Ned Kelly 41

Edinburgh's John Campbell told his public on Friday that their attendances were down at least 10% on last year, on one occasion more than 20%. He explained his club had lost more than £4,000 on one meeting alone! And that is a successful outfit, league champions, huge population in towns and cities all around and unbeaten at home (up to the point he was writing) so we should not blindly attribute falling crowds only to home defeats. At Berwick, in a sparsely-populated area, it is important to remember how cold it has been at the majority of meetings so far, which was probably the primary reason for lower attendances in April and early May. Yes, winning helps -- and your above excellent post is correct to highlight the losing-team factor --but (other people's) destructive criticism of a promotion facing the kind of weekly losses at least the equal of those laid out by Mr Campbell is going to have only one conclusion. That the promoters consider enough is enough, and with no further financial help on the horizon they decide there are easier ways to part with four grand every time they open the turnstiles.............

So who is the rider they're getting close to? Obviously a Brit.

Not if you have a hard and fast "let's hammer the promotion" agenda, it seems.

Where to begin? The British League Division III was created in 1994. This in turn became the Academy League in 1995, and was renamed the Conference League in 1996, and went back to being the Amateur League in 1997. These were all (supposedly) amateur competitions. In 1998 the third tier was called the Conference League again, but was no longer restricted to amateurs. Finally, in 2009 the name was changed yet again, this time to the National League, as it remains today. How's that?

Yeah, but.... In 1997 the Bandits were in the National League, which was then called the Conference, weren't they?

Exactly what I thought when I read he'd been on a bike.

I think what you're advocating -- and I have no disagreement -- is that these clubs might be better-off joining the National League.

Fair points raised there -- but if one really wants to help out 'just the riders' you can slip any of them the odd tenner in the stand after any match, no need to join a supporters group to do it. Again, if you are worried about the promotion not being able to balance their books and closing down (perish the unthinkable thought) one could become an associate sponsor, or -- if that were too steep, as it might be for many -- just buy an extra fiver, or tennersworth, of 50% draw tickets each week, no need to join the VIP Club to pump a bit of dough into the club coffers. All personal choice, and nobody need feel a need to be cajoled, or bullied, into 'taking sides'. The all-important thing must surely be that the Bandits enjoy an entertaining, hopefully-successful 48th term of trading -- and can come back, all bills paid, in 2016 for another one, and many more thereafter..

We've had newsletters all winter. We know the team, we know the sponsors, we know how much tickets will cost, we know when and where the first fixtures are happening -- and we know you're a cretin. What else is there?

Despite the wording of Workington's announcement, has Matthew Wethers actually been denied a visa? He's already here, lives in UK, hasn't gone home to race for a decade, he's married to a Scot, has two British children -- what's different between Matthew and Summers, Henry, Doolan, Ricky Wells, Rusty, etc? Isn't it the case that when Mason Campton was declined entry and the Comets decided to bring back Rusty, Wethers' CMA just didn't fit? Might he not be allowed to race elsewhere -- like the other resident 'foreigners' listed above. I mean, they're not going to deport him as an undesirable alien, surely?

They could have put admission prices up instead. Having a VIP Club leaves the option of joining it or not. No-one's twisting your arm.

Not just Branford, same incident ended Robert Ksiezak's career.

You really think this is about speedway, don't you?

Promise?

Tero is going to be 31 in April, is no longer a club asset and (sadly) unlikely to improve a rolling average. Andre is going to be 38 in May, and would be coming back from an awful whack. A great rider with a fine career, but by now - not least after the injury - an unlikely loan, I'd have thought. Bunyan will be 36 in March, he's on the downslope of an fairly unremarkable career and (according to Rye Housers) is trouble. Looks like a newbie, then -- any informed guesses?

Aw, you bit! Bless....

Slovakian, surely?

I think it is wrong to lump the blame onto the BSPA. Some clubs kept proper records and passed all their audits. Others didn't, changed ownership without advising UKVI, brought over a series of duds, moved riders about without going through channels and probably disregarded advice from the BSPA office when things started to look messy last year. What's unfortunate -- unfair -- is that the clubs who did everything right have now had their status as certified employers cancelled along with the guilty ones. The blame should be put on those who, through laziness or incompetence, brought the UKVI to speedway's door.

One good thing to come out of all this --- Mister Blobby has clearly been told by the management to zip up and post nothing!

....and the fee is?

They may not have changed the criteria, but they've certainly changed the way it is enforced. From April 2008 until the end of March 2013, visas were processed by the inefficient and much-criticised UK Borders Agency. It was a direct result of the authorities being so lax that speedway clubs got lazy, and (some, only some) didn't keep proper employment records. The Conservative coalition disbanded this Agency as from April 1st, 2013 and set up the current UK Visas & Immigration and (separate) Immigration Enforcement agencies. There was a noticeable tightening-up of procedures, culminating in speedway getting handed yesterday's news, and the efficiently-run clubs being grouped in, and punished alongside the less-organised others. One thing not being talked about is the (perhaps-mythical) need for a rider at PL level to achieve a 7-point average. When this was first introduced, CMAs included bonus points. Should there not be a lowering of the barrier, or could bonus points be reintroduced to rolling averages, giving the CMA of a rider involved in a team sport a truer reflection of his worth and abilities?

So did I, as I posted earlier. However, as the 2014 SCB regulation have been posted to say "start of the season" it is pretty clear. What you and I were thinking, I suspect, is the FIM regulation for riders entering U-21 events and the like -- that runs from Jan 1,

Like racehorses, speedway riders qualify for the whole year at the age they are on January 1st. Or so I understand.

Minor?

Yeah, good idea --- the winners could get Aaron Summers as a trophy.