norbold

When I first mentoned Hackney and unwittingly started off this controversy, that was the period I was really thinking of - pre 1984.

Writing books gives me something to do in my retirement.

I understand there is a brilliant new book being published today. All about growing up in Hackney in the 1950s and 60s and contains a part about going to speedway in the 60s and how the author came to be named after a speedway rider...Looks good. More info here: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Pie-Mash-Prefabs-1950s-Childhood/dp/1784181234/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1425542499&sr=1-1&keywords=Norman+Jacobs

According to Peter Morrish's book, the Newcastle v. Sheffield match was not restaged.and the points were awarded to Newcastle.

I'm sure there must be a joke there somewhere about a pickled onion..... Snap!

Eating a raw onion.

I would have thought that Ward needs to be careful what he says about the FIM and its findings otherwise he could find himself back in front of them on a charge of bringing the sport into disrepute or some such charge.

The racing at New Cross was always very exciting because it was so small. There was never time for a race to become boring! But talking about the best prepared track for good racing, I think I'd have to say the best I visited was Hackney under Len Silver.

I think you mean lowered it.

According to the link above he chose: Favourite track: You Oughta be in Pictures by Ray Conniff & Billy Butterfield Book: Encyclopaedia Luxury: Surfboard I don't know what his other seven records were.

Another former Hammer, Reg Luckhurst made a record.

Agreed sommelier. And it took him years of dedication to reach the top. He wasn't by any means a "natural". When he first came to England as a 17 year old he was, to put it bluntly, a flop. But he went away, worked hard and dedicated himself to the sport. He came back when he was ready, worked even harder, and we all know the end of that story. Without getting too boring on the subject, could I add that Tom Farndon too dedicated himself to the sport. He was probably the first rider to take physical fitness seriously with regular training, was tee-total and didn't smoke. He too wasn't a natural but it was his dedication and hard work that paid off.

Haven't seen a contribution from Bryn on this thread, but if he did he might mention their programme editor could be, say, Parsnips....

It won't do Phil. It's like saying the Daily Mail or the Daily Mirror (see I'm being fair!) only report the facts and it's up to people to make up their own mind, when, in fact, the reporting of both is very biased to the view they espouse so it doesn't give people the opportunity to weigh up different views and opinions and more importantly, the facts before coming to their own conclusions. If you're only told one thing you've got no opportunity to come to a proper conclusion. In the case of the Mail and the Mirror there is the balance of the other paper to help people make up their mind as well as a supposedly neutral BBC. But in the case of the SS, in its monopoly position, you bear a much greater responsibility to see that all views are equally disseminated. This is especially the case where matters of actual fact are are called into question. eg, the 45 days. You really have a duty to point out what the rules say and explain what is actually going on, so that people can take everything into consideration before making their mind up. Sadly, the SS failed to do this.

Perhaps Darcy could be rewarded by being named the wild card in every round after June.....

You're right, gustix, I do indeed know John Hyam and it is the sort of sensible thing I would expect him to say. Speedway WOULD become a mickey mouse sport if the riders were allowed to ride intoxicated. So I was rather hoping it was him who posted that comment. However, you seem to be suggesting he didn't and wouldn't agree with that sentiment. Shame really.

Mind you, this was an interesting comment on the petition: "John Hyam LONDON, Speedway would be a mickey mouse sport if the riders were intoxicated."

Blimey, Grachan. They shouldn't let you anywhere near an Internet Forum. You're and your both spelt correctly!

If it was a one-off meeting they probably wouldn't have needed planning permission. Actually, Arnie would probably know the answer to that one.

Sorry, compost, I don't have any heat details for this meeting. The last greyhound meeting was held on 4 October 1979 and the stadium was demolished in 1980.

Now you tell us!

Further to Mick's reply, there were also three trial meetings run at the stadium on 9, 16, 23 December 1931. Another was advertised for 26 December but it is uncertain if it was ever run. The first officlal meeting was held on 1 August 1932, the Chatham Scratch event, and was won by Alf Foulds. The second was om 9 August 1932. There was another unofficial meeting on 14 March 1969, with Reg Luckhurst, Martyn Piddock, Rob Stewart and Judd Drew taking part. The meeting was won by Piddock.

Yes. I recommend you buy a copy.

There's a good book called Speedway in the South East with information about Rochester Speedway.