Grand Central

Which backs up my point completely. Those that have no interest in any of the issues surrounding averages and the rules to which they relate should keep quiet. And leave it to those who understand. They could then just go along in their uninformed, blinkered way, and 'enjoy the racing'. But they won't. They keep coming on threads like this and making daft points about the very subject they don't understand. Seemingly JUST to display their ignorance. .

I just wish the forum could employ a 'maths monitor'. Those with a self-evident blindspot for statistics could then be taken away for their own safety. Where they can be helped to understand that they must SHUT UP and stop posting things about averages. Year after year, month after month they just insist on doing this time after time. Is this what it is like at a BSPA AGM ? Like a remedial class for people that really believe they understand stuff when they so clearly don't ?

That would be tragically consistent with the way the BSPA PR tends to work. That is true. In addition the BSPA website refers to it as "... rolled back the years by bringing back the traditional tactical substitute when a team is six points or more" And the Speedway Star says a "... return to tactical substitutes" Are they just being disingenuous with the false inference that we are returning to past usage of tac subs. And are just conning us again ? Or do they really mean it ? Tac Subs were ONLY EVER used in a system that alowed multiple use. NEVER anything other. Why the hell can't they just make stuff clear ?

For some reason when I see photos from their 'formal' occasions. I am always reminded of those reality shows dedicated to showing Travellers' weddings. Their menfolk always looked strangers to business attire. Lucky Heather anyone ?

I'd say a pretty brilliant AGM for the Chamionship. They have not lost any numbers to the 'lure' of the Premiership. Instead gave gained an extra team. The fixed nights have given the graveyard slot Mondays to the PL and with the Thursday night tracks sticking with the Championship they have retained that excellent midweek choice for them all as well. It means that the Chamionship has the excellent spread of Thursday through the entire weekend. Kerching! The Single eight pointer in the PL may 'feel' like the right move to their owners, so as to try and distribute them evenly around the teams. But it sends out the wrong message. It just reeks of 'dumbing down' the product there. Even when it isn't. The unrestricted element in the Championship sounds do much better to sell to folk as a success. On top of it all the fixed nights will allow almost everyone from the PL to ride in the Championsip without those fixture clashes that so blighted last season. I cannot see why anyone was daft enough to choose to stay in the PL. They've given the best stuff away!

Have just read what PR describes as an 'epistle' from David Gordon in this week's Star. It is difficult to see what is different in giving a page over to a one-sided rant by Mr Gordono this week to giving Peter Collins a similar platform, without counter-argument, just two weeks prior. And yet that article was almost unanimously judged to have been a flawed journalistic piece and an editorial mistake to publish in that way, In the PC article at least an issue that most of the general Speedway public had not heard about was being raised. Whereas PR acknowledges that there is really no new information of substance in Mr Gordon's most recent sermon. On a different note I was glad to read the excellent in depth article by Brian Burford on the Carlise Tyres controversy of the 1980s. It was particularly good to hear from some of the people involved in this episode and their illuminating memories of events from well over thirty years ago. Including those of a quite 'on-the-ball' Peter Collins.

No Tsunami was reffering to the fact that none of the Division 1 tracks would not release a second heat leader from their 1994 squads to Boro which was needed to staff the 'promoted' Division Two sides for 1995 and give reasonably equal teams. Shane Parker was as good as they got and he was not a heat leader at Ipswich 1994, he was about 4th in their averages. He obviously became a heat leader and number 1 alongside the other two by default as they were just the top three in a very weak side. No where near the averages, or standard, of heat leaders of other sides in the expanded league of 1995.

Yes I understand that those would be the issues that require clarification. But not what the answers would need to be to change BT's mind on the price they would be prepared to pay My pondering was do BT Sport actually have any intention of offering any more money even if the Promoters 'pushed the boat out' ? And went for radical change ? Would they really put any more money on the table for half a dozen SGP riders being tempted? Would they prefer one big league, a 12 team top league or the same old same old 8/9 team Premiership, and avoid the Championship like the plague? {Again) Are they troubled by Guests ? Did they find the Promotion -Relegation charade a deal breaker, or deal-clincher ? Do they give a flying fig about doubling up, does the Joker really vex them ? Or do they not really give a toss about any of that as they just want to sign up for something that is very, very cost effective. But could be pretty much identical to 2017 for all THEY really care. As none of it affects viewing figures and revenue, one jot ? They just need something to fill Monday Nights with Live stuff that gets decent figures for minimum outlay. My thinking has always been that they know that they could get probably get a deal for next to nothing beyond the production costs. Considering the poor bargaining position of the BSPA. Take it leave it would work, surely?

And so will all of us.There are some choices they could make that will make a real difference to my attendances in 2018. Any ideas what sort of answer to those various questions would sway BT decisions ? In either direction ? Is there actually ANYTHING that the promoters could choose to do that would get them to part with some cash? Or is that a lost cause ?

I fail to see what legitimate criticism one could offer towards an invited guest expecting the courtesy of a 'plus one' . It is the norm in all walks of life and event/function I have attended. To not do so is just bad manners..

. Even to insinuate relevance in a comparison with the CEO of the Premiership is hilarious. .

It's ridiculous to have a ride-off meeting to determine the wildcards. The whole idea of having them is so that they can be determined by consideration of other factors, such as injury and to include in-form guys from outside the challenge or previous year's GP standings. I am all in favour of that. One would, of course, hope that those charged with that responsibility would use sensible, decent and justifiable criteria for their choices. But no one can force them to do it that way. I suppose they could behave very differently. And probably do. Those 'fence sitters' planted on the panel from the outside, with barely a passing interest in the SGP, could just sit on their hands, offer no opinion and just rubber stamp whatever choice was made by the SGP organisers. Meaning that a rider may end up getting the pick just because he knows the right people, had chummed up to the right folk or just has a face that fits. The truth is we really don't know what goes on. And never will. Which is why the freedom of speech to call them out when they make a 'Stinker' is all we have. And with all the options available, to my nose, Holder's pick stinks the place out like a wedge of over-ripe Gorgonzola. .

Great to read the PR opinion piece in this week's Star. An object lesson in how to write an article that at first glance looks to be sat strictly on the fence. But is in fact always firmly on one side of the debate. Very nicely done. It also neatly spares Mr Burford's puse-cheeked blushes by making no reference whatsoever to his hamfisted handling of the original article. I am pleased that no one, from the new or old promotion, wants to 'wash their dirty linen in public' as that would not be their style. The teaser at the end of the article though is quite mouth watering. It seems that Mr Gordon is off down to the The Star Public Laundry next week with as much 2016 dirty washing as he can find. Really quite stylish. I can't wait.

.It's funny where people get these daft ideas from isn't it? And then bandy them about in scurrilous magazines. It shouldn't be allowed. .

The old saying that you can judge someone by the company they keep. Cannot be more exemplified than to find that Ward has tweeted in support of Holder. And with such eloquence. Torben must be beeming at the PR possibilities. Each to their own.

My completed programme agrees with heat 3 and 5 exactly But Heat 9 has the Berwick riders finishing in the opposite order Heat 9: Richardson, Close, Wright, Bloxsome, 74.8

.They were never going to pick a novice, so not relevant either. They could have picked quite a few names and given them the massive opportunity it is. Some of them may have jumped at it and been real assets to the series. Perhaps even contenders. But they haven't done that. I don't believe they were ever going to, either. They've given to one if the 'in crowd' And just because He MAY make good with the pick. Still does not make it right that he got that 'freebie' now.

.Nobody said it WAS unprecedented. But the rest of the information given about previous years shows that it is far from the norm. So pretty irrelevant really.

Of course it's all about it being personal. About your face fitting. It's certainly nothing about performance on track. If we didn't know it before. Melbourne proved it.

It is something of a measure of him.And the attitude of the judging panel. That we could feel that is so likely to be connected. And that they would still have him back. And others - like Millik - have bust their balls to get into contention. Only to be crapped on from a monstrous height. Their whinging Mate was a shoe-in all the time. It really does sap ones enthusiasm for what should be a great series. But without integrity or fair sportsmanship. Why should we bother, or care ? They don't.

Pitiful. Shameful. But totally expected. The SGP panel must be at serious risk of diabetes. The amount of high-sugar drinks they must have consumed has affected them badly.

Interesting that just because of the extra emphasis placed on points scored in the final in the old system. This finishing order and the relative points difference down the list does 'feel' a bit more representative of the year.

You may be right on all those reasons for the reluctance t stage the SWC. But I have a feeling that the biggest reason will be the financial requirement for staging fees and the difficulty/impossibility of getting those covered out of the meeting revenue without local tourism/government money that has been available from some areas before. Whereas Gorzow and Leszno have been happy to do this. Outside Poland it will be very different. I Imagine a request for similar from Manchester City Council would be met with derisive laughter at the moment.

I think that is all pretty much spot for on. The great thing about the SWC is that everyone has always had the same number of rides as all other teams. Every race the score is seen as being the reality of where the competition stands. The programme just works. Pairs events are always all over the place in the programme and you never really get that tension from the race by race scoring that has been so apparent in the SWC.

I agree that the change was forced on One Sport.But the national teams event they ran for two years never really took off anyway, did it? I don't think there is any evidence that a pairs event would fail due to the lack of team riding ability. If that were the case then normal league racing in Poland and Sweden would be failing for the same reason. And it isn't. The real problem with Pairs meeting s that the public has never really got 'into' them. There is something about the format that is just not that fulfilling. They fall between a rock and a hard place; not individual nor team. They are neither Arthur or Martha. Whereas the TV audience feedback had always been very 'pro' the SWC most years. And the excitement on the BSF has always been quite vocal despite the Joker. Even though track attendances may not have held up for anything but the final. A one off pairs event may be a bit of a novelty, for some. But I do not see it filling that 'mid season' break in the SGP calendar. At least nowhere near as effectively as the SWC has done so well, so often.