PHILIPRISING

ISG not Gordon and Morton were responsible for building the sub-base for the track. No speedway experience required there. It was only the top surface, the icing on the cake as it were, that involved Colin Meredith, etc. Obviously Gordon and Morton were not going to watch while the sub-base on turns three and four was laid. They would assume it would be done to the specification required and as carried out on the rest of the track.

ONE of the first proper speedway interviews I did was with Gentleman Jim ... a lovely guy and a very useful number two in the Wimbledon line-up when that position was often key with opponents using tac subs in Heat 8 against him.

HAD to tone down and delete some references to conversations between the respective parties because we had no documents to back them up but still believe the material we have will prove conclusive. MCC provided a very short statement.

NOT happy about this. It actually isn't the finished article, which will appear in Speedway Star this week.

MY info is that the two directors of Belle Vue 2017 have appointed a CEO to run the stadium and Mark Lemon will be in charge of speedway matters. Most riders appear to have been signed which is why Ritchie Worrell knows that he is surplus to requirements. If I had to make a guess about why the full details haven't yet been made public it would be that the new owners will want assurances about the completion of the stadium to the original specifications.

BEEN saying that for decades.There is no continuity of teams now which is bad for fans too. One minute Joe Bloggs is your favourite rider, the next he is off somewhere else through no faults of his own.

GENERALLY between 80,000 and 100,000 ... occasionally more. Quite obviously most of these people have no interest in attending speedway meetings live.

IT wasn't seating ... it was terracing. The £18 grand was for the West stand ... first bend. A temporary grandstand (seats)) was installed at the west end of the stadium for the SWC and was sold out. A new company called Belle Vue 2017 was registered at Company's House on February 3rd. It has two directors, one of whom is a former CEO of Cable & Wireless. Both have been 'High-flyers' in some very big British companies. GOOD questions but another week has gone by with silence from MCC now deafening.

THERE was a problem with the track on bends 3 and 4 only, no one is denying that, but (and I was there in the afternoon) the feeling was that it would be just about okay but certainly not ideal. However, believe what you will, but it did deteriorate as a consequence of the weather and the sub-base. This is a fact and not conjecture as supported by the examination of what was under the track when it was dug up. NO

YOU guessed it ... but we have more. SORRY but I don't understand the question. The temporary seating on the east side was for the SWC only. The south side is terracing only and for people who do not want or can go in the grandstand. WHO says they are my or Speedway Star's mates. As I have said previously, we will publish what we know and you can THEN make up your own minds although you seem to have done so already. As far as I know and am told (not just by messrs Gordon and Morton) the riders didn't go the whole season without being paid and as far as their 'in-house speedway debts' were concerned others had higher figures.

THESE are figures we have acquired but so far not fully verified although certainly confirmed in the loss assessors statement ... Temporary toilets cost BV £10k per month, £70k to rent for the season, South terracing cost £65k to rent from March until October…and West £18k.There were many weeks when BV had no meeting and these facilities weren't even used. East Grandstand cost £60k just for 2016 SWC...which BV paid for as part of their agreement with BSI and would have been profitable had they not already run out of money and relied on BSI to ensure that the SWC meetings went ahead. ​It is also worth mentioning that the fact that the terracing under the south stand was temporary, the capacity in that area was reduced by council officials from 3,500 to 1,900. BSI admit that they could have sold at least another 1,600 tickets for the two days of the SWC race-off and Final, a loss of revenue of around £80,000. ​All this would have been unnecessary had the stadium been completed to the original specifications.

THEY are but like SS waiting for some legal points to be eradicated. EXPLAIN what you mean by "all the money?"

WE have a document from MCC to ISG listing, chapter and verse, the mistakes (an under-statement) made in completing turns 3 and 4 of the track. There is also a report by Arup, a renowned civil engineering company, commissioned by MCC but is subject to a non-disclose agreement which Messrs Gordon and Morton were compelled to sign. One of the questions we keep asking MCC, without any response, is why should that report remain a secret unless they, ISG or whoever have something to hide. But to the best of our knowledge, and we haven't seen the report, is that it only embellishes the MCC/ISG document that we do have.

I REPEAT, for the umpteenth, time, the problems with the track, caused by the sub-base and failure to break up the hockey pitch, only became apparent because of the very sharp drop in temperature that evening and the top surface on. bends 3 and 4 became problematic. Don't forget that the rest of the track was perfect. The reasons why that happened immediately became apparent when the faulty part of the track was dug up the next day and the material used as the sub-base (which was basically rubbish, possibly from a land-fill site) became apparent.

I HAVE never said it was everyone else's fault. In fact, I am not taking sides. I repeat, in case your grasp of English is at fault, the track was inspected on Friday and Saturday. Whether it was unfit earlier in the week is irrelevant. And was Havvy at the NSS to see for himself? Why would Gordon and Morton go ahead knowing that the meeting wouldn't take place and that they would have to refund all the money? Where is the logic in that? Having their promoters licence taken away was a direct consequent of the losses incurred because of the opening night debacle and what followed. The huge errors made with the building of the track on turns 3 and 4 were nothing to do with Gordon and Morton no matter what you think of them. And we have the documents to prove it. WE also have documents from a reputable firm of 'loss assessors' who have itemised the cost to BV Speedway as a result of cancelled or postponed meetings. And don't forget that Gordon and Morton had to pay for temporary terracing on the back straight, portaloos, etc., all of which should have been in place by the time the stadium was opened. And it was the contractors, ISG, who provided BV with an opening date of March 19 with the promise that all work would be completed by then. The remarkable thing is that the sum (several hundred thousand pounds) provided by the loss assessors matches exactly the sum MCC withheld from ISG as a result of the track defects. But no compensation was paid to BV Speedway. That's another document MCC aren't happy about us acquiring. GORDON and Morton will argue that they never "accepted or signed off" on the stadium so no rent was due but they took possession under a temporary agreement with rent being deferred until the stadium was "fit for purpose."

I HAVE already told you that then track was inspected on Friday and deemed to be okay. And on Saturday morning too. I am not sticking up for anyone. What SS intends doing is printing various documents that will show exactly what went on regarding the track, before and after opening night. You can then draw your own conclusions. But MCC seemingly don't want that. Also, regarding rent. David Gordon says that the NSS was never formally handed over to them and rent due because the stadium was never completed - no back straight terrace, no permanent toilets and various other faults, including a leaking grandstand roof, as per their contract. Again, we will publish documents to supplement his argument as and when we can.

YOU need to get your facts straight. The contractors laid the sub-base and the top surface of shale which was then worked on by Colin Meredith. Although there were concerns about turns 3 and 4 in the days leading up to opening night, improved weather led all concerned, included SCB'S Gaham Reeve and track specialist Doc Bridgett to feel that the track would be okay on race night. It was still okay during the day. But as the temperature dropped and moisture started to rise from the sub-base, for reasons which were later found to be caused by the rubbish used in the sub-base at that part of the track and the fact that an old hockey pitch had not been broken up.. Meredith felt that the surface was getting softer and was a potential problem. By that stage people were already in attendance and the riders felt it was too dangerous and declined to ride. WE have most of that. MCC keep ignoring requests for comment and you can probably draw your own conclusions from that. Have told them that we will go ahead if they refuse to answers all the questions that we have put to them.

MOTORSPORT other than F! is rarely considered worthy of coverage these days.

SPOT on ...

WE are still waiting for legal clearance for Speedway Star to publish its story of what actually took place regarding the NSS, Manchester City Council, the construction company ISG and David Gordon and Chris Morton last year. We have now been promised a statement from Roger Williams, Media Lead, at MCC but so far it has not been forthcoming. Sooner (hopefully) or later we will publish and while Messrs Gordon and Morton are not totally blameless, they were certainly not responsible for all the faults with bends 3 and 4 on the track which ultimately caused the cancellation of the opening meeting and the postponement of others immediately afterwards which subsequently caused grave financial difficulties,

It was only late afternoon, early evening that Colin Meredith felt that the track surface was changing, getting softer in that one area. He couldn't understand why only that part of the track was affected but we now know why. All sorts of odds and sods were used to form the sub-base of bends three and four rather than the specified material, as used elsewhere, and the old hockey pitch under the turns had not been broken up either. It was a disaster waiting to happen ... and, sadly, it did. Of course, as soon as bends three and four were dug up it was plain to see what had occurred. And we have the document to prove it.

That is such a simple, straightforward statement of fact that explains so much, so easily. And MUST be demonstratable by eyewitness, documentary, photographic and scientific evidence that would make it incontravertible. So why has no one made it before. Speedway Star has documental evidence of the materials used on turns three and four which were completely different to the rest of the track and backed up by various civil engineering reports, which undoubtedly caused the problems on opening night and subsquently had to be rectified. Surely there can be little doubt that had the track been perfect from day one and the meeting gone ahead the rest of the sorry BV/NSS saga which not have materialised as it has. But, I repeat, Manchester City Council are challenge statements made to us by David Gordon, effectively calling him a liar, despite all the paperwork that we have in our possession. At present our own legal advice is to hold fire. DG believes he is 100 per cent correct but MCC, while threatening legal action against him and us, have so far not given us details of which items in the proposed article they actually disagree with.

AS the temperature dropped (it was very cold, bit like Warsaw and Gelsenkirchen), moisture rose to the surface due to the contaminated material used as the sub-base on bends three and four and the surface got progressively softer and was deemed unsafe. Would like to say more but as mentioned elsewhere Speedway Star's hands are currently shackled by the threat of legal action by Manchester City Council who are challenging the accuracy of an article we have ready for publication.

HAVE tried that DON'T think it will but perhaps they want to have speedway's future at the NSS settled before calling off the legal hounds.

SEVEN days and still not response from Manchester City Council as to what they object to and threaten action against in our proposed feature in Speedway Star. Very frustrating.