E I Addio

The article covered half a page of SS. Your précis of it consisted of just three lines, omiting completely the fact that it was in answer to criticisms and mentioned nothing about the inconsistencies that had been thrown up in various methods of calculation, amongst other details then after summarising the whole thing in just three lines you quoted Cooks remarks verbatim. That, I modestly submit was not a fair and accurate depiction of the salient facts. Baba' s comment above suggests it was a bit of a misrepresentation, and I tend to share that view. More important is Baba's comment about what we could all learn from the unfortunate and I'll-tempered episode. Some will take his comments on board, others sadly will not.

No it wasn't. SCB later admitted that at the time he started the thread with a deliberately provocative title he hadn't even bothered to read the article in question. The very first reply to the original post was from someone who said they were no fan of Jon Cook but that in that posters view SCB should be banned so the thread was clearly controversial from the start. There was aready a heatleader list thread where the article could and should have been discussed maturely without a second thread which very quickly degenerated into name calling and abuse and when the mods amended the title yet another thread was started with an even more offensive title. Babas post was spot on IMO The full picture, or at least as much as we are ever likely to get , only emerged with Gordon Pairmans post.

That pretty much sums it up IMO. I tend to think that hurling abuse says more about the abuser than the abused. As Stevebrum said earlier, two wrongs don't make a right.

Yes

Lot of bickering and getting hot under the collar on here recently, lot of demanding of oppologiz and refusals to. New year , new season, ahead , shall we all drop hands and try to be nice for a few months till it all starts again, ? I even feel quite benevolent to Starman at the mo.

Apart from No1 they all had at least one ride against the opposing reserves. I don't see why you think the No 2 had it any easier than No 4, but even the numbers 3 and 5 had theoretically easier races against opposing reserves, but averages are only ever an approximate guide because they depend on so many variable factors. I actually quite like the present race format.

So what exactly has the abuse achieved apart from one member getting himself suspended and a handful of others indentifying themselves as being too inarticulate to engage in grown up debate ? I and a number of others have never understood how abuse is a substitute for adult discussion, or improves the forum so since you appear to support abuse perhaps you can enlighten us on that point

Gordon, I won't copy the whole of your post to save bandwidth, but speaking as someone who has been critical of you in the past I think on this occasion, to be fair, you have put out an informative and helpful post. I think you make a fair point in saying that whatever format you take to compile the list there will always be anomalies and borderline cases, but coming back to Skidder 1's post of a couple of weeks ago, when one stands back from the situation it doesn't seem that anyone has been disadvantaged by the list. It is a pity that an explanation like that was not given some time ago by your fellow promoters but having got the explanation I woukd say it certainly clears the air.

The ACU probably don't add anything in practical terms, it's just that they are the governing body of the sport in this country, affiliated to the FIM and to that extent give some authority to licensing of riders and sorting out really serious disputes. It's sensible that the running of Speedwáy is delegated to the SCB because Speedwáy is not only unique in its team/league structure but also unique in the way it is promoted. It's probably sensible that the day to day running is delegated to the BSPA because they are (in theory at least ) the ones with "hands on " involvement with riders and fans. The whole thing seems to break down when it comes to compliance with and enforcement of the rules. Personally I don't think there is a lot wrong with the rules themselves, it's more the lack of enforcement and sometimes changing on a whim that causes problems. The point I was trying to get from bigcatdiary was why Graham Reeve thinks the problem is because the BSPA control the ELand PL rules. In other words if Reeve and the SCB had total control what would does Reeve think they would be doing that is not being done by the BSPA? It makes one wonder why Reeve stays in the job if the BSPA are doing things he doesn't approve of, unless there is more to it than meets the eye. A lot of the problem is the appalling lack of clear statements from the BSPA . I am not one of those that jumps to criticise and fault-find at every opportunity but I do think it's dreadful when the BSPA can't even issue a post-AGM statement in clear, plain English without it being contradictory and ambiguous. Issuing a simple statement is not a difficult thing to get right. In the context of the heatleader list, its very poor PR to put forward a promoter to explain it in a SS interview . If an announcement is to be made it should be issued by the BSPA chairman and checked for accuracy before being put on website not in a magazine . It is daft to simply put the list out in one place and the explanation somewhere else. This in my view is a major problem with the sport. It's not so much what is done but the way it is poorly explained. The infamous Poole v Lakeside postponement for example The BSPA give a public directive to run with a certain team, Ford doesn't do it, it gets referred to the SCB then we hear nothing, and apparently no action is taken. Since the BSPA had given a public directive then surely it needs a public statement explaining what action was taken as a result, or if none why not. As it is the whole thing goes quiet and the keyboard warriors come up with their own explanations. This sort of thing does a lot of damage to the sport and if is a frequent occurrence. Things could be so much better if there was some joined up thinking between the BSPA and the SCB on PR It wouldn't cost much apart from a bit of care and effort and would make a massive difference to the public perception of what is basically still a great sport.

Auty's move taking Rob Mear off in the British Final wasn't much better. I don't know if Auty is an intentionally dirty rider though, he just rides like a nutter and is as much danger to himself as anybody else.

Can you clarify what you mean by the BSPA having "control " of the relevant sections of the rule book? Do you simply mean they have control of the interpretation of the rules (i.e. the MC ) or is there more to it than that ? It certainly suggests the tail is wagging the dog but it would be interesting to know to what extent.

Your point about the SCB is more than a viable option, it is to my mind by far the most sensible option, and indeed the only sensible and workable option. Speedwáy, comes under the general authority of the ACU . The ACU delegate management of the sport to the SCB who in turn delegate the day to day running to the BSPA. To add another body with a say in how the sport is run is adding another level of management to a sport that already has more lavels of management than any other discipline of motor cycle sport in this country. It would be a recipe for disaster, as things invariably are when there are too many fingers in the pie. The whole problem stems from weakness at the SCB as you point out. There should be a "Chinese wall" between the SCB and the BSPA and that would avoid a whole lot of problems.

It is the team that supported Danny King and Lewis Kerr. Not sure if Danny will be back with them in 2016 but Lewis Kerr is and it appears that Lewis Bridger will be. They are by all accounts a serious professional outfit so who better to sponsor than a serious professional rider like LBR ? EDIT Revolution Speedway to be pedantic over names.

Hmmm... So you reckon Starmans a bit old for it but say nothing about Jaques being a bit old for riding on the back of a Lambretta in a mini-skirt ? I'm not sure what to make of that. We'll see what she says when she comes on here. She's a bit quiet at the moment, must be either in the kitchen doing the dishes or maybe just recovering from the shock of seeing the wooden spooners that Horton and Havelock have cobbled together !

Now there's a thought to conjure with--Starman as a mod, trundling down Wimborne Rd on a Lambretta, wearing a Ben Sherman and a Parka, with some bird in a mini- skirt on the back (probably Jaques) looking for a bit of bovver !

If the test is simply getting all the letters there but not necessarily in the right order you could even say sidney is a good speller ! Somehow I seem to remember from my schooldays there is a bit more to it than that.

Whether the sport is worse than any others is not the point. We are talking about what deters new fans from coming through the turnstiles. Cycling and Athletics consist mainly of amateur competitors and generally speaking have small crowds except for occasional big meetings, just as Speedwáy gets big crowds at Cardiff. You have said on another thread that you haven't been to a Speedwáy meeting for years so perhaps you are unfamiliar with things that have gone on, but there seems to be controversy in every area from team building to rain offs to the tactical ride. More often than not there has been no actual cheating but things are handled so badly people question the integrity of the sport. When there is cheating the sports controlling body are so limp wristed about enforcing the rules it only leads to more discontent among the fans.

I asked my brother in law, who likes most sports, why he didn't go anymore after I had generated his interest a bit in Speedwáy. His answer was: " I don't like Speedwáy, it's corrupt ". Unless the question of cheating and even the perception of cheating is addressed I think the sport will always struggle to increase its base of hardcore fans.

It all depends where the border line id between being very hard as opposed to being deliberately dirty. Ivor Brown certainly had a reputation as a hard man but I have never heard or read anything about him diliberately being dirty. I believe Browns own career was effectively ended when a hard move firm Ove Fundin put him through the fence, causing serious back injuries. Did forum member see that or can comment ? According Malcom Simmons DVD , Bill Andrew was one of the very few riders Siimo regarded as being deliberately dirty and who would put riders into the fence for the fun it if he got the chance. A nasty piece of work according to Simmo

Really ? Nearly 40,000 posts on here and he is banging away at Facebook as well ? Unbelievable. For someone who claims to hardly ever go to speedway he seems pretty obsessive about it . As a matter of interest, how many other forum members go over the same old stuff with the same old people on Facebook ? Cant be many surely . I know Gluesticks is on FB because he keeps telling us but he'll probably go anywhere for a bit of attention, but is there any real point of being on both ? I see Gluesticks has now surfaced on Speedway Plus as well

Is it secrecy or just poor organisation ? Maybe it's a bit like the old joke :- EVERYBODY thought SOMEBODY should do it. ANYBODY could have done it. But in the end NOBODY did it. Good old nobody ! For me cock-up trumps conspiracy every time. Still only a few more days and everything will be fine when the new chairman takes over.

Not missing the point at all. There are three likes to the post so some grasped the import of the point being made, in the context of the post being replied to. The issue is what the fans are "entitled" to. The third para graph of my post says "Of course there is an argument that it makes good business sense to keep your customers informed of what is going onbut that is not an ENTITLEMENT that exists as an automatic right " Then Humphrey Appleby says virtually the same thing ... "So whilst I don't particularly think the public have an ENTITLEMENT to know about the business details of Speedwáy I don't think it's unreasonable to have the competition rules explained." Not too far from the point I made, albeit phrased differently, yet you "liked" his but tell me I missed the point. As I have said before half the disputes on the forum are because people read posts with preconceived ideas or just latch onto certain words or phrases instead of looking at the whole post in the context of the line of discussion. Finally, I repeat yet again, that if someone attempted to answer the question Skidder 1 posed twice on the other thread (and which nobody has yet attempted to explain ) the discussion might be moved in a productive direction, but I dare say that the argument has now been ratcheted up to such an extent that his question will now probably be answered in an aggressive way so there is probably not much point now. That is just another example of people picking and choosing what posts to answer according to their agenda, rather than in the spirit of discussion.

Thats not quite it if you read the final paragraph properly. The perennial problem with the BSF . You are constantly dealing with people who virtually incapable of reading a whole post in the context of the discussion as opposed to picking out a small section that suits their argument.

In which every Elite Leagur promoter had a MAJOR say, according to the report.

Have you never had a couple before 1 o clock on the last working day before Christmas ? I know I have , albeit in the distant past. Be that as it may, the thread that we are now on wasn't started until nearly 5 pm . I don't know if SCB was three sheets to wind or not but look at the chronology. You mentioned first the SS article early in the morning on the thread where it belongs. SCB from reasons best known to himself starts a separate thread with a pejorative title several hours later, adding nothing new apart from some name calling . The mods simply shorten the title down to "Jon Cook ". SCB then starts yet another thread late in the afternoon that is not really anything to do with speedway but simply focusses on, and inflames the use of the word "retard ". Whether he had a skinful or not by that point the third thread is a direct challenge to the mods after they had already fired a shot across the bows by amending the title on the Jon Cook thread, which he then amended yet again and which the mods changed back yet again. SCB is old enough to be responsible for his own actions, On this or any other forum , when anyone starts flouting the authority of the mods its going to end up in a ban (or suspension ). We told he had been given some warnings, but drunk or not he continued his collision course with the mods, and at one stage he said he didn't care if he got a ban. Well now he has got one. He got his wish , he has made a martyr of himself on what he sees as a point of principle, and he is off the forum for two weeks (so we are told) at the quietest time of the year forum wise. When we stand back from the situation its really a storm in a teacup. SCB will soon be back or not be back depending on what he wants to do , No big deal.