Elephantman

They are poisonous because they are factually incorrect (they are a net contributor) and pandering to those who stereotype. Hitler did that, he blamed the Jews and decent people said nothing. rmc is correct to point out the nature of that post and I'm very happy to see there are people on this forum who are intolerant of intolerance.

It should be relevant; because if the Rotherham Advertiser article was correct a key member of the consortium is running Sheffield's biggest rivals. Not necessarily a problem but if what I have read is correct there is a certain lack of integrity over the way Hoggy's departure has been handled. Integrity is quite interesting, you either have it or you don't and if you don't there is no way of gaining it later on. I am not happy that the club I follow has behaved in the way it clearly has. It's almost like they have been running a dirty tricks campaign where their press release damns Hoggy with faint praise. Your post reminds me of so many Football supporters who don't care where the money comes from to buy success or who owns the club, as long as it is bought. Clearly Machin had Hoggy deal with you at some time did he? I notice Montie likes your post; that's not a surprise really is it

This really isn't good. It appears the new broom couldn't be bothered to talk with Hoggy: http://www.thestar.co.uk/sport/other-sports/speedway/sheffield-s-axed-boss-is-offered-roles-1-6484591 Seems a bit scummy to me. The interesting thing is that Machin named the fourth man on the Rotherham Advertiser website earlier in the takeover talks but the article disappeared soon afterwards. He stated the three we definitely know about and the fourth as Rob Godfrey. Now if that is the case everything falls in to place. This is nothing to with Hoggy or his abilities and everything to do with the first reserve on the BSPA Management Committee. Who would that be.... Rob Godfrey. This is a good old fashioned power play. My understanding is you have to be a promoter to be on the MC get rid of Hoggy and you automatically get the big boys job! Did I say scummy?

Just being there and not declaring an interest is in effect hiding. Clearly they are either: 1. Very shy 2. Someone of local repute 3. Are already involved in the sport and don't want to show their hand You're not changing your moniker to "The Fourth Man" are you?

I think their still is mystery; as posted earlier there is reputed to be a fourth member of the consortium; who is that and why have they kept their head down?

Well I'm thinking why would one shareholder go unnamed unless of course: 1. They have something to hide or 2. They have something to hide

Before the statement there was rumour and speculation; by default that means the situation has been mishandled. Handled correctly there would have been a joint announcement of some sorts; the old "mutual agreement" stuff, the absence of such is also indicator that the departure has not been handled that well. Sport in general is useless at this type of thing I am concerned that you now have 29 posts on a forum that has built its reputation by commenting on "things that have nothing to do with us". Are you sure you are in the right place; have you invested in the right sport?

Why? Honeymoon period is over! If they can mishandle this departure what else are they going to screw up?

You may well be correct, but it appears to me, from all that we have read, that Hoggy sweat blood for Sheffield throughout the close season to make sure somebody bought the club. So did they buy or were they sold on it? I'm with Arthur Cross on this; at minimum it is a very unsatisfactory way to deal with the departure of someone who has put many years in to Sheffield both as a sponsor and promoter. It just smells rather funny to me! The past few years have not been good under Machin and the others; you seem to have forgotten who owned the business and by default dictated the policies and budgets.

You clearly know more than you are saying; I suppose they are "mind your own business reasons" then? Your post does beg the question that if he is, "too important to the BSPA for him not to pop up somewhere" what have the new promotion at Sheffield missed?

Looks like the old game plan of use people for what you want to get, then shaft them: http://www.sheffieldspeedway.co/news.php?extend.1498

Why would he leave having put a consortium together to buy the place? That just does not add up.

That is a surprise; I got the impression Hoggy put all the hard work in to keep speedway at Sheffield I would have thought he'd have been there to have his efforts recognised by the fans.

Are you quick witted or dim witted; can't make my mind up.

As I say drivel; try things the other way round and you may be close; if Morris goes to Leicester...... I would assume the reason it's all gone quite on the "illegal approach" front is to save Swindon any embarrassment of having to deliver facts to back up their false accusation. When two parties are in disagreement normally they let it lie when one has proven conclusively to the other that they are incorrect in their belief. If Sheffield had made an illegal approach the BSPA would have been obliged to deal with the issue. The fact that nothing has happened speaks volumes.

Shame you are posting such drivel; the Morris saga has nothing to do with Sheffield from what I can see. The interesting post is the one that assumed that Morris was riding for Leicester as if he was riding for them he wouldn't be riding for Swindon would he?

So you cast aspersions around on Hoggart's character then admit: 1. You don't know him that well 2. You have a history of issues with the BSPA; not connected to Hoggart or Sheffield I don't think anyone has to impress you or make you change your mind; I think you need to go away and think before you type; because you clearly have some personal issues that you are taking out on the wrong person and the wrong club.

Yeah absolutely right; the trouble is that some posters (perhaps you) prefer top listen to unsubstantiated gossip rather than deal with facts. The facts are that the promoters elect the MC of the BSPA; presumably because they believe they are the best fit for the job; therefore if you don't like the way the MC is run speak to your clubs promoter and see what he's got to say for himself! It's a strange thing called democracy; people all round the world are fighting wars for it.

Not at all; it follows logically that Sheffield would not do this. Currently the only person empowered to speak on Sheffield's behalf is Hoggart (unless the paperwork has gone through for the sale; I don't believe it will have done). Hoggart has stated he has been working very hard to facilitate the sale; he also states that he knows nothing about an approach to Morris. I have always found Hoggart to play things with a straight bat. Therefore the issue lays elsewhere; but not with the current Sheffield management. This is a Swindon issue that they must resolve. Dragging Sheffield in to their issues helps no one. According to who and who at Sheffield spoke with them; name names; your informant clearly has the information otherwise they wouldn't be feeding you with it would they?

Yes that's fine except some if us believe Sheffield are a totally innocent party in this shenanigans; I'd like to Swindon prove otherwise; if they do then Sheffield must hold their hands up.

As the old saying goes "you can't control what other do; but you can control how you react". This is Swindon's issue and Swindon's problem. It is apparent that there were NO conversations going on between Sheffield Speedway and Swindon about this issue; the Swindon press release confirms that. So if as you understand "it was being dealt with privately prior to the news appearing in a small snippet in a tabloid newspaper", exactly who was dealing with who? What that may mean is the following: 1.Swindon claim an "alleged approach"; now if Swindon were doing a deal with Sheffield behind closed doors it wouldn't be alleged now would it? 2.That also implies that any discussions were between Morris and Swindon; not Sheffield and Morris 3.That leads one to believe that the discussions between Morris and Swindon have stumbled and to cover their own backsides Swindon released a snippet to the tabloid press (easily done). 4. The tabloid press contact Swindon for a comment allowing Swindon to respond with a press release that accuses someone else of wrong doing 5. Morris and Sheffield are used as scapegoats 6. Swindon look squeaky clean Not that I've ever worked that closely with the PR industry of course.

It was a press release by Swindon to the Swindon Advertiser that is at issue. It is the integrity of Rossiter that needs to be questioned; by the response of Sheffield I don't believe they were aware of any issue. Hoggart appears to have been spending his time finalising a takeover to secure speedway at Owlerton; I would hope that all the documentation is signed off on the buyout as this sort of crass comment by another promotion can put these sort of deal at risk. Rossiter had better have the facts to back up his claim or he is going to look fairly more stupid than he normally appears.

This is a pathetic post; the promoters vote in the MC and the MC apply the rules that the promoters vote for. Rossiter should have kept his mouth shut and dealt with this in private; he didn't; his problem.

Totally correct; we don't want anyone acting in a professional manner and dealing with this issue in private as it should be. What we want is little half-wits running off at the mouth and making public statements (which may or may not be correct) before the facts are established. In this way we maintain the standards that British speedway are renowned for!

I was by the pits and overheard some of the "discussion" re Hall's departure last year. You tend to burn your bridges if you try and make your boss look a buffoon in public; even more so when you end up looking the idiot! For Hall to get back in I wouldn't see it as a "re-building bridges" exercise; more a "what new technology can fix this chasm for us?"