1 valve

Lions race on Friday..problem solved and still a no school next day scenario...of course other speedway promoters may object...after all cant do anything that may help another club eh?

Any good reason why we couldn't have Elite League run on Thursdays and Fridays with all promoters agreeing that this means where possible each team rides one match at home and away (yes I know there will be rain offs) and teams taking a even share of race nights - As an example (to make things simple) if the league remained with eight teams meeting each other four times then one team rides the A fixture on Friday at home and the away A fixture on a Thursday and then change so that the other team has home advantage for the B fixture on Friday and away on Thursday for the B fixture. By adopting this approach teams would save on costly travel and each have a none school next day fixture night.

Can anybody provide an insight into what the cost differentials are in terms of "Top riders" "very good riders" and FTR as featured in the Elite League?

Wilson & Storer as FTR looks good

Wish I knew what the "regular" Lions side is!

If you listen to what Tatum had to say after the race when reviewing it he clearly states how impressed he was by Doyle's pass (hence the woar) and the bravery involved. also I think its pretty clear Doyle had more than a bikes length between him and Jonsson as he made the turn thanks to the speed he had generated down the back straight which made the pass possible in the first place, and sure he turned sharply once in the turn which had far more to do with staying on the racing line than chopping the nose of Jonson who I noticed had no problem getting around the bend nor with Doyle after the race.

Actually you could run up to 14 teams in an expanded Elite League without there being an increase in fixtures. This is because currently teams race each other twice home and away and hence more teams can be accommodated by having one meeting home and away.

My suggestion re Thursday & Friday did exclude Friday meetings when there is a GP. I believe we need consecutive days to reduce back and forth travel costs of riders based outside of UK and a day where there is no school the next day. Hence only Thursday & Friday meet this criteria. Incidentally this also resolves your last point about regular meetings being required which I totally agree n. Limiting GP riders keeps cost under control and I believe be a better way of ensuring development of riders and a better way of balancing team strength inside whatever points limit is created. BTW wait until next season when Poole announce 3 GP riders in their team (Holder, Majic & Ward) to see if people think it doesn't matter.

In another topic somebody has posted: "Hopefully the Elite league will do the decent thing and put itself out of its misery this winter and we can have something in its place which is better" Obviously easy to wish for something better without stating what "better" would be. so given that opinions on any changes for 2016 should be thought about sooner rather than later, we forum folk should lead the way (cant believe the promoters are too far advanced in their own planning for 2016) in setting out ideas which could provide "something in its place which is better" To start the ball rolling my suggestions are: 1. Race days limited to Thursday and/or Friday, No Friday meetings when there is a GP - removes the Poland and GP effect where riders need to be at those meetings on Saturday less clash with PL double ups 2. FTR to be limited to one rider (no 7) other reserve is 6th lowest scorer and treated as per main body of team - 2 FTR's have proven to be a) too influential on the outcomes of meetings or impossible to replace when injured with similar ability riders 3. Teams to be limited to 1 current GP rider as the norm. or if a team wishes to have 2 GP riders then team points limit reduced by 2 points. Creates a more balanced team v team structure.

I am presuming that Norrie or somebody from the Lions challenged the SCB/BSPA decision as soon as it was known about. if so does anybody know what was the reason given by the SCB/BSPA for blatantly approving a breach of the rules?

Heat 12. Lions (guest) Sarjeant brings down hammers (guest) Hall on the 3rd/4th bend of lap one and is excluded. Lions (guest) Greenwood returns to the pit entrance whilst Hammers rider Elis returns in to the pits. The referee excludes Ellis for leaving the track as per rule 15.2.2 which specifically states "no return into the pits is permitted" however this rule is applicable only when the race has been stopped and no riders have been disqualified i.e. a "flying start" Rule 15.2.3 which covers the situation where a rider is excluded and a re-run is required does not specify that riders cannot return to the pits and this is the rule that the referee should have used. Hence after being told by the Hammers manager and then another referee that he had used the wrong rule he reversed his decision of penalising Ellis.

I am happy to stand corrected re Hall being booked by Hammers weeks ago...good research by them. also agree that Swiderski is not delivering as he needs to. Also agree that lions were beaten by a better team on the night....I just don't agree that Hammers should have been allowed to field Harris and that 4 guests in one team is simply too many. Yes Lions beaten by a better team, just that the team in question wasn't really "The hammers" just a line up who plundered the league points for the team in question.

According to the speedway regs. 14.4.1 the away team must inform the home team of their line up 4 days before the meeting. Subsequent changes are allowed if circumstances change i.e. a rider is injured and therefore unavailable (the full list of acceptable reasons are given in the rules) In this particular instance after the 4 day cut Hammers adjusted their line up to accommodate Harris. Now this may not be cheating in the true definition, but this action does not follow the rules. So lets say Hammers did not follow the rules (which I think some people do call cheating) but because their action was endorsed by CVS of Wolves (by the way does anyone know which team is in danger of Lions overtaking at the foot of the table?) the Hammers late change was deemed as permissible....Of course since such changers are now apparently arbitrarily allowed, one could question why we bother having rules in the first place. Speedway promoters...please grow some balls and start acting like responsible custodians of a sport in need of some tender loving care rather than feeding it with the drugs of despair, greed & deceitful manipulation - and start by using a truly independent body regarding rules and regulations to police the sport in the UK..i.e. one that does not involve a promoter from the very league youa re involved I......

or as a politician would say.."His opinions are inconsistent"

Lions didn't field their team nor did the Hammers so hardly a fair comparison. In reality with 50% of the combined line up being guests this meeting should have been listed as a challenge match so that at least after a long lay off the promotion had a meeting fro the fans to watch. Interestingly, Hammers had the larger portion of the guests which apparently was finally arrived at after rule bending (a polite way of saying they were allegedly allowed to cheat by another promoter) to allow Harris in as a guest meaning that 57% the Hammers final line up was made up of guests who collectively scored 65% of the teams total score. I am also prepared to say that Norrie in his role of team manager failed to field a suitably strong team particularly at reserve, where although hard to explain Richard Hall being seen as an up and coming rider Norrie was slow off the mark to book Hall for the Lions. Sorry but clearly 1 up to the Hammers management. Overall, a truly bad advert for British Speedway capped by a referee who had to admit publically that he did not fully understand the rules.

every team bar Leicester have won at Lakeside this year. I think the tactical rider rule needs looking at as clearly that was the main reason for Robins getting back into the match. Hammers off to a flyer, Swindon get use to the track and required settings and then wham..big points and no real chance for Hammer to do likewise. My suggestion would be limit the use of tactical rides to heats 11, 12 & 13.

Lions will not finish bottom - unless they suffer even more injuries. will be ahead of Wolves and most probably Lakeside although tonight's fixture may prove difficult considering the strengthening of the Hammers via the guests from Coventry. They may also pip The Aces. so having finished bottom last year, they will improve on that result this year which will be a good base to plan for next year when hopefully Doyle, Walasek & Wozniak will continue as full time Lions. It would be great to see Masters come back too but I agree with the concept of trying to build a team around full time riders rather than double ups as clearly this does disrupt the flow of the team when PL fixtures interfere. two things we do need for next year 1. riders who do not quit once their domestic season starts, 2 a great reduction in the number of injuries. The backward step of going into PL gains zero respect, as there is no guarantee of the Lions being able to build a competitive team as all good riders are spoken for, whilst the intention of building on this year performance will see Lions competing for a play off position. So three seasons one an inaugural wooden spoon, followed by a mid tablei(sh) season two and then a play off birth is a better set of circumstances than retreating back to the lower divisions. I am sure the continued ambition of the promoters will be rewarded with both increased support and a winning team

The report which is a very good read refers to rumors of a "long lease" being quashed. I recall that mention had previously been made of the CO inserting a restrictive covenant in the sale agreement/title deeds. if this was the case this is far stronger than an extended intended use lease agreement. Or was this wishful thinking from the outset?

Does anybody know to what extent there is truth and scope of a supposed restrictive covenant placed on the Brandon site by the late Charles Ochiltree? If one does exist how is it being used to challenge the plans of the current owners?

If there was (or is) a land covenant applicable to the land the local council cannot overturn it. Such decisions are subject to the Upper Tribunal - Lands Chamber - based in London.

Coventry only scored 2 points from Robson's programmed rides. Good tactics by Havelock in switching the reserves around to make use of Garrity's form had a major impact on the final score.

I agree that things look tough for the Lions, but maybe the three Polish lads will take a liking to the track and provide backup to Jason D which will keep things interesting. Can anyone comment on how well the two guest reserves have done on recent visits?

Except for any individual and play-off meetings all Elite league clubs have more or less the same number of home meetings per season and of course the most significant cost for clubs are the riders who are for the most part a variable cost i.e. no meeting no wages to pay. Promoters will have taken this into account when planning their season’s budget. The big influencing factors on a seasons total attendance and thus actual income v budget is the weather, holidays other attractions and team performance which can be both positive and negative and in differing degrees of effect. Another aspect is the promoter’s ability to do their job and promote the sport. In the case of the Lions the extended absence of home fixtures cannot be positive for keeping the momentum going in terms of attendance but they do get the apparent benefit of Saturday night racing which appears to help the numbers turning up – and or DH does a decent job promoting the Lions. I for one prefer Elite league racing and would not wish to see the Lions drop down from the top tier and frankly as they have every likelihood of finishing above both Lakeside and the Wolves and maybe the Aces come the end of the season I don’t see any reason for the promotion to consider the notion, more that we should wish for a less challenging 2016 in terms of injuries & deserters, the return of Doyley and a play off place will be a real possibility.

No need to be so negative..it may have took a long while but eventually the Lions returned to the speedway fold and with the help of the local authority. When the Coventry situation first came to light last year I did advise all concerned, not to get stuck in protest but accept the fate of Brandon and spend all your energies finding an alternative venue. Tough task but not an impossible one.

Leicester will have recieved a fee for being the host of the televised meeting and so in all reality will have made more money than normal meeting. However, the point is a good number of people turned up who would not have normally attended which means the Lions have prospects of gaining more fans. This is a perfect example of using TV money to promote the sport. The other consideration is the amount to be charged and I think there is an argument that Elite speedway is too expensive and the possibility is that a reduced entrance fee could attract more fans. But will a 25% reduction attract 30% or more fans? I dont know but it might be worth a try/