500cc

I think you'll find Havelock was a protected asset as opposed to to a draft pick. Looks like the rules were updated to allow another asset to be selected. Oh dear !!!

Thanks for the time details. At least it gives me an idea if the likely time even if it changes. Having Phil involved in this gives it credibility from my perspective as I think his involvement is for all the right reasons. Whilst we would be naive to assume a key driver isn't financial, it doesn't take away the fact it has opened up a big opportunity. Whilst the size of the jump (straight to EL) in one go is too big, we've been crying out for years to give young Brit's the opportunity at the highest level and this is the first step. In the end it's success will come down to promoters following the ethics of the related regulations rather than looking for loopholes. I really hope on this occasion clubs play this fairly. It will be to easy for them to push it to the limits, resulting in uncompetitive matches and disillusioned youngsters. These youngsters aren't being brought into the EL for a "nicey nicey your turn to win". They and we want competition. But at the same time remember they are our future. Other sports bring their youngsters on slowly as investments. Speedway needs that attitude. We must get away from this mentality that when you do well we can discard you for the next model up due to your improved average. On the face of it the proposed regulations won't allow that.

Thanks for the heads-up. They do listen to their customers !!! Exactly the type of thing that should be on social media as it attracts interest and discussion. A thumbs up to the BSPA for doing this. And I see Phil Morris has just tweeted his praise for the BSPA "Getting with the times"

Miedzinski, Batchelor, Barker etc. Potentially Howarth now. The BSPA have allowed the mess to occur and shouldn't be surprised when individual promoters (themselves !!! sic) stick two fingers up to the "direction" they are given. I said at the time the Miedzinski resolution (sic) was going to create problems. It was the catalyst to last years issues and look like its continuing. But the BSPA keep telling us they are best qualified to run the sport. Perhaps their business speciality is Exit Strategies !!

Have to add that the Wimbledon programme Parsloes produced was first class. Was always very very impressed by the level of detail. It's a shame that so much conflict exists at Kent. I think there is an awful lot wrong with British speedway, yet if I could choose the best bits of Parsloes, Nikko and Len Silver I wouldn't hesitate to select them to a 'dream team' for a speedway club. They all offer a lot of strengths, and were the chemistry there and the ability to leverage off each others strengths it could be very successful. In fact I'd suggest that it did start that way at Kent, but the cracks were obviously there before it became public.

Correct However, Poole have an option to play their joker and jump up to number 3 for Kyle Newman. It's a special condition to reward those clubs who have put most into junior development (or is it for those who've flashed the most cash !!!) It basically a version of Rider Control (with selected teams opting out).

Forgetting the rights and wrongs of the case for one moment, you just have to laugh at the combined incompetence of these promoters who make-up the BSPA. They may be successful in their other businesses, but their incompetence as a collective defies belief. Year on year their public bickering defies belief. The last few years have been an embarrasment. No wonder they are so anti social-media as it's their dirty washing that fuels it.

100% the reason I became interested in speedway. It was the excellent local newspaper coverage. The modern day equivalent is, as you rightly state, social media.

Ford stated Piotr Pawlicki wasn't good enough for Poole last season.

What is the point of a rider signing as an asset? I have never worked out whether a rider can refuse to be an asset for a club. Seems to me that by riding for a club for a short period the club is claiming the rider as an asset. As is seen in the current Kyle Howarth controversy, it is the fact that he is an asset that is causing the problems. So what does a rider gain? Does he receive a signing-on fee for example? There must be something in it for the rider for all of this to make sense (that's before you get into the whole discussion about the legality of such a system in its current form).

The thing is Poole have previously been fined for an illegal approach, so the proof exists. What surprises me is that Ford has actually made such an emotive quote as he unnecessarily exposes himself. To be honest I thought he had a little more business nous than that. He has publicly stated there is clear evidence of fellow promoter(s) breaching rules. You'd assume he is certain of that, because if nobody is found guilty, he exposes himself to libel. He has specifically asked people to draw conclusions exclusively from his quote. If the resulting comments further damage the accused, the case of libel becomes stronger. He has to all intent and purpose accused Kyle Howarth of being a liar; at best not clever. From a pure business perspective you'd suggest the timing to be very strange. Just as the league makes a move towards a greater British content, he releases one of the most prized British assets for future years. That very much goes against his recent business strategy. For Ford this unusually looks like an emotive decision over a business call. It could once again bring the asset rule to the fore. Unless Poole and Howarth had a signed agreement for next season, then effectively Poole are preventing him from earning a living. This isn't a Poole issue. The asset issue is across the sport. The behavior of promoters is also across the sport. Its a self destructive sport, but that's the result of self governance I'm afraid.

This is all getting a bit tight now. The draft is on Tuesday and I don't know what channel I will be able to watch it on. Stayed up all night to follow this years NFL draft, so quite excited to be able to watch this one at a more sociable time. Will the riders be there and called up onto the stage when their pick is announced?

I'm yet to be convinced the second strings are at all important. Assuming on the new format, that generally second strings are (significantly) stronger than most reserves, it is only the opposition second strings that become an issue. If the race format is two reserve races, and four heats with reserves and second strings, you generally expect your second strings to get 2nd places. So an expected loss of 4 points v equality (8 on swing but that's an equally opposite extreme.) But the remaining 9 heats (including Heat 15) will include heat leaders (2*5 and 1*4 = 14 plus 4 second strings). If the 2nd strings meet again you have 7 heats of exclusively heat leaders and you lose 2 more v equality. But either way a top heavy team will surely lick their lips at these 9 heats. Imagine Ward, Holder and KK in 2012 with this format. Even with weak second strings it would be a walk in the park. The biggest game changer would be reserves where the points differential in those 6 heats could be issue. As things stand the only reason I'd strengthen at 2nd string is if my reserves looked likely to concede 5-1's to most opposition reserves.

Apparently Matt Ford has offered Belle Vue a dozen bricks in exchange for their Number Two Pick. The deal is on hold until an investigation into whether Ford owns too many bricks is concluded.

You don't have to pick a Top 10 rider. Anybody not claimed (protected riders) or undrafted is available at any pick. Technically Number 1 Kerr can be picked last or not picked at all.

Third time lucky. If the pick Newman, Poole will actually pick 18th (8th in Round 2) assuming Kerr and Garrity are selected in Round 1.

I don't actually think they changed their minds, it was just very thoughtlessly worded in the first place. But rest assured plenty of goalposts will move between now and 31st October 2014 in British speedway !!! Interesting point Phil about any rider becoming an asset before Tuesday. Bet Matt Ford was first to think of that possibility though !!!

Injuries (generally) are a reason on their own to draft Garrity as an injured (or potentially unavailable due to washing their hair - depends on the wording of the regulation) reserve can be replaced by any rider below him in "The List". Since only Kerr heads him, assuming the rule is as implied, he can be replaced by anyone else including Kyle Newman.

You are correct. Matt Ford stated that the reserve he wanted was Kyle Newman. And they get to pick him before everyone else. Once Poole have selected him and Wolves, Lakeside and Kings Lynn theirs, then bottom club Coventry finally get a go.

Only top ten riders are protected. If Coventry protected Sarjeant, then Coventry's first pick (overall) would need to be downgraded to Number 4. With an argument that there are three riders ahead of the others at the moment and only one draftable, that Coventry wouldn't actually be keen on that anyway.

Thanks Neil, I should have carried on reading, and got my answer !!!

They are the only ones? "These riders are: Lewis Kerr (King’s Lynn), Kyle Newman (Poole), Adam Ellis (Lakeside) and Ashley Morris (Wolverhampton). Should these riders not be selected by their parent clubs, they will return to the draft and be available to other clubs." I assume the reality doesn't meet the wording. Surely the four teams must make their claim on their asset pre-draft. Otherwise Poole will simply pass on Newman at 10 and pick the best rider below the 9th ranked at that point, and then nab Newman with the 11th pick !!!

The list doesn't tell us who is eligible, just those who have accepted. Birks may be eligible and offered but may have turned it down due injury or other reasons. I suspect though he isn't eligible due to having an actual EL average. I think Newman has only ever been assessed. I too wonder how this will actually be implemented as it is open to the normal abuse by EL promoters. Out of interest, does anybody know how many of the 23 riders are EL assets?

Today's quote: http://www.speedwaygb.co/news.php?extend.23327 As you know, BSPA statements are a moving target !!!

But won't this create further inequality. Four teams already are comfortably placed. If the remaining six teams are restricted even further then it won't work. And if Coventry pass on Garrity (unlikely), is he prepared to ride at BV after the apparent falling out? How many riders may be unavailable to BV? I suspect the riders agreement requires them to ride where selected. If not we have a real can of worms. Anyway Eastbourne is a lot closer than Poland and that has never worried the promoters !!!