1 valve

News on website reads that a new company has been formed who has acquired the assets of the previous promoting company. This more than likely means the old company will be wound up and unless there are adequate funds left over, unsecured creditors (which riders are) will not receive the money owed to them. That said, the BSPA could arrange for the riders to be paid out of the security fund lodged with them by the previous promotion - assuming there is anything left over.

Excellent if not surprising news. Team looking good. One more rider to go, insight anybody?

In the case of a speedway rider., he could be riding for a Premiership club who has not paid him and thus quite understandably not want to ride for that club. However, if he refuses to ride for the none paying club, he would be banned from riding in any other UK meetings irrespective of the competition i.e Championship or individual event. So to answer your question, he would "want to ride for a an employer who failed to pay him" so that he can continue to ride elsewhere.

The big (& grossly unfair)anomaly regarding riders being paid/not paid is that riders would be in an immediate breach of contract should they refuse to ride because of not being paid for previous work (meetings) done with the consequence of not being allowed to ride elsewhere in UK. Promoters however have no reciprocal action taken against them for not paying their workers/contractors “on time” Whilst clearly this set of circumstances is so that “The show must go on” (which wouldn’t happen if riders withhold their services) it seems appropriate that something along the lines of rules being set where riders must be paid no later than (say) 10 days past the due date and if that payment is not made then the BSPA makes the payment from the Bond fund. The delinquent promotion then has to reimburse the fund within a set period time with interest or face further sanctions. Frankly the only promotions who would be unable to live with this type of agreement are those who are in reality unviable in the first place and need to face the consequences sooner rather than later so the sport has a realistic financial & moral operating base to work within.

Two places left to be filled. 1. Kyle Howarth 2. ? Maximum points remaining?

Joe T? 24 hours after it was printed in the local newspaper!

Yes only 5 announced so far. Though I understand Tom has decided not to ride so Joe has stepped in.

you know ——Joe !

Tom confirmed as riding for Lions 2022 - that is via Leicester Mercury & not Lions own website (as yet?)

With Oxford making a welcome return in 2022 it would be interesting to compile a list of other stadiums where speedway could be resurrected/introduced. some like Coventry maybe regarded as a long term project but others could be less challenging? let’s see what we have.

Like it or not. To fight legal cases regarding property development you will need lots & lots of money from somewhere and claiming discrimination is not the way to go unless you want to waste lots & lots of money

Not quite. Scaled it based on Leicester cycle speedway. DH won world championships on 3 different tracks. Worth noting the Lions circuit has been significantly altered since then hence the much improved racing now seen at Beaumont Park

Will Joe be the next one up or is this the start of “the twins” going their own way?

Dan should be retained simply because he will improve on his 2021 average due to more than maintaining his home record and increasing his away numbers due to learning from previous visits at tracks where they were his first time.

Yes two leagues, one professional the other semi pro/amateur. Now the can of worms question. Which current teams would make up the two leagues? A question fans, never mind promoters would, more than likely not be able to agree on a answer.

You point is well made. Unfortunately there are not enough riders to make 18 teams. The number is more likely 11 at the most so 10 different teams visiting Monmore. would this be ok? BTW - to make 11 teams Wolves would need to lose a heat leader as per the other 5 current Prem teams.

Rest assured Oxford will have AN air fence by the time it will be required and will also have PAID their bond plus all other requirements for a license to be issued.

Great work - well done & thanks

Does it? where?

Clubs not allowed to have the same owner in the same league. Leicester/Sheffield thus ok. However, the work around is. Same owner in same league ie as in recent times Kings Lynne/Ipswich/Peterborough is ok if separate promoters/co promoters are the front men. Is it right to do so? Others can decide.

Most riders fly where appropriate - the mechanics by road/ferry is not done in a rush with plenty of time for rest. - some do fly if the equipment is already in situ

Well if it is on the agenda it will be low down given speedway promoters first & foremost think “what can I do for my own business” followed by “what SPIN” can I apply to decisions I have influenced to make me look like a caring promoter who puts providing entertainment for fans, the long term future of uk speedway & rider welfare above anything else.

Riders are self employed “Contracted riders” ”subcontracted” when allowed by club who rider is “contracted too” to ride for another club. In legal terms the “contract” is the “asset”

No deadlines have been passed yet for 2022 planning - which raises the validity of one of the key reasons given by LS for his none continuation of Kent.

Leicester bound?