclement weather. If you find it impossible to comprehend that nobody had any reason to even suspect that might happen because nobody knew about the base. If the evidence of the successful extensive practice prior to the Leicester match followed by the problems the following day does not tell you that was an identical situation to what happened at the opening meeting and proves that no amount of testing on the Friday would have made any difference because the problem wasn't there on the Friday, there had to be the combination of the defective base and the inclement weather for the problem literally to surface. As we saw at the opening meeting it took only a few laps fit the problems to be seen and if they were there on the Friday they would have appeared when the track was tested on the Friday.

As a Belle Vue fan I am more than happy with the team we have this year and I shall not be conceding the title to Poole if and until they win it. However, to claim that all teams had an equal opportunity to build a successful team is rubbish. Poole gained a significant advantage when it was decided to use PL averages for the ftr. Virtually everyone acknowledged that Newman was either the best or, second best ftr last year and yet he was ranked 6th, allowing Poole to gain a second advantage in signing Ellis. I am not blaming Poole.I don't know how such a ridiculous decision was made but it gave Poole a clear advantage over almost everyone else. Again, I make no complaint against Poole, they built their asset base themselves and deserve credit for it but it certainly means that not every team had the same opportunities to build a team. They had first pick of those assets so have a better chance of signing the better riders on their retained list. I don't necessarily see anything wrong with that but nobody can argue that it didn't give them an advantage and mean that not every team had the same opportunities. I think teams should only be allowed a certain number of assetsand I say that knowing that Belle Vue are building their asset base and likely to be in a position to have first pick of the best of those who will use their new training facilities and come through the MDL and NL teams. If we want a system of team equalisation then more thought has to be given to devising systems which create a more even playing field. It is madness to have a system like this year with the ftr's which allows one of the stronger teams to start with an advantage.

At least be accurate if you're trying to prove a point. The track was worked on and tested and found to be ok on the Friday.The problem on the Saturday would not have been discovered no matter how much testing was done because it didn't exist on the Friday. It was the interaction of the defective base and the weather on the Saturday that caused the problem. Exactly as it did on the day following the extensive and successful practice before the Leicester match. As you like analogies, similar to you driving your car home on Friday night without problem. On Saturday you go out to it, fully expecting to drive off to your TV show and discover there's water under the car and a hose needs replacing. You phone your boss, explain and he says it's all your fault, we've got a team of people here all waiting, you should have told me last night. It might take you more than six weeks if you were not in a position to control the contractors doing the repairs and it was going to cost them a substantial amount plus potential legal proceedings against them.

You still don't seem either able or, willing, to understand. What people said was that the problems were because the track had not had time to bed in. It wasn't. That had nothing to do with what happened, it was the defective base, that nobody knew about and the inclement weather that caused the problem. Even the SCB had to admit that on the Friday the track looked as if it would come good for the Saturday. So again, why would anyone call off a meeting after a successful practice and a track that on the Friday was raceable?

I don't dispute there were problems on the Saturday. What I have explained is why they weren't apparent on the Friday or, on the Wednesday before the Leicester meeting. Is it so difficult to understand or is that you cannot stop the constant sniping at Belle Vue, even when the evidence is there for you to see.

There are those who will never admit they are wrong. Those who are anti Belle Vue or, anti David Gordon and Chris Morton, those who are jealous of the excellent facilities, which will help drag the sport into the 21st century, those who are incapable of understanding or, refuse to acknowledge the evidence that has now come to light and those who are incapable of being objective. We shall soon see who they are.

How difficult is it to grasp? There were problems with the track. Lots of work was done and by the Friday before the opening meeting it looked ok so a practice was held with two riders and it was OK. Even the SCB said after their investigation that on the Friday the track looked as if it would come good on the Saturday. Why would anyone then call it off? On the Saturday the track still looked fine. Riders paid no particular attention to bends 3 and 4 during their inspections and the SCB referee obviously saw no reason to call off the meeting after he had taken control. What we now know, because it happened again after the extensive practice on the Wednesday before the Leicester meeting, is that the track can look ok, ride ok during an extensive testing session but then, because of the defective base, the problems appear if there is inclement weather. That is what happened on the Thursday after that extensive practice and what happened on the Saturday of the opening meeting. Nobody could have foreseen that and the evidence from the extensive practice before the Leicester meeting shows that an even longer practice on the Friday would have made no difference because at that time the track was raceable. In both cases it was the defective base and inclement weather which caused the track to become unraceable on the day after the successful practices. As has been asked, who was it who is supposed to have told them to call off the meeting earlier that week? Not the SCB and not anyone in authority because the SCB would have referred to it following their investigation. Did anybody or, is it just another rumour without any substance. There are even some who seem to think that rumours circulating that the track wasn't ready prove something, because of the eventual cancellation. Those rumours were based on the track not having had time to bed in. We now know that had nothing to do with it, the problems were due entirely to the defective base, which nobody knew about.

So because the contractors seem to have got the base of our track wrong no Belle Vue fan can express an opinion on track conditions. You might as well say no Swindon fan can express an opinion on the building of a new stadium. Equally stupid.

I don't think you've thought that one through, much like the rest of your points. When did the tickets go on sale and for how long?

It was known there were issues but what was not known was that those issues were caused by the defective base and as we know today, other issues only revealed when that base has been dug up. It is a fact that the track had been worked on and that on the Friday night came through a practice session. It still looked fine on the Saturday but unbeknown to anyone had been affected by the weather because of the hidden problems with the base. The SCB investigation even said that on the Friday the track looked as if it would come good for the Saturday. Those are the facts but you ignore them and believe whatever you want.

Congratulations to Swindon on a deserved win. I predicted we would lose without Richie and Swindon having Grajczonek as a second string and Tungate at reserve. However, the deciding factor seemsto have been good night's for Sedgman and Morris and a poor night for Cook. I wonder if Rosco is still complaining about the number of races decided from the gate. It's all part and parcel of the sport.

So you're suggesting what? I don't recall Belle Vue saying anything of the nature of some of the accusations made by you and others on here and which the facts now show to be untrue to those capable of being objective.

With no Richie, Tungate at reserve, Grajczonek as a second string and Joe in poor form so far, I now think this will be a Swindon win. Wright could be a weakness as a heat leader but Richie has been scoring well,

This is totally frustrating and must be a financial nightmare for the promoters with no income coming in. Hopefully, the full extent of the problems is now apparent and can soon be solved. At least what it does make clear is that none of what has happened has been the fault of Belle Vue. There is no way they could have been aware of the problems with the sub base and now, whatever these further defects are that have been revealed. It just proves the wisdom of waiting to find out the facts before making the sort of outrageous comments and allegations made by some after the opening meeting and the subsequent postponements

Belle Vue fans did and over many seasons in a terrible stadium. We're either mad or very loyal. Keep the faith, whatever the faults of the management this is a season when Coventry supporters have got to show to the local councils and the media that there is significant support to keep the club going after this season.

Of course they have, both Peter Craven and Peter Collins for example and although before my time, I bet Freddie Williams did. The sport was much bigger in those days and received national publicity. I can recall Peter Craven's victories having a full page spread on the back page of national Sunday papers and regular stories in the national press. Peter Collins appeared on a number of popular terrestrial TV programmes during 1976/7 in addition to lots of press coverage. Obviously, there was no social media but newspapers had many more readers in those days and TV programmes had many more viewers than today. Collins and Craven were household names. Lots of people who had never attended speedway knew who they were, you can hardly say the same about Tai. On the general topic I see no argument that Tai is British, of course he is. I have no problem with him not riding in the EL, I can understand that he had to follow the money and the higher standard of competition in Poland and Sweden. I am less happy about him missing the British final. I can see the problems of him doing the semi finals but I am sure that a behind the scenes compromise could have been reached to seed him to the final. If he truly wants to help British speedway then he must know that his absence is likely to lower the profile of the meeting and adversely affect the attendance numbers. Having said that I certainly shan't be booing him at Cardiff and whenever he is in a race with Zagar in the GP's I shall be shouting for Tai. Neither of the PC's were arrogant, they had confidence in their ability but let their performances on track speak for them, That is part of the reason why they were both extremely popular with fans everywhere.

They are anticipating that the work will be finished on Friday and obviously only if everything goes to plan will the Colts match take place on Sunday.

There's a notification on the Belle Vue website, dated 11th April, that refunds were starting to be sent out. Somebody has posted on Facebook today that they went to the stadium today and they were given a cheque. They also confirmed what Joe Hatton has guessed in his post above might be the situation, that the admin staff are hard pressed coping with the refunds and their normal duties and that it may take some time to deal with them all.