Ray Stadia

You are missing the point Vince, I mentioned van versus trailer as 'a' possible way to reduce costs, not by any stretch the 'only' way and if riders substitute a van for a car or need a van for their other income earning activities, yes, I can see a van is sensible. But if the van sits on the drive when not used for racing and the rider runs around in a car most of the time, the van is an expensive luxury. And yes, I am aware that vans nowadays are comfortable etc, but not practical for everyday use, in my opinion. But you just want to pick holes in one part of an earlier comment I made, when the big picture is IOW hanging on by it's fingertips and perhaps others and why? because promoters can't afford to run and why? because the promoters biggest expense is the riders. Reduce riders costs, promoter reduces the amount he has to pay and the big benefit, tracks might stay open!

Speedway, surely, is semi professional for many anyway. If Speedway could be made cheaper for everyone, promoters, riders and fans, it could perhaps save the closure of tracks like IOW.

I do love forum members, like you, who berate members ideas, but are not capable of coming up with alternative suggestions. I still remind you that many amateur motorcycle racers still use cars and trailers to haul themselves around. I can see it's not as fashionable as turning up in a sign-painted van though. Speedway's issues, sadly, go beyond 'do I use a trailer or a van'.

If you feel the sport of Speedway is in good shape, fine. All I am really suggesting, is if the sport is to survive, not only on IOW, but tracks on the mainland, costs need to come down. How you reduce the costs, is up to the sport as a whole, but from someone outside looking in, you either raise the cost of admission or you reduce the cost for the promoter and rider. It is not only me saying costs are too high, there are many others on this forum. It has been said on this thread that riders have been paid 'over the top' to ride for IOW. With a fan base of 120, that is never going to square! If promoters say 'well, you can't get them to ride unless we pay them £x'. Then Speedway must be the only motorcycle sport who does that. The NL or certainly the spirit of the NL is a training league an amateur league. If you started out on Moto X, Trials or Grass Track you wouldn't get paid, you pay for everything and do it for the love of the sport. Why should the amateur end of Speedway be different?

What ev! Good for you, but I do think, overall, Speedway's troubles are due to riders, promoters and ultimately, fans, costs.

If you are sponsoring a rider, that is great!, well done! What point are you making? Let's assume you are sponsoring a rider that owns a car. If you provide a trailer and a bike, you have reduced your outgoings!

Do they? So all Speedway riders have a profession, outside of Speedway, that needs an unwritten van? What world are you in? Obviously the same one as the (retired) Mr T! Get real guys!

Ooooh! Sorry you are offended! Poor poppet! All I am trying to do is illustrate past and present Speedway costs and trying to see a way forward. If I am totally out of the 'ball park', fine. I would still 'suggest' a fancy up to date, sign painted, fairly big engined diesel van to be more costly than a modest car towing a trailer!

Good post Mr T! Too much bucks fizz?

Exactly George!

I hear what you say Vince, but if a rider is a family man, is he really transporting the family around in the 'Transit'? Although, I suppose the wife would have a car of her own. So are we saying that if riders turned up with one bike, the fans would disappear? I find that unlikely, personally. Also, you just have a system of team members lending their bike to others. And perhaps a track spare, which I know adds cost for the promoter, but if riders are saving on their own kit, the riders can ride for less. As for clean and shiny equipment, not really that difficult and if you only have one bike, even less difficult. Speedway needs to 'cut it's cloth accordingly', otherwise it will gradually fade away. I truly hope it doesn't.

I know you are well connected to Speedway, 'behind the scenes', Mr T, but what do you think Speedway should be doing in 'the present'? If you do respond, could I respectfully ask that it doesn't centre around the rules, for whilst there are some odd rules, I personally believe any changes to improve the amount of people interested in the sport, needs to be beyond the rules of Speedway. And of course, it needs to be affordable for the promoters.

Perhaps the NL needs to get back to something similar to how it started, when it was the Conference League and was a training/nursery league. I am reading Len Silver's book at the moment, probably a third of the way through and you realise Speedway was always run on a shoestring, with promoters either making a bit or losing a lot, but what is apparent, so far in the book, is the riders costs were a lot lower. Most riders had only one bike to fork out for and maintain and also, they arrived at the track with a trailer behind a car or a simple bike bracket, no fancy transporter. It wasn't so long ago that the Speedway riders choice of transport was a Citroen estate car. Speedway is trying to live beyond it's means and it is not necessary.

Regarding the above, larger crowds, more tracks, weekly speedway will only come if Speedway becomes more popular. Promotions making money, in even the 'so called' good years, I am not sure many promoters ever did make money. Close-fought test matches, surely that is down to the strength of the touring team, pitched against Great Britain? Not necessarily a sign of the times. Better racing, slick tracks have been blamed and slated for years now. Appreciation of Speedway, I think people who love the sport, only want the best for it, whatever the team. Affordable Speedway. I personally think this is key to all the other items mentioned. Costs need to be reduced for everybody, riders, promoters and fans. If that could be 'got right', I feel Speedway could grow. In the past, I do think Speedway was more affordable for the riders, promoters and fans. Riders of the past, a lot of years ago now, I know, had just one bike. If you have 2 bikes, the cost must be enormous nowadays. Add in special transport vehicles and not a bracket on the back of the car or a bike trailer and the cost is massive. Fuel prices have greatly increased for both riders and fans.

Tsunami and Gustix seem to know exactly what you are saying, but with respect, what are you saying? Are you saying that if IoW get the AF all will be good? But, from what has been said the club attracts 120 fans and let's hope they are paying fans! Is the circle squared?

Has anyone seen Mike Hunt?

To get back on track, excuse the pun! If I donate a sum of money and the IoW don't go ahead, do I get my donation back?

How about, hand leaflets to the holidaymakers as they step off the ferry. Or if they have their cars, somehow have an advertising board so they can see as they drive away, IoW has a Speedway track. I would imagine, many holidaymakers don't bring their cars over, so how easy is it for them to get to the track? Does the promotion try and offer transport or at least, make it easy for the holidaymakers to know how to get to the track? Not sure if it is allowed these days, but what about a car or van going up and down the seafront, with a loudhailer and posters on the side of the vehicle, similar to what Circuses do, to promote the track!

Hey, TWK!, don some kevlars/leathers and join them, hurtling round the track! I am in trouble now, I have moved off subject!

I can understand your frustration and no supporter of Speedway wants to lose any tracks. Let's hope the IoW promotion are being honest that the only thing stopping them run Speedway in 2014, is the cost of an air fence and not using it as a 'smoke screen' to not run anyway. Just being devils advocate. I do hope it turns out good for the club.

I am sure it has been discussed, but who is insisting on the compulsory use of AF's? Is it the promoters, riders, insurance companies or some health and safety executive? Obviously rider safety is of paramount importance. Just wondering?

Seems like you are getting on a bit! I say, it seems you are getting on a bit!

Did Glasgow raise their game, because they had the incentive to catch up and win? or was their standard of racing still inferior to Sheffield? The point being, was the overall standard of the meeting raised due to the tactical ride and gave Glasgow, as a team, a fresh impetus?

I think one of the problems is the promoters are not thinking Speedway 7 days or even 5 days a week. For many, I would imagine it is a side issue, they run businesses which take up a lot of their time. Also, most don't own the track, just rent it on the day of the meeting and basically turn up on the day, along with the riders. Ok, they need to prepare the track, but it's not like, say, a Football Club, which is manned, probably most of the week, with training/coaching etc. An ideal situation could be for a separate body, within Speedway, to be responsible for training and bringing on the youngsters and making full use of those tracks that can offer training facilities. As for funding, perhaps a levy to all those involved in Speedway, promoters, riders, tuners, bike manufacturers/builders and maybe fans.

To be honest, I reckon there will be many F1 fans who won't like the rule and may, dare I say it, use the 'R' word!