norbold

Yes, very sad news. Freddie was always so supportive of speedway right up to his death. He still went to meetings, functions, events etc. R.I.P. Freddie

Life is full of surprises Mick. I could counter that by saying I cannot believe that anyone picking a Wimbledon team would not include the late and great Vic Huxley, the greatest rider of his era. However, the point I was really making was the idea of naming an All Time Wimbledon 7. Parsloes says, "And with all due respect, great as the likes of Huxley, Kempster, Tauser & Lamoreaux certainly would've been, they are all way before the time of ANY of us on here (well except Bryn of course!!!) so really it's hard to comment on their inclusion." Exactly. No-one here is really in a position to name an "All Time" Wimbledon 7. I could certainly put forward arguments that all the riders I mentioned should be included ahead of Tommy Jansson but really we'll never know. I just think the idea of naming an "All Time 7" is impossible. Vincent, who started the thread and presumably gave it that title, limited his choice to an eight year period, hardly an "all-time" list. Perhaps it would be better as the "best Wimbledon team made up from riders I have seen".

Vic Huxley Jim Kempster Ray Tauser Wilbur Lamoreaux Norman Parker Ronnie Moore Barry Briggs

Vic Duggan Cordy Milne Frank Hodgson Morian Hansen Dick Case Dusty Haigh Wally Lloyd Just saying.....

Yes, if you just take the trouble to look back in the thread you will see that spin king quoted your remark about Ivan Mauger, which said, "Around the same time he struggled without success to break into the Wimbledon side too didn't he..?? Just goes to show that no-one needs to be an overnight success to make it to the very top in the end...." He then added: "Gives hope to the likes of Billy Legg, Nick Simmons and Benji Compton and may others." So I said "Still waiting..." which was a reference to the fact that we are still waiting for Billy Legg, Nick Simmons and Benji Compton making it to the very top. Jeez, this is hard going sometimes.

Still waiting....

The only BLRC final I saw was the first one Barry Briggs didn't win! 1971. He could only manage a poor second that year, behind Ivan Mauger and after a run-off with Jimmy McMillan. On the night Briggo was the most spectacular rider. He was involved in two "photo finishes" and had to come from behind to win two others, including a spectacular win over Mauger.

I think the worst thing about this whole thread is the number of people who have said "Chris Holder should of been excluded". It's Chris Holder should HAVE been excluded!

It is not a precise science - which team is in London and which isn't. In my first book (Speedway in London) I concentrated on those tracks which were sort of recognised "London" tracks and had been in the top flight. As it happens, of course, while they were open, Harringay and Lea Bridge were never in London and tracks like Wembley (as you say) and West Ham were not in London either until their revival, by which time Middlesex and parts of Essex had been incorporated. I think London is more a concept than a precise geographical area.

There's only 11 in Speedway in London. The others are Romford, Dagenham, Greenford, Barnet and Crayford (All in Speedway in the South East - available from all good booksellers )

Thank you, Robin, glad you liked it. The producer said the response they had by phone, text, etc. was one of the biggest ever. Apparently they don't expect much in the 9:00 to 10:00 slot as everyone is watching television by then, but last night they were inundated and could only read out a tiny fraction of the texts they received or talk to a small number of those phoning in. He said they would probably do a similar programme next year.

And MJJ is only what? 20. The point being? As a British fan I have to say that all I get out of seeing Bomber in the GPs is to cringe with embarrassment that he is our best. It seems to me it would be better for GB to have at least a year off and put in place a development plan for our young riders rather than pretend they can mix it with the world's elite, which they quite clearly can't.

Correct. Jason equalled Ove's record.

Next Wednesday from 9:00 to 10:00 p.m., BBC London are to broadcast a programme on the "Lost Sporting Venues of London". A significant part of this programme will be on the lost speedway tracks. I will be the studio guest for the whole hour along with someone talking about the lost greyhound tracks (which for the most part - though not all - will be the same venues). As well as studio discussion the programme will also be a phone/email/tweet/Facebook in so you can all have your say and give your memories. If you wish to contact the programme beforehand please contact Ian Ramsdale on ian.ramsdale@bbc.co.uk Speak to you next Wednesday then....

A great rider and a great guy. I remember him at the WSRA dinner a few years ago. He was the guest speaker. As he spoke, Ove Fundin got up to take a photo of him and Jason stopped in his tracks and said, "I can't believe it. The great Ove Fundin taking a photo of me!"

The History of Crystal Palace is now out. Available from Amazon and all good book sellers: http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/178155062X/ref=s9_simh_bw_p14_d0_i1?pf_rd_m=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&pf_rd_s=center-2&pf_rd_r=0SGMGHPM46KQKWGWKVRJ&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=288382987&pf_rd_i=266239

The idea of excluding a rider for not racing could, of course, be open to interpretation. Does a rider race to win the race or win the meeting? If by winning a particular race it makes it harder for his team to win the meeting, could it not be argued that, in fact, he is racing to win by losing? Isn't winning the meeting the bigger prize and should it not therefore take precedence? Oh, and by the way, scrap the Joker Rule!!!

That's the sort of thing my five year old grandson says to me when I get the rules of one of his games wrong. "I won't play with you any more, granddad...."

Actually, Jack, thinking about it, you probably won't like my book at all as I did a lot of my research in contemporary newspapers and magazines (local and trade), programmes, scrapbooks etc. I hardly used any second hand references from other books or web sites, so it's probably very inaccurate. No doubt when it's out you'll correct me with some links to a few modern web sites.

This looks like just the book for you, Jack: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Crystal-Palace-Speedway-History-Glaziers/dp/178155062X/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1335280359&sr=1-4

I've refrained from looking at this thread for some time - in fact I've refrained from looking at the BSF for some time as it has descended into the pits (no pun intended). Olddon says "No matter how much Ross Garrigan, Norman Jacobs, Cyclone and others in the clan attempt on the BSF to decry the evidence provided in support of Johnnie Hoskins and the start of speedway at Maitland in December 1923, support for that theory is always provided in a convincing way." What convincing way is that? The proponents of the "Hoskins Did It" theory have still not yet quoted one contemporary source to back up their views. Ross, Cyclone, Kevin and I have asked repeatedly for them to do this and all we get is some link to a modern web site or quote from a written modern source. I suggest to BFD, olddon and kennylane that they actually go to Australia and look through the newspapers in the archives, or failing that go to Colindale and look through contemporary sources in the Newspaper Library. That's what historical research is all about, going back to the source. Ross has provided incontrovertible evidence on here that the meeting at Maitland in December 1923 was not the first of its kind, nor was it even thought to be at the time. That's the reality of this whole discussion. OK, that was my last contribution to not only this debate but this forum as I'm finished with the BSF for good now because I know the only response from the Big Fat Tractor Driver will be to hurl personal abuse at me without trying to show any evidence of his views while olddon and kennylane will give more links to modern web sites. I have operated all my life under strict research conditions where arguments are supported by real facts and sources. There are disagreements over interpretation of course but never once have I found it descend to the level of personal abuse so beloved of Dave Puxley nor the idea that a link to a web site - or even worse, a plaque, can overturn years of real research. I always thought there were supposed to be rules on this Forum about attacking the post and not the poster. Obviously I was wrong if BFD is still here. I find it very sad to have to say I've finished with the BSF as I was one of the first members on the original site over 10 years ago. But it's just become a joke now. The idea of real historical research is now frowned on and those who practice it subject to personal abuse. It was nice knowing you, Phil, but it's goodbye now.

All been mentioned already, Bob.

Incidentally, while I'm considering a response to your earlier detailed forensic dissection of my post I wonder if you could define "amateur historian". As you know I worked at The British Museum for 37 years and have had 23 history books published. I'd be interested in your definition of "amateur" in this context and whether you consider yourself to be a professional historian. Your score somehow seems to not count my post. So not biased at all then..... Peter Oakes doesn't seem to be as sure as some of you on here that Maitland was the first meeting. In fact the meeting was on grass and as we know there had been other dirt track meetings before. Hoskins did not travel to Newcastle from Maitland. He went to Sydney first and then on to Newcastle, where he took up the position as secretary for an already well-established speedway. The reference to a World Championship is interesting as I have never come across that before. Perhaps you can expand on that kennylane. Do you have the contemporary references to it as they would be very interesting to see?

An excellent thought provoking and well thought-out response to my reasons for saying why I do not believe Johnnie Hoskins invented speedway. I shall look into all the reasons you raise for disagreeing with my post and get back to you when I have had time to study your detailed post further.

The major argument against speedway originating on 15 December 1923 at Maitland is the Monday December 17, 1923 Maitland Daily Mercury's report on the Saturday December 15 carnival, which says: - "For the first time motor cycle racing was introduced into the programme and the innovation proved most successful. In an exhibition ride at the last sports several riders gave the track a good test and they then expressed themselves satisfied with it. They also stated that it was better than several other tracks that have been used for this kind of sport on a number of occasions..." Note the last sentence particularly. Maitland’s own paper did not see the meeting on 15 December as anything new. The riders themselves were comparing Maitland to “several other tracks” Even without going in to the developments in the USA stretching back to before the First World War and just taking Australia, the fact is that there are many reports of meetings similar to that put on by Hoskins prior to 1923 in places such as Townsville (as early as 1916), Rockhampton and Newcastle. Eleven months prior to the Maitland December 1923 carnival, which, incidentally, was held on a grass track, motor cycles had raced on a cinder circuit under lights at Adelaide’s Thebarton Oval. It is true that what Maitland gave the sport of speedway was continuity by providing speedway on a regular basis as between 15 December 1923 and 26 April 1924 there were no fewer than 15 carnival meetings featuring motor cycle racing, with promoters Campbell and DuFrocq staging six of them and including a rider by the name of Charlie Datson who was to become one of the leading pioneers of the new sport of speedway. But the meeting on 17 December was nothing new. It was not the ORIGIN of speedway.