GS550

What by virtue of.... 1. Their behaviour? 2. Them being paupers? Sorry, you mean their total numbers. Time for my taxi.

On that basis no shared events should ever be staged at such as Somerset or Poole either according to your philosophy. So its ok for Glasgow supporters travel each year to tracks south of the border, but its not reasonable to reciprocate for one meeting? Maybe time to wake up and realise that there's a world out there beyond just your own back yard. Shared events have been 'shared' around by being hosted by different tracks. False. Perhaps if you took your blinkers off you would realise that it has produced some of the best racing anywhere. If you go onto the Glasgow website you will see plenty videos showing examples of passing and various passing lines. Remember to take your blinkers off. Can't do much about your apparent anti-Glasgow bias though, I'm sure when you view a pass it will appear in your eyes as if nothing happened. Yeah, of course Shane Parker could never overtake on that track cos there were no passing lines....

That's consistent with reports of Lawson//Summers celebrating as if they'd got through, only to be denied by the ref's decision giving it to Barker third and Summers fourth. Who was the referee?

But then no as big heat advantages are unrecognised i.e. a 5-1 or for that matter a 5-0. As "Fueltaps" said: "It could also mean 5-1 × 7 and 2 - 4 × 8 meaning a traditional 51 - 39 win becomes a 8 - 7 loss." Which I find ludicrous. Sorry. I agree.

Appears to have been 13/5 ? (Ht 13 3-3, Ht 14 5-1, Ht 15 5-1) You were pretty close though, sorry mate!!

While I agree with the gist, not sure about when there's a genuinely flooded track that is not race-able and genuinely not possible to complete fixtures by the end of August. Under your proposal, taking 2016 season at Armadale as an example, Edinburgh would have been penalised when they had simply been victim of an horrendous weather pattern. So not sure your proposal would be either fair or practical. Agree something needs to be done to make use of dates though.

Well said and says what many of us are feeling.

What do we need changing in Speedway next season? Worth having a look at this thread.... Glasgow Tigers V Newcastle Diamonds Ko Cup 1/4 Final 1st Leg Fri Oct 6th 2017: http://www.speedway-forum.co.uk/forums/index.php?showtopic=85449 Tells you so much that is wrong with the sport and why so many are just fed up with how the sport is being run. So many factors on that thread and so many fed up and deciding not to attend, e.g. Lawson being absent due to doubling up, other riders injured and not allowed to sign replacements, first leg of KO Cup in.... October!! , etc. Due to doubling up, injured riders but not allowed to sign replacements, other rules relating to who has priority of which rider and/or which competitions have priority but then its not stuck to, rules being changed on the hoof, riders that should be available are not due to ad hoc changes to the rule book, it culminates in..... A first round KO Cup tie in October whereby Glasgow will have only two of their riders, four guests, and r/r. The thread noted above summarises so much that is wrong with the sport and the paying public is just fed up. That kind of tie doesn't interest me and I won't attend, and as has been noted on that thread there is a distinct lack off interest and even the Glasgow Tigers Supporters bus has had to be cancelled due to lack of interest, whereas if they had held this tie in say May then there would have been plenty interest and coach loads would have attended. The people running the sport need to have a long hard look at themselves. I won't be attending either due to the same apathy which has crept in among so many on that thread and who can blame them. BSPA sort yourselves out.

The point regarding 1997 was of course also on topic i.e. de-strengthening of the second tier. In the longer term it didn't do the second tier any harm, and indeed the standard of rider substantially increased in successive years back to where it was, arguably stronger and a higher standard of rider such that many riders can change seamlessly from one to the other (doubling up/down). It may allow a larger number of riders to be utilised and reduce the need for doubling up/down. At least that's the logic. Just an idea. Yes there does need to be a better bonus for finishing first than getting first pick of the other teams. That better bonus should be - the League title.

I feel your pain. This season seems to have been a shambles.

Just an idea, but we could maybe do with a de-strengthening of the second tier, like was done in around 1997 season? I'm sure most of us already know all this stuff but maybe worth a recap. As you may recall the two divisions ("Div 1" and "Div 2" as was called then) merged in 1995 season, thus was formed the "Premier League" of 21 teams. The amalgamated one league format remained for another season i.e. 1996 season. However, in the close season everything changed as the top boys wanted to break away hence the Elite League was born and the second tier retained its Premier moniker. The second tier was "de-strengthened" as they seem to call it so previous second strings under the amalgamated set up now became heat leaders as some of them had been before the merger but now achieving even higher averages than before - given that the second strings and reserves were now of a lesser standard even than before the amalgamation. Prelude now over, there's maybe a call for a similar de-strengthening of the second tier. It seems to me that the difference in standard between the top two tiers is much less then it used to be (e.g. old BL/NL of the 80's). I know that some of that is due to not attracting GP riders as once was or World Finalists pre-GP days. Nevertheless, the difference in standard between second and top tier could maybe do with being restored by de-strengthening the second tier. This would enable young up and coming riders to be utilised and the tendency for doubling up could be reduced - a top rider probably wouldn't want to "double down" so much anyway. So doubling up/down could be limited as some appear to want (e.g. limited to British riders only) and it may be enough of a compromise between those that reckon doubling up should or has to remain and those that don't think it should be there at all. My mate Spanner may well be swung by this (thanks for getting back to me mate). That's just my take on things. But really we're all on the same side, we all want Speedway to flourish. That we have different ideas on how to get there is a good thing. The more the merrier.

I could do with a proper rest meself

Maybe better to "attack the post not the poster" as the saying goes. I made a valid point, namely regarding Bewley, tbh I only expected a reasoned point in reply. So the shoe appears to be on the other foot? You close by saying "Goodbye. I won't be looking at this thread again". Well that's entirely up to you. Enjoy your speedway.

Pedantic? The point about Bewley was and is a valid point. You say that I have to accept your point of view - I don't. Some things are inevitable and must happen - night follows day, the sky is usually above us the ground below us. But doubling up/down is not in that category.

More to it than that. Do you think it suited Glasgow to be dictated to by being deprived of Bewley when either the rider himself or his top tier parent club decided they would rather he didn't ride for Glasgow yet he could ride for BV just the night before. That scenario wouldn't be the case if it weren't for doubling up/down. This factor wouldn't necessarily be eradicated by riding different nights as the case in point with Bewley. This as well as injuries and not being allowed to sign replacements created far too many instances of R/R and Guests this season and it just seems a complete shambles with many becoming fed up with the sport and reducing their attendance. When there were 10 or 12 teams in the top tier and 19 or 20 in the second there was no doubling up/down and there were enough riders to go round. Time they relaxed the work permit rules for Aussies and also brought on far more young home grown riders into the sport and really developed it from the ground up.

Agree with that. I disagree. It was put there, it can be removed. You say "none of us like it" - which means a significant number of people will reduce their attendance and it won't pay so it won't be sustainable and it won't survive.

Don't agree with that at all. It was put there, it can be removed. Not enough riders - false. I don't have enough money for a Lamborghini but I've just about enough for a secondhand Mondeo. We will just have to cut our cloth to suit and if it means 6 man teams or 5 man teams then so be it. I want to see riders riding for one team, the shambles that has been the 2017 season has had much to do with doubling up/down combined with injuries and not being allowed to sign replacements so fixtures full of R/R and Guests. Trying to explain this to non-speedway friends and colleagues and they shake their head in astonishment at how badly run it all seems. From my point of view there's no point in continuing with doubling up/down cos I won't attend such a shambles, its the main reason why I've lost interest and reduced attendance.

.....and Ippo sneaked it. ok I'll get me coat

You say that but did they!!..... We've seen how different spectators at the same event witnessing the same Nicholls/Greaves incident saw the facts totally differently..... Think you'll find if you apply "Duckworth-Lewis" or conversely if you apply "Stableford" you will probably get a different result.

By the looks of it he was paying far too much attention!!

Well that does explain a lot!! Time both of them were weeded out!!

Agree with most of your points, including the one quoted above. Only minor grumble I have is your wording of "Re" training would suggest that Mr Dishington has either previously received training or that on said initial training he attained a competent standard in the first place, either of which premise I greatly doubt.

Has only crept into speedway in the last few years?? You're kidding me!! Its been going on for at least 30 years. I do agree that it should be outlawed and I agree with your proposed penalties.

Murrayfield? No, you're right, think probably better with the national stadium in Manchester!

Tbh the venue just aint there as far as capacity is concerned in the case of Ashfield in the West, and from all aspects in the East in the case of "the dump!".