Grand Central

Nor in the 2013 regulations, if it comes to that.

I agree completely with every point you make. I was just wondering what people thought could be done. But your assesment of the unlikeliness of success is just too realistic.

2013 version here http://www.fim-live.com/fileadmin/alfresco/6550004_eng.pdf 2012 version here http://www.fim-live.com/fileadmin/alfresco/SpeedwayGP_en.pdf

A 'made for sky' competition would have to built around the Sky Schedules with the realisation that we were well down their list of priorities. So we would get what is 'left'. But the idea of coming up with something of this type would be to keep some of the money rolling in. So hopefully the participation would be open to anyone who could make it viable and they would get to share whatever is being paid. The events and venues would have to be chosen accordingly. I certainly don't see any need for TV to set foot inside Arlington but still have Eastbourne as part of some 'made for sky' event. I feel you have become a little 2013 Elite League 'centric' in your thinking. Surely whatever 2014 brings us it will not look like the current set up anyway. So meeting numbers and the finances of running those meetings are going to change a lot I would have tought A simple renewal of the contract was probably always impossible and not really what the British Promoters would want anyway. The stale format on varied nights is looking past it's sell by date for everyone. But surely we could all see the benefit of keeping Sky on board somehow.

It is now perfectly clear that every rider in the top 8 who announces they are retiring before the list of 2014 SGP riders is published are replaced by the 9th and below riders. If they announce they are opting out after the list is published then they are substituted from the qualifiers list from the Challenge. I do not think that is just a tidying up of the wording. It may very well be what the organisers WANTED the 2012 regs to say. But it wasn't what was written. .

Anyway. Just getting back to the thread for a moment. Are we pretty much certain that Sky will be dropping Speedway? Is that the best assumption for us to use for the discussion? Or is there still a chance of keeping them on board? Most of the talk has been of the 'downsizing' that will take place or have to take place if their money is lost. And bemoaning our rulers failures But does there remain the possibility that some sort of 'package' of domestic Speedway that can be put together to maintain our 'foot in the door' with the people from Isleworth? And then all may not be wasted. But what could that be? I was thinking along the lines of a streamlined competition, completely separate from the season-long league. But one that is drafted specifically to meet Sky's scheduling needs. That could be over say six weeks of Mondays during the Football break. Or much more concentrated over a week or two similar to the SWC. And staged just at tracks that have the facilities to make the production as viable as possible. Devising it would need to take into account exactly what Sky themselves wanted. This could be streamlined knockout tournament, four team event or even our own British series of individual or pairs events. Anyone think this a goer? Or any other ideas?

The facts are comical enough that they were bound to inspire further satire.

As you say, we each have our own preferences. And mine would be for this years's set up of SEC and SGP running side by side. Especially if it is run by a different company AND allows access to territory that seemed out of bounds to BSI. With All the world to choose from BSI can take us anywhere so there must be room for four weekends across Europe for the SEC. On the issue of pairs meetings. One of my favourite meetings of the long distant past remains the 1977 World Pairs Final at Belle Vue so I am not blinkered against them. The race where Ivan kept both Collins and Simmons at bay for four laps at Hyde Road was a memory that will last forever. But seriously how many World Pairs meetings in the next twenty years they were running can you remember well or even slightly fondly? Matters were never helped with the six-man race formula that came in or the hideously irritating 4-3-2-0 scoring farce that seems all the rage whenever Pairs racing is now staged. And the use of reserves which makes a pair into a threesome, is even more loathsome. I accept that a World Pairs may seem a reasonable competition to have on alternate years to a bi-annual World Cup for BSI's purposes but please lets not have anything more than one meeting every couple of years in the summer break. And stick to 3-2-1-0 scoring over the 21 heat formula if we must.

I can't quite understand why this wildcard this year is raising anything more than an eyebrow. The presence of the wildcard in the rule book is entirely intentional and only exists to operate in this situation. A third world nation who cannot provide a qualifier is given a free space for the purpose of giving the home crowd a reason for turning up. They have to have the same chances as all other starters otherwise their participation in the meeting would be so pointless as to negate their 'draw' value. The thing is we usually think that this facility will only get used by one of 'those' nations. The crappy ones. The Italians, Bulgarians or Romanians. You know the sort. Where their riders don't stand a chance of qualifying anyway. But then the truth is WE are one of those crappy nations. And frankly Danny's chances of qualifying are actually probably less than any previous similar wildcard. Lets just remember this is not an unforeseen flaw in a perfect system. Far from it. This EXACTLY why the revered rulemakers created the abomination.

OK fair enough. I see your position. But actually I like the look of it now it has started. I have to say pairs events just leave me stone-cold and whatever status you give them they have zero appeal to me. And a qualifying series with sub-GP riders ... not so sure I would be too interested in that either. Can't actually see anything wrong with this. .

Quite true, but there aren't any years when the SGP isn't running ... so how would a Euro competition get a look in? Most sports have a World Championship on a bi-annual rota (or longer) to start with We don't. Running four alternate weekends of SGP/SEC seems about right..

Because it is a different Championship organised by different people. Most Sports do have European Championships that are distinct from World Championships.

Sorry but I pressed the Like button for this by total accident! I HATE this idea. Is there a way of removing a 'like' from a post?

Yes it's all very well to deny the specifics of a 'ban' as we all know that would never be possible. But the leverage of contracts, sponsorships and money. That is a very different thing.

I understand the distinction you are making but it is mainly just one of semantics. The number of ' that type of fan' is increasing on here. But the number of 'that type of fan' is increasing everywhere. On the Bus. In Tescos. At the Job Centre. In fact everywhere. Except inside a Speedway Stadium. .

I will await commenting until I read the true story on speedwaygp.com. Or failing that until the World's Leading Speedway Magazine drops through my letterbox on Thursday. Then I will have all the facts. .

I now understand that 'problem' that is percieved by one or two here is just the simple straightforward fact that under the current system the winner of the final - and thus the GP - may not have the most points from the night to carry forward into the series. They are vexed by it and feel it fundamentally wrong. They find it embarrasing or a joke. I am entirely comfortable with it. I think we are all aware that the night ending with semi-finals and finals is to create a dramatic climax for all spectators via TV or at the venue. And they do that brilliantly. I am more surprised by people trying to advance the argument that the GPs they've taken people to haven't had exciting enough climaxes. And that a few more points thrown at the last race would make all the difference. That's just bizarre. .

Looking at where everybody stands in the points at the moment Greg and Tomasz are fighting over 8th and 9th. The most likely scenario is that the top 9 places could remain the same at the end with just Chris Holder dropping out and Darcy leapfrogging in. Above Greg/Tomasz - NKI and Zagar look to be doing everything they need to stay ahead. But below them only Freddie and Kasprzak can really overtake them. And even with Greg/Tomasz under performing they have been getting just enough points over the last few rounds to maintain their advantage. So as I say it could easily end up with Greg and Tomasz in 8th/9th place in October; in either order. But all this would change dramatically if, in the next four GPs, one rider out of the top 6 (not Darcy) surprises us by jumping out with a win. And the thing is.... that could easily be Greg or Tomasz. Then the talk of them needing widcards would be redundant. What about a shilling on Mr G for a win in Torun?

Pesonally I'm quite OK with having two different sets of commentators for the two different series/broadcasters. I've never been over critical of the Pearson/Tatum team and their employers seem to like them so no moaning here will change that. Credit has to be given to the Eurosport team as Pearson/Tatum have been doing their act for donkey's years. Day/Nicholls are real novices by comparison. Scott Nicholls is really very good and the Day chap has obviously gone away and learnt an awful lot more between the few meetings he has been on. Most of his pronunciations and terminology were good. And it looks like he could have more to come. At the moment I'm quite happy. Which for the fickle so-and-so that I am is pretty unusual. Edit: Oh, I forgot. Except for the appearences by Staechmann on the Euros and Ermolenko on Sky. They are plain dreadful. MUTE is the only option.

Well, I have put forward what I think. I just hope the FIM and BSI have the sense to keep things as they are.

That is a hypothetical theory that is so unlikely to happen that it is pointless spending a moment of my life thinking about. None of the scoring systems that have been in place since the start of the GPs have even come close to producing such a bizarre thing. The nearest - but still different - anomaly is the Mark Loram win of 2000 where he did not win a GP but was champion by the end. None of the scoring systems put forward here can totally prevent a situation where year-long-consistancy can beat one-off wins by a variety of riders. Nor should it. .

As it appears obligatory for Speedway on TV to have the racing interspersed with a fair haired interviewer asking the riders stupidly banal questions. Can I suggest that they stick with them being good looking females?

I see that Eurosport employ low-talent charisma-free presenters for the Athletics as well.

You have said what you feel each rider 'should' get. But not why. What is wrong with the current system that this method 'puts right'?

Presumably the banking on the track will be pyramid shaped.