brianbuck

Yes, I was heavily involved with the Sandwell Cycle Speedway Club for 63 years, and I know the Perry Hall track that is being mentioned, very well. The track is within a fenced compound and there is no scope to increase its size even if motor speedway would be allowed there. It also borders a number of residential houses and some of the occupants are regular complainers about the Cycle Speedway, so the motorised version there has no chance.

This topic seems to have moved away from "we like (or don't like!) Poole, but I've been reading through it with interest. My opinion is that although there is a certain amount of envy over Poole's lengthy success, one of the reasons why the club is unpopular is the way that some of their supporters (not all of them of course, but a vocal minority) instantly over-react to any form of criticism whether it be about their track, their management or their team manager etc. In many ways, Poole are a great example to other clubs, and I certainly don't begrudge them their success which is obviously good for Poole fans, although I feel it isn't good for the sport overall, to have one team dominating all the competitions year after year. Perhaps if some of the more touchy Poole fans would let the criticism ride over them, and not feel that they must reply to it, things would settle a bit?

Tony Mole was never shy at speaking about his attendances and I know he used to have his crowd figures printed in his programmes whilst he promoted at Long Eaton and that for some reason, other promoters didn't like this. Most people will never realise how much Speedway owes Tony Mole. He still attends both Wolverhampton and Birmingham every week and never ever tries to interfere or try to tell anyone to do things he might have done. He sits quietly in the bar with his family and just enjoys the racing. This quiet, modest man has been a pleasure to work with, and he has always had my total admiration and respect.

There has been endless speculation on this site about the size of Birmingham's crowds. I'm not suggesting that they are in any way satisfactory, and I certainly agree that speedway in a City the size of Birmingham ought to be much better supported, but people should bear in mind that a high proportion of Birmingham's patrons do watch the racing from inside the restaurant/bar which is air conditioned on hot nights and centrally heated on cold nights as well as having over 800 comfortable seats and a superb view of the track. Personally, I dislike watching speedway from inside, but at Perry Barr the external viewing from the home straight is very poor due to the gr.ound being flat with no tiered terracing, and on a cold or damp night inside viewing has its consolations. I'd like to see better attendances at Perry Barr yes - but Birmingham's crowds aren't as dire as some people imagine, and seem to be fairly similar to a number of other tracks I have been to.

I doubt that any speedway enthusiast will see this development as anything but spiteful vindictiveness on the part of the SCB and the BSPL (if the latter has had any input into it - and we don't seem to know for certainty that they have.) This could surely be challenged in a court of law, and a serious threat to do this would surely produce a backtracking of the decision? We are all entitled to our views, but if there is a single poster who comes on to this site and says that they support the SCB's stand, I will be very surprised indeed!

I think it unlikely that the City Planners would sanction a permanent Sunday race day at Perry Barr. They would be amenable to a change of race day, but only on a weeknight. Saturday's are currently the only night when public greyhound racing is staged at the stadium (with a crowd!)

I don't see that amending the planning consent to allow a Tuesday or a Friday race night, being a problem as long as the planning officer is made aware of the fact that the intention is not to stage more than one meeting per week. The change from Wednesday nights to Thursday nights (a change which only lasted for one season) wasn't difficult to obtain. There were a handful of objectors who all claimed that Birmingham wanted to run twice a week, but the Planning Officer in his report to committee, stressed that he was approving either Wednesday or Thursday as the permitted race night conditional on this not being on both nights of the same week. The approval to run on Good Friday and on Bank Holiday Sundays, which is still valid on the planning conditions, also stated that if a Bank Holiday Sunday meeting was rained off, then it could be re-staged on an alternative non-Bank Holiday Sunday providing that another meeting was not scheduled for the Wednesday or Thursday of the same week. Contrary to what people seem to think, Birmingham City Council have never placed any difficulties in the way of Birmingham Speedway.

Every time there is a rain-off or a threatened rain-off, the subject of track covers comes up. Yes, using track covers can save a meeting sometimes, but unfortunately, people just won't come out when the weather is doubtful, so would it be worthwhile spending time and money laying covers and saving a threatened meeting, if the turnout was going to be poor?

Weather wins again. Match called off.

Yes that's correct. Tony Mole also wanted to move in at Bordesley Green and accepting that a speedway and stock cars mix wasn't practable given that the cars were using the old track every day, he was prepared to fund the building of a new track on a different part of the complex, but he was stymied by the opposition of the site manager who for some reason he would never reveal, had set his face against speedway coming back to the Wheels. The Wheels Park, which has been quite impressively developed over the years, is currently in limbo. The City Council have closed it down with a view to building industrial units on the land. There is a "Save Birmingham Wheels" group trying very hard to block the council's plans and to have the complex re-opened, but they don't seem to be having a great deal of success. Bordesley Green took plenty of stick during the three years that speedway ran there, but although the place is situated in a very poor and rundown part of Birmingham (where I was actually born and lived for the first 27 years of my life incidentally), but it was by no means all bad, and could have been just the kind of site that Birmingham Speedway could thrive in. Speedway's mistake was to have move there before the place was anywhere near ready, but unfortunately, the demolition of the "old" Perry Barr stadium at the end of 1983, meant that the promotion of the time had no option but to do so. Apologies to have muscled in on a site about Long Eaton, but I needed to get this off my chest!!!!!

Colwick Park in Nottingham was one of the many venues which Tony Mole considered as speedway venues as was Derby Greyhound Stadium (the latter no longer in existence) and I know from my time working with him, how he turned Birmingham inside out looking for a suitable site before Perry Barr Stadium became available when it's ownership changed hands. One venue in Birmingham which we tried really hard to get was Salford Stadium in Aston. There was a track already there although it would have needed widening, and the scope to develop what were Spartan facilities were very obvious. By all that was fair and reasonable, we should have got it but our efforts were blocked by one determined councillor - this still rankles with me, and always will!!!!

The argument that supporters suffer by watching 3 man races might seem logical, but I believe that some riders are encouraged by team managers to try it on at the starts, knowing that there is always a reserve to replace them if they are caught out. This would stop abruptly if there were no exclusions for tapes offences, so supporters would benefit in the long term by not having to put up with repeated restarts.

Gary Patchett was one of the promoting consortium in the last year or so of Cradley Heath's tenure at Wolverhampton. He leased Birmingham from Tony Mole for a season but didn't take up the option to buy the promotion outright and departed under a bit of a cloud. Tony Mole is now retired and is not too well, but still comes to Perry Barr for all of the BRUMMIES home matches and is also a frequent attender at Monmore.

Whether or not this change is successful will depend on the rule being properly enforced. I notice that Wolverhampton had a two minute clock all last season but referees and riders paid scant attention to it and riders were regularly continuing to "garden" after the time had expired and I can recall only one instance when a rider was excluded for exceeding the time limit. Referees need to put their foot down and rigidly stick to the letter of the rule. There might be a brief time of chaos and howls of protest from riders, but they would soon get the message. Personally, I'd be strongly in favour of NO RESERVE replacement for excluded riders too!

Opposition supporters should take particular notice of the car parking changes. The One Stop Shopping Precinct opposite the stadium have now outsourced their car park, so free parking will now be limited to a maximum of (I think) two hours, which means that anyone exceeding this limit is likely to get a parking ticket - so don't risk it! Alternative parking sites will be confirmed closer to the start of the season.

Why does UK Martin seem to get so much pleasure from knocking everything that Birmingham try to do? His latest post is no more than his jaundiced personal opinions which he tries to present as established facts. No one, for example has ever suggested that James Pearson was "The next Darcy Ward" when most accept that he was just a young lad with a lot of promise. It's disappointing to read these posts from someone who worked so hard to get a planning consent for Birmingham - but if youv'e really gone sour on speedway Martin, why not find another pastime and lay off the negativity? There are good people trying to make a go of speedway in Birmingham and who don't deserve all this.

Anyone imagining that there will be a reduction in admission prices is living in a dream world. Clearly Championship promoters are looking to cut costs so they are hardly likely to give away what they might save. I fully agree with the poster who suggested that there are numerous rider riding in the Championship who shouldn't be performing at this level at all, and it is these who are pushing up the costs so a way has to be found to exclude them. Some supporters won't like it, but it has to be done. Allowing doubling-up has been the most damaging decision that the BSPL have made, but we are lumbered with it now, and the only hope is that it can eventually become more limited - but to be honest, I wouldn't bank on this happening.

The danger is of course, that Brandon Estates will now sit tight for perhaps 20 years or more, knowing that it will not decrease in value. I'm as pleased as everyone else at the outcome of today's planning meeting and really hope that Brandon Estates get the message that they and their proposals are not wanted.

I can remember visiting Swindon on the Birmingham Supporters' Club coach one Saturday night in 1957. and watching the Brummies battered to the tune of 77-19 and just to compound our embarrassment, the Birmingham Team Manager didn't get to the stadium until the second half scratch races were underway, and had the team's race jackets with him, so our team had to race without wearing any body colours! Monday's Daily Express carried the back page story that the Referee Cecil Telling had sent a report to the Speedway Control Board suggesting that Birmingham should be thrown out of the league. Ironically, in the return match at Perry Barr on July 31st 1957, the Brummies became the first team to defeat Swindon in a league fixture in what was to be the Robins Championship winning season - only for the Brummies Promoter Les Marshall to come to the microphone immediately after the last heat to inform supporters that he was shutting down the Perry Barr track and withdrawing the team from the league. This was the last league match to be staged at this particular Perry Barr track for the next 50 years (although there was of course, racing at the other Perry Barr Stadium between 1971 and 1984, and at also at the Bordesley Green track.I vowed to never set foot into Perry Barr Stadium until speedway was restored there, and I stuck to that until it did come back in 2007. My condolences to all Swindon supporters on the loss of their team and track. I wish you all every success in your efforts to get both of them back.

Seems to be a very long drawn out one-sided meeting. Really thought Wolves had a chance but they seem to have been very poor.

Surprised by the claims that the Speedway Star used to publish attendance figures. I have taken the Star from 1953 and don't ever remember seeing these printed in in. What I do remember though, is Tony Mole printing attendance figures for every Long Eaton home matches in the club's programme - and from what I understand, he was roundly criticised by his fellow promoters for doing this!

Having spoken on the subject to some of the members of the Save Coventry Stadium group, I can appreciate that they are fully on top of things so I think it best not to complicate things for them by e-mailing individual councillors. The group have done a great job so far, and will continue to do so, so the campaign is by no means over just yet.

Mr Gillias will have to declare an interest and withdraw. He won't have any choice but to do that, but he can be useful in making his views known to his colleagues. At the Perry Barr planning application, we initially obtained a three year temporary planning consent and before we applied for full planning we invited the members of the planning committee to come and watch a meeting. Only one of them accepted the invitation. She came, and she loved it, but the downside was that she then had to ask the chairman whether or not she needed to withdraw from the planning meeting. She was asked why she had accepted the invite to watch the speedway and replied that she wanted to see what it was all about before she made a decision. She was then asked whether or not she had given any indication of which way she intended to vote. She replied that no, she hadn't but that she had "jumped up and down all evening because it was so exciting." She was then told that she must withdraw but before she left the chamber she called out in a loud voice: "It was wonderful, wonderful." " I loved every moment of it." It was a very powerful influence on the other members of the committee, and was I grateful to her for this.

Like everyone else, I am shocked and appalled at the one-sidedness of the Planning Officer's report and recommendation, but the decision will be made by the Planning Committee and they do not always go along with their officer's recommendations. I was very involved with the battle to get planning a planning consent to bring speedway back to Perry Barr so I know this to be a fact. Birmingham's planning officer Alan Orr recommended refusual at every turn, but we eventually won the planning committee round by making them aware of the strength of feeling and the huge level of support we had, and the eventual decision to give us full planning permission achieved a 14-1 vote of support. Perhaps the Save Coventry Speedway Group have already contacted all of the Rugby Planning Committee members individually to make them fully aware of the situation, but if not, it would surely be worth them doing this, and if it would help, I have looked up the contact details of all of them. They won't reply to messages as they are not allowed by the rules to enter into correspondence or to give an indication of how they intend to vote, but it will at least put them in the picture and might even sway the issue for those members who do not appreciate the unfairness of the current position. These are the e-mail contact details for the committee members concerned: The political mix (if this is relevant) is: Conservatives 6, Labour 3, Lib-Dems 2. barbara.brown@rugby.gov.uk adam.daly@rugby.gov.uk peter.eccleston@rugby.gov.uk anthony.gillias@rugby.gov.uk eve.hassell@rugby.gov.uk bill.lewis@rugby.gov.uk becky.maoudis@rugby.gov.uk neil.sandison@rugby.gov.uk john.slinger@rugby.gov.uk tim.willis@rugby.gov.uk ramesh.srivastava@rugby.gov.uk If someone from the Save Coventry Speedway group can confirm that they think this worth a try, then I'll be pleased to e-mail these councillors myself, but I'll hold fire at the moment rather than interfere in something which might have already been done.

I for one, can see no reason for changing or "bending" the existing rule, which clearly puts the emphasis on the referee to decide which rider is at fault. If eclusion were to be made optional then it would be abused and there would probably be an increase in reckless riding. The exact same rule applies in Cycle Speedway but an increasing number of referees choose to ignore it and regularly take the easy option of calling back all four riders for a re-run - on occasions even after two or three laps of the original race have been completed - and it does crease considerably more controversy and ill-feeling.