Sings4Speedway

Any ideas if it will be a true Gems side i.e 7 riders unsigned elsewhere or a cradley style NT side which was the best 1-7 available by current averages from teams not in the competition

In terms of entry into the league yes but this attempt was quashed before that stage was reached i believe so most likely from the mafia once again, if there was justifiable concerns about finances, race nights, location etc then fair enough but a stupid naming issue is just daft. As ever im sure there are loop holes and the Swindon 'Reading' Racers would be allowed to take to the track if all other citeria were met.

Even worse when adding Boston, Weymouth, Sittingbourne Crusaders and as you said likely others too to the list. Almost as many 2nd sides from clubs have run in the NL and been pulled out plus of course the clubs that have folded and been fortunately resurrected like Brum, IOW & Plymouth.

Yet again its just short sighted from the BSPA. The NL is dangling by a thread and with Plymouth likely to attempt a step up again next season, Kent to discover how viable two side are and standalone teams like IOW & Mildenhall to find out how workable a reduced fixture list is things are far from certain. To then prevent the possibility of Reading, Exeter or any other nomad team that has the funding from joining the league when clubs are folding far faster than they are opening is yet another showing of ineptitude by the powers that be.

The definition of 'actively looking' would need to be very heavily clarified here. Searches are one thing, having the finances to build it are quite another. There is also a very strong argument that running a nomadic team at another venue is part of the track search process by verifying & justifying the levels of support in existence for a particular side.

I was saddened and heartbroken to read that an attempt from Reading to run at NDL level from the Swindon stadium was shot down by the bspa before it got off the ground due to something as stupid as the team name. If the side was to be entered it had to be under the Swindon banner and not Reading which would defeat the object for this bunch of supporters whos continued aim is to see a Reading team on track. Surely if the funding was there and the agreement of the Swindon promotion in place what is the issue? With the NDL enjoying far from prosperous times at present the blocking of this side and effectively any attempts from Exeter in future seasons surely the bspa is poisoning the sport from within? Would certainly be interesting to know who decided against this and why they think it is a positive move for Speedway?

THJ could be the real trump card in this Brum side and if he applies himself i think he could be number 1 in no time and one of the top performers in the league (but he will need equipment to match). Harris had the backup of Roo Boy last season as a stronger heat leader partner and if he has to be the top rider this time around it could be a pressure too far. As for Garrity everyone knows he is pure entertainment but he is no more than 3rd heat leader level and will lose bucketfuls of points with reliability issues.

The plus side Mike is that neither side will be more than 2 places lower than the other in the Nat Trophy Table.....

This is precisely the issue that is hurting Speedway across the whole country. Everyone agrees that development is required for the sport to survive and yet it is always considered someone else's problem. Poole were naughty not running the youth round this year but did allow a MSDL side to operate from their track which is still more than many clubs do. The BSPA only wants to promote the youth rounds and imposes some hefty fee's and requirements upon development league teams including the treats of not being able to run if they cannot find their own tracks. Referee's often don't want to officiate dev league meetings or youth rounds after main matches and 22 heats of racing counts as a double header so double the fee for the official. There are obviously some notable exceptions but in reality the future of the sport is being handled by a few unsung and unknown heroes.

get in there Danny & well done Ipswich. Banging signing and long overdue. Effort, enthusiasm and once he is on top of the confidence wave points a plenty.

Obviously there are 3 sides to complete and i suspect Leicester will be a touch stronger but its still a good IOW side (that said i thought the Warriors would be bottom last year and still owe Barry, new years resolution, pay up) so what do i know. A lot can and often does happen over a season even if it does look like a short one this year.

Certainly potential for Brum to make top 6 but unfortunately i fear there as many pro's as there are con's with this side and my gut says 7-8th missing the pay offs but providing plenty of home entertainment along the way.

Only saw Wooley a couple of times last season but there appears to be less of him and was riding well rather than his old gate and road block technique which won't work on the Island. As covered by the others Campos has to be a better rider than his average, Morley is the standout rider in the league and if Connor & Chad continue their improvements from last yea it looks a strong side. Titles will hang on whether Leek discovers some technical ability and can keep out of the fence and if Coles can find enough funding to keep competitive.

I think that after one season a decent indication can be given even if its the levels of improvement required. I would imagine every rider will tell you the first season is the hardest / learnt the most from whatever the level

Its not been weakened again it has continued to stay at the previously set weakened level. You are correct that setting below the 42 limit artificially inflates averages (although this should then force the top riders up/out). I think you are ignoring the fact that not all newcomers are appearing from the youth ranks i suspect that if the entry limit remained at 2.00 many clubs would have used the minimum points required on the reserve berths to make stronger top 5's (only got to look how CL sides have bee built) its just a little ironic that riders who started last year on 2.00 and failed to achieve over 3.00 are now the desirable riders this year despite not being able to increase their averages.

T.Kurtz & D.Hume to finish the side off......?

Firstly with the increase of 3.00 as the base and the points limit increased to 39 the league has surely been strengthened this year? You are also correct that there was a crop of talent that was ready to make the breakthrough last season and Thompsons, Palin, Ablitt, Gilkes, Wirtzfeld and likely Kelly would have featured no matter the minimum. Not sure the same could be said of Rathbone, Spencer, McGurk, King, Bursill, Clouting, Davies, Butcher, Sheppard (again) but some took the chances and other didn't. 15 year olds aside as age is only reference for eligibility not ability there have been less new faces into the league this year (1 youth & 1 dev league) thus far so as this season stands its hardly a progressive year although there is always time for that to change.

I hope Danyon lands a champ place somewhere and is able to return and score big at Perry Barr. If he could get in at Poole and link up with his old mentor he would be able to make the step up with more confidence. In Jack Thomas Brum have a likeable lad who is well prepared but may be lacking a few HP and could definitely suffer confidence issues if he fails to get a NL ride.

Hands up i got that wrong although i still feel Elliot benefited from the return to the 3.00 base average. In his last meeting he spent his time being swapped out for Butcher while struggling at Plymouth, his last home fixture he got double figures but against a very sub par visiting side. His home average is decent and i can see why Mildenhall have picked him up but his away record was poor and needs to be vastly better before achieving NL heat leader status and is definitely a few years off Champs level.

Perhaps the best solution is pay a set fee per position in the race so here is an incentive to push harder for the higher finishing positions? Or additionally compensate for he handicap so riders off 20m get an extra tenner, 10m get a fiver and off the line go from scratch?

There was and will be again however last year there was a glut of newcomers due to the 2.00 ruling. Now it has been returned to 3.00 the number of newcomers has dropped. Largely because there are several riders on 2.xx that are more appealing despite not being able to achieve an average of over 3 from last season.

Its more a case of the suspicion that he has improved as far as he is going to? Personally i didn't see him ending the season on a 6 plus average and maybe IOW thought so too? As stated above the average system can be skewed as it can very much depend upon the fixtures for any given point of the season. Perhaps keep as it during the year but at the end of season generate an average based upon all matches / league matches and use that average for next seasons team building?

I assume this is for names to go forward to a fans vote & then subject to it meeting with the promotions approval the new name will be appointed? Cannot see Kent Klowns , Korkers or Kilimanjaro's sneaking through.

Fair point. Having never seen an Olympique i wouldn't want to comment. Its handicapped based upon previous race result rather than rider grading i believe? Perhaps a little bit more accurate on the night and slightly more tactical i would think?

I had heard he wasn't riding this year or not riding Speedway, however don't know if that's his choice or no team place available to him? Shame as been making good strides and riding a big track would really suit him. Coles seems a little bit of a concern? His interview seemed to suggest he was broke, last years bikes should be alright and he will have help with him sometimes but no guarantees?