brianbuck

I can understand Jayne's frustration at having to call off a meeting on what was a reasonably fine afternoon, but I think the suggestion that it was because the Birmingham team refused to ride is an exaggeration! The Birmingham riders I spoke to were not happy with the condition of the track and did not think that there was sufficient time to put it right, but they would have been prepared to give it a go if the referee had decided to go ahead with the meeting. The referee's comment that he "did not like what he had seen" after Tom Woolley had ridden a few laps and in my opinion, had looked increasingly uncomfortable on both bends, was made in my presence, and the bottom line is that it was he who called the meeting off - not Birmingham nor Buxton. This was my first visit to Buxton. I enjoyed the trip and the scenery and although I was naturally disappointed not to see some racing, the events of the day have not put me off the thought of future visits there. I feel that Buxton were the unlucky victims of unfortunate circumstances. My opinion is that the postponement was the correct decision, but I look forward to my next Buxton visit and wish the club well for the future. I'm sorry that the events of the day have created so much ill-feeling and hope that on reflection, both sides will calm down a little when the dust settles.

Tony Mole made an application to vary the condition relating to the race nights, several years ago and under the Planning Officer's Discretionary Powers, obtained a consent to run on any alternative race night conditional on there not being more than one meeting staged in any one week. On various past occasions, Birmingham have run meetings on Mondays, Wednesdays, Thursdays, Fridays and Sundays. Tony always did things by the book - he was never a chancer!

Co-incidence - the first Post-War match at Brandon was against Stoke.

Birmingham v Kent match scheduled for tomorrow night (Wednesday) has already been called off thanks to another poor weather forecast and an already waterlogged track.

This is true. Most of the people who attended the meeting were pleased with the information supplied and with the way that the meeting was presented, and went home very optimistic about the forthcoming season.

I don't think it is wholly fair to compare Belle Vue's £10 admission price for National League matches with the prices that other tracks charge. With two teams to support, Belle Vue have to take into account that their supporters have to fork out £17-£18 for the Aces meetings so the prices for the Colts meetings have to be kept low and I would think it unlikely that there are many people in Manchester who support only the Colts. This isn't intended as a criticism of Belle Vue. Their new management have done a great job in restoring the club from the brink of extinction and they have to pitch their admission prices at a level that their fans can afford.

Although I'm a bit of a traditionalist, I do like the new design and think this is a very professional move. I've always been a strong advocate of the big red B and don't want to see it reduced in size. My one gripe in the last few seasons (and this doesn't only apply to Birmingham) is that the numbers on the reverse of the colours is far too small and is much too difficult to see from the terraces.

Inevitably electric bikes will eventually become normal with the probability that speedway will at some time in the future have to be raced on silent bikes. This may seem horrendous to us, but it would always be possible to play the sound of the bikes over the tannoy whilst the races are in progress. With the proper electrical equipment this should allow the level of the sound to be monitored and adjusted to suit the proximity of residential houses to each track. At many tracks, (such as Birmingham) a high percentage of the spectators watch from inside the bar, so the sound level in the bar could be set at a higher level than outside if need be. This could be a good way of overcoming the so-called noise problem and allow speedway to be staged in venues where houses are very close, so would electric bikes be such a bad thing?

Based on all the evidence seen so far, it seems highly likely that Rugby Council will reject the application, but no one should get the idea that Brandon Estates will then go away with their tails between their legs. They won't, they will come back with repeated applications and will eventually go the Planning Inspector to appeal. The Planning Inspector will be one based 100's of miles away (in Bristol in Cradley Heath's case) who will know nothing of local feeling against the loss of the stadium - so this is where the REAL battle will have to be fought. I don't believe that this is a lost cause by any means, but we mustn't be lulled into thinking that because we have lodged our individual objections that there is nothing more that we can do.

Tony Gillias will have to declare and interest and withdraw from the Planning Committee meeting as also will any other Councillor who has publicly stated that he/she either supports or opposes the application. Having said this though, it would be naive to imagine that the matter will not be discussed in private by the members of the committee. The majority will probably have little or no knowledge of speedway, so that is where Mr Gillias will be invaluable. I can only quote from my experience from Birmingham City Council's Planning Committee rules, but presumably these rules apply to all Councils. Come the day of the meeting, the applicant and an objector will be allowed three minutes to address the committee. The applicant has to speak first, so this will be to our advantage (it wasn't in the case of Birmingham because the objector was able to make all sorts of outlandish claims which we couldn't answer because we had already used our three minutes - which does highlight the unfairness of the system) Three minutes means three minutes so if more than one objector wants to speak then the three minutes has to be shared.

Rugby Borough Council's Planning Committee consists of 12 Councillors (6 Conservative, 3 Labour, 2 Lib-Dems and 1 Independent) An E-Mail to all of these could be useful. They are: Jill Simpson-Vince (Chairman) jill.simpson-vince@rugby.gov.uk Julie A'Barrow julie.abarrow@rugby.gov.uk Tina Avis tina.avis@rugby.gov.uk Kieren Brown kieren.brown@rugby.gov.uk Peter Butlin peter.butlin@rugby.gov.uk David Cranham david.cranham@rugby.gov.uk David Ellis david.ellis@rugby.gov.uk Tony Gillias anthony.gillias@rugby.gov.uk Kathryn Lawrence kathryn.lawrence@rugby.gov.uk Bill Lewis bill.lewis@rugby.gov.uk Neil Sandison neil.sandison@rugby.gov.uk Ramesh Srivastava ramesh.srivastava

The situation that Jake Knight and numerous other riders find themselves in is 99% due to allowing riders to race for more than one team. Speedway has had absolutely no benefit from this and all it has done is reduce the number of team places available. Most people agree that the leading National League riders should be looking to move up to the next lever, but how can they if 30plus riders are now riding for two teams? Those riders who keep trying to convince us that they must have two teams "to make it pay" should stop for a moment and think of the riders such as Jake Knight etc, that they have deprived of one team place - because they have two! This situation will only get worse until or unless the BSPA see where it is leading us and have the courage to scrap doubling-up.

Objections to the planning application submitted by Brandon Estates can now be E-Mailed or posted to Rugby Council and should be addressed to the Planning Officer Ms Erica Buchanan. Her E-Mail address is: erica.buchanan@rugby.gov.uk and your E-Mail/letter MUST quote the application number which is R18/0186 and MUST also include your own name and full address. Anyone who is uncertain of what they should write need only say that they are strongly opposed to these plans and urge the planning officer to recommend refusal. This will be sufficient to have it recorded as an objection (although of course there is no reason why you should not give all the reasons you can think of to make your point if you so wish.) When the Planning Committee meet to consider the application, the Planning Officer will state the total number of supporting E-Mails/letters and the total number of objections and will give a selection of the reasons for both, which have been stated in them. It is important therefore, that we try to overwhelm them with the volume of our objections. We did this in our fight to get speedway back to Birmingham and it was very effective. It will help too, if we can find out the names and E-Mail addresses of the members of the planning committee, and bombard them with E-Mails as well - remembering of course to keep them courteous and polite since the chances are that many of them will know little or nothing about speedway, and might well have been got at by the opposition. I wish the campaign every possible success in their efforts to save the stadium. It will be a major achievement to turn over big business - but it's certainly not impossible if we all play our part.

Our biggest and most persistent enemy at Birmingham was the University sited on the opposite side of Aldridge road. Even though the University closed at 6pm and was in total darkness by 6.30pm (an hour before the speedway started!) they still objected on the grounds that they "might" one day keep open later! The University refused to attend the noise tests conducted by both Tony Mole and the City Council, and when they did their own tests, they sited the microphone on the stadium side of Aldridge Road as close as they could get to the stadium entrance. They had no case at all, but the threat was always more about the influence the University has with members of the Council, plus the fact that the then Chairman of the Planning Committee was a former Chanceller of this University (although in all fairness, he never tried to hide this fact, and did not allow this to affect his sense of fairness.)

This debate shouldn't be about whether two riders should or should not be allowed to ride for two teams - it should be about whether ANY riders should! The whole situation is a complete farce and has spiralled out of control. The BSPA should at the very least be taking steps to gradually reduce the scope for allowing this nonsensical situation with a view to eventually eliminating it altogether - not trying to frame rules for extending it! Those riders who bleat that they must have two clubs "to make it pay" should spare a thought for all the riders who don't have a team at all - because they have two!

Everyone needs to appreciate that it is virtually impossible for any club to follow a season like Belle Vue had in 2017. The points limit means that the team will have to seriously weaken in order to comply - which will seem very unfair to the home supporters, but a reasonable expectation for everyone else. We were lucky at Birmingham that we were able to win the league in 2015 and again in 2016 but that was only due to the fact that we managed to pick up the two best 3 pointers available in Jack Smith and Jack Parkinson-Blackburn, and keep these two lads at reserve all season. Everyone knew that there was no chance at all of winning the league again in 2018 - but then - would it really be good for the sport if the same team were to win it year after year?

Excellent feature on the situation on Central Television last evening (Friday). I have been a strong critic of Steve Clamp and Central for some years but on this occasion his presentation was extremely good, and having exchanged E-Mails with him since, he is clearly sympathetic towards the fight to save the stadium. The one thing which did strike me whilst watching the programme however, was the sheer size of the land on which the present stadium is sited. Surely there would be room for a housing estate AND a smaller replacement stadium (as has been promised, although still not delivered), at Swindon? I am just wondering whether this idea could be floated as a possible way of breaking the impasse with Brandon Estates?

No one likes being on the receiving end of these kind of comments Laurence, but best to ignore them and just crack on with the job in hand. Best wishes for a successful association with the Brummies. You did a good job under difficult circumstances at Bordesley Green all those years ago so it's good to have you back on the right side of the pits again!

Coventry's acceptance in the National League is now confirmed. From the posts that have appeared on this site, it seems clear that a high percentage of Coventry supporters are distinctly unhappy about the present situation. They do not trust the motives of the promoter and many believe that patronising the Bees at Leicester is tantamount to supporting Brandon Estates' attempts to get a planning consent to build on Brandon. This is wholly understandable, but we need to appreciate that if the report that Mr Horton will pick up £50,000 in sponsorship from Brandon Estates by running at Leicester, then we can't blame him for not wanting accept this. Which of us would refuse it? Brandon Estates can, and probably will, sit tight for perhaps 20 years, in respect of the Brandon site, and will lose nothing as it will only appreciate in value. Eventually, even if it takes 20 years or more, they will eventually get the planning consent that they are after. My take on the position is that Coventry fans should support their team at Leicester. If they do, then at least this will show a potential buyer that there is a future for Coventry Speedway - if they don't, Mr Horton will cash in on his rider assets (and he has plenty of these) and then walk away. If I were a Coventry fan this would stick in the craw, but I would do it as the only real option. Withholding support never achieves anything - it just hastens the end.

ke I just don't see the point of it anyway - Porky at Wolverhampton does it during every race but because of the excessively loud PA and the noise of the bikes, it is impossible to make out what he is shouting - and why should he think that people in the crowd can't see for themselves what is happening?

I think that Match Races are a relic from the past and have very little appeal to present day supporters.

When I first started going to Perry Barr in the early 1950's, the pre-match parade was well worth turning up early to watch. This did not include the riders - just the track staff who were all dressed in spotless white boiler suits and maroon berets,and marched in step to their positions (Les Marshall the then promoter, would only accept ex-servicemen as track staff members). The stirring march that was played was called "We're on Our Way" and was played by the RAF band. (It is out of production now, but I have been able to get hold of a copy to be played at my funeral!!!) At the interval, and at the end of every meeting, the track staff regrouped and marched back into the pits. Very much different to the way the track staff shamble out to their places these days.

Could anyone ever match the achievements of the great Birmingham rider Graham Warren who broke the Perry Barr track record eleven times and also simultaneously held the track records at six other tracks?

Don't think this would be the case as the numbers 8+9 would be competing in their club's home fixtures so would more than likely both be locally based lads. If this idea did take root (and I'd be as surprised as anyone if it did!) then there would have to be a ruling that each club's 8+9 must be unique to that club (ie Birmingham and Cradley couldn't use the same 2 riders for example).

I doubt whether it is feasible to have more teams AND a higher points limit. It would have to be one or the other - the greater the number of teams in the league, the lower the point limit would have to be. Apart from this, I think the wishes are pretty universal. Personally, I would like to see all clubs compelled to name nine riders with the numbers 6-9 being inter-changeable at a team manager's discretion, with at least one second half race following the main match to be comprised of these 4 riders. This would provide real competition for the last two team places and would also give a rider who has lost his place in the team,a fair chance of winning it back.