Gordon Pairman

When I was involved with Belle Vue, we did a huge push one summer with publicity on local radio and the MEN newspaper for much reduced adult admission and children free. The results were overwhelming with double the normal crowd (though the same turnstile income as usual). We were so pleased with the out-turn that we ran it for the next week. The crowd returned to pre-offer levels meaning we lost a fortune. I concluded that reduced entry pricing was unlikely to increase crowd levels on a long term basis - but were likely to bankrupt the business

No and no. Once only and helmet colour of replaced rider

I think the comments from Walter Plinge - I do not know who is behind that name - cover most of the areas of rebuttal. BSF is not the correct place for a formal reply to the article in the Star. That has to be through the same channels as the comments were made.

I too have found the article sad, but not for the reasons posted above. I have not been directly affected nor involved in this matter but am well aware that there are two sides to the story. Hopefully, the Star will give the right of reply to those on the other side.

In 2011 - just after England had won the cricketing Ashes in Australia - Kyle Newman rode in three out of the four rounds of the Aussie championships. I think he was eligible to ride as he had won a state championship, but he was initially blocked by the authorities and missed the first round. When there were insufficient Australian riders available for the second round, MA asked him to compete. He and Steve Koppe drove from his base in Townsville to Adelaide - over 2800 km - to be met by a threat of a riders' boycott. The riders were over-ruled and Kyle competed. In the third round at Broken Hill, he continued to be ostracised and was given a place in the pits amongst the sidecars, not the solos. Kyle just kept his head down and said nothing. In the final round at Mildura, Kyle was amongst the solos in the pits, next to Chris Holder who was exceptionally supportive. Against the odds, Kyle won the B final putting him into the final, where, out of the referee's vision, he was bundled off his bike and unfairly excluded. As he was getting to his feet, an Aussie supporter shouted that he shouldn't have been in the meeting anyway, to which Kyle replied "at least we won the Ashes"! Oh yes, and the rider who bundled Kyle off? Rory Schlein. So, regardless of rights and wrongs, the addition of a cuckoo certainly adds to the conversation.

For the record, Neil Vatcher had no influence whatsoever in the decision that was reached by the SCB in respect of the MDL and proposed new SJL. The organisers of these leagues are aware why it was decided that the NJL format is the only acceptable one to be used.

There is no reason why I wouldn't be prepared to comment but I'm not sure my views are that important.I have, however, written something for this week's Star. If the Star declines to publish it, and that's entirely up to it, then I'll post my comments here

Supplementary Regulation issued this afternoon: The Speedway Control Bureau SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATION 2016 / 02 Art. 15.14.3 Art 15.14.3 ( is re-written as follows: A rider in the top 3 of that Meeting’s Team by current MA (NB. A Team missing one of their top 3 and using the RR Facility may use the 4th highest rider by MA) If a rider is disqualified for an offence under Art 15.3 then the Team Manger can chose either that i) The disqualified Rider starts in the same starting gate position on a 15-metre handicap or ii) is replaced by a Reserve (who will start in the same gate position from at the tapes. In the re-run of Heat 15 where a non-disqualified rider is unable to take part in a re-run (FN) then the place may be taken by a Reserve or another “qualified” rider. Issued: Wednesday 1st June 2016 The Speedway Control Bureau ACU House Wood Street Rugby CV21 2YX Tel: 01788 565603 www.scbgb.co.uk E-mail: info@scbgb.co.uk

I had the privilege and pleasure of being shown round the National Speedway Stadium by Chris Morton and David Gordon yesterday, and the easiest word to use is wow! I have no idea when the last full facility custom made speedway stadium, as opposed to track, was opened, but I really think this one has to be the best ever. The indoor part of the grandstand, with function rooms, meeting rooms, bars, catering outlets and plentiful toilets, plus superb disabled access is simply amazing and will be better than anywhere else in the country for speedway. But it's outside that excels. Sight lines at the old track were always a problem - not any more. I don't think there will be a single restricted view area at the new stadium whether in the seating or standing areas, and the track is huge, with wide banked bends and slightly curved straights that recreate the old Hyde Road circuit - it must have a real chance of being the fastest circuit in UK. Even Mort is tempted to come out of retirement and have a few laps, knowing him, probably only behind closed doors. My respect for Chris and David, and everyone else involved in this project knows no bounds. This place is a must see for all speedway supporters and I wish all at Belle Vue every success.

Halifaxtiger - I am happy to answer the specifics you raise. Firstly, the way in which disciplinary matters are dealt with by the Bureau have been and still are closely scrutinised to ensure that any questions of bias are eliminated as far as they can be. In my limited experience, I am not aware of any bias having taken place, but I do believe it is important that any matters dealt with by the Bureau can be seen to be dealt with impartially. Given the situation that you outline with Glasgow and Somerset, any perceived bias on the part of any member - and bear in mind that I would be in a completely opposite position given my past involvement with Glasgow, and the good working relationship that exists between Poole and Somerset - would be discussed and resolved before any hearing. Secondly, the information about appeals is incorrect. There is a clear route to the ACU for appeals. Your comments on the relationship between the Bureau and the BSPA may have been correct in the past, but no more. There is a very detailed deed of declaration between these two parties, and the ACU, which makes the constitutional position clear, and it is now as I outlined previously. Finally, I am aware of the existence of the report by Lord Shawcross but I am unsure of its relevance to the current debate. Fifty years ago - the report is that old - there were rival promotions at loggerheads, and Shawcross was tasked with ending this. His job was similar to, for instance, a business consultant, parachuted in to help an ailing business. Such an individual needs to know about running a business in general, but not necessarily about any specific industry. Shawcross didn't need to know about the sport of speedway - he was needed to be able resolve a major dispute by bringing the parties together.

I apologise for my lack of ability to multi quote. You'll just have to bear with my attempts to respond to Humphrey Appleby's points, though, as I said, my comments were personal opinion, so wide open to being contradicted by the opinion of others. On the first point, does it matter if ACU exists because of FIM or FIM exists because of ACU? FIM is the ultimate rule setter and delegates its authority via the national governing bodies. It would still be around if there was no ACU. On the topic of former promoters, your suggestions as to who would be suitable would be interesting. You need to take account, though, that, under ACU rules, members have to be under 70. To be honest, I can't think of any former promoters who are under 70 who would able to bring a better insight than the current members, but I stand to be corrected. I think that we are in total agreement on averages. They have been used religiously for team building for many years, and continue to be so. It is my view that trying to find a weighting to adjust for the different race format that is fair to everyone, riders, promoters and supporters, is exceptionally complicated if not in face impossible, so I disagree with your second paragraph on this rather. And your comments rather contradict the idea that averages are the correct basis for team building. The heat leader list does not take away the use of averages. Nothing has changed in that respect. What has changed is the methodology for the fair distribution of riders.

I have been following this topic with interest and am only jumping in now to try to correct some misunderstandings about the infamous list and the role of the Speedway Control Bureau. My normal rule for BSF is that my rare posts have to be factual, and not opinion as, for every opinion I have, there is likely to be a contrary one. For today only, I am going to partly ignore my rule! Firstly, a couple of points about who is supposed to do what: the BSPA is the body responsible for promoting speedway throughout England, Scotland, Wales, the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man. It has been delegated this authority from the Speedway Control Bureau which has been authorised by the Auto Cycle Union, which has a legally enshrined authority given to it by the UK Government in relation to all motorcycle sport in the country. In turn, the ACU has been authorised by the FIM, the world body of motorcycle sport. I fundamentally disagree with “Humphrey Appleby’s” comment that “There's nothing especially wrong with having BSPA nominees on the Speedway Control Bureau, but they shouldn't be active promoters. That defeats the purpose of having a third party to deal with disciplinary procedures and appeals.” In my view, it is essential that two – out of five – members of the Speedway Control Bureau must be active promoters. How else will they bring a current perspective to decision making? We have two top notch delegates from ACU who are invaluable in guiding the Bureau members through overall disciplinary regulations, but they need the input of speedway officials to keep them up to date on the day to day operation of the sport. Disciplinary matters are a very small part of our duties – overall consideration of the safety of competitors, officials and supporters take up far more of our time. When I put my name forward for consideration for the Speedway Control Bureau. It was partly because, at that time, both the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the BSPA were the Bureau members and I believed that it was wrong, in disciplinary matters appealed from BSPA to the Bureau that the same people who passed judgement should also hear the appeal. In 12 months, of course, the whole picture has changed with neither of BSPA’s delegates being on the Management Committee. In other matters that fall within the Bureau’s jurisdiction, current experience is far more important than past theory. At present therefore, it can be argued that there is the necessary independence required to allow the Bureau members to carry out their duties. That’s the Bureau out of the way, what of the BSPA? The members of the BSPA pass responsibility for the day to day management of the promotion of the sport to an elected Management Committee. This then takes me to the infamous heat leader list – I was not aware that it was ever a big secret, it was simply something that was not released. That was a decision for the Management Committee. It should probably have been published earlier than it was, but that is simply my opinion. It was a shame that an incomplete list was leaked to the Star, the reasons for which I can only guess. Jon Cook’s article in the Star – which was simply his views, and not an official release - explained the process for creating the list which comprised 38 riders, not the 23 shown in the Star which only included riders who had ridden in UK in 2015, nor the 37 released by the BSPA press office which missed out Linus Sundstrom. This list was agreed by all of the Elite League promotions and confirmed on 2 November. The list that the BSPA forum member, SCB, produced might have been useful to our discussions – I will return to that in a moment – but it didn’t appear until 18 November, by which time the decisions had been made. By the way, I gather that the “thick or biased or both” quote from Jon Cook was aimed at a fellow promoter who tried to reopen the discussions on the list, not any supporter. And now to the detail of the list: I have looked at SCB’s list and the underlying detail which I don’t really follow. What I do know, however, from many years of statistical sampling in my professional career is that statistics are a great guide, but sometimes, you also need to add a bit of common sense. Peter Oakes produces statistics on all riders, and we use these to aid our discussions. What we have found, however, is there is no simple arithmetic answer to the anomalous averages thrown up by the Elite League race format, so we have to apply knowledge and experience to the simple numbers to get to a reasoned answer. The BSPA list consists of 38 riders and all but 11 appear on SCB’s list. I have looked at SCB’s 11 and those of the BSPA’s and these are as follows: SCB Korneliussen Karlsson Ward Walasek North Kennett Michelsen Wells Swiderski Milik Bridger BSPA Hancock Dudek Przedpelski Zmarzlik Sayfutdinov Lindback Kasprzak Hampel Vaculik Smolinski Sundstrom In addition, Watt, Michael Jepsen Jensen, Zengota and Miedzinski were in the BSPA’s top 38, but were ranked 39, 41, 45 and 51 respectively in SCB’s list. Taking in turns SCB’s 11, my thoughts, and these are simply thoughts, are as follows: Korneliussen – border line, but he performed poorly for Leicester Karlsson – no longer a heat leader Ward – should not have been on the list Walasek – another border line but a 5.91 average is not impressive North – not a heat leader Kennett – likewise Michelsen – same again Wells – and again Swiderski – another border line Milik – definitely not a heat leader Bridger – not a heat leader As I said, these are my opinions – others will have a different view, but we reached agreement by discussion and consensus using our knowledge, and perhaps, bias both for and against. But I would certainly argue that the BSPA 11 riders are all stronger than SCB’s. The inclusion of Watt and King on the list could be debated until the end of time, as could the exclusions of Korneliussen, Walasek, Swiderski and Buczkowski, but the list has been produced and we all have to work with it. As a final point about this, I have no beef against SCB – I have never met the man so can have no direct opinion of him, even though he has attacked me on this forum. That is his perogative – if you are in the public eye, you have to expect and accept that people will not always agree with you. His being forcibly rested from the BSF left me in two minds – partly, I was disappointed as he can add flavour and intelligent debate to the forum, partly I was pleased because I really feel that offensive remarks and gay sexual slang should have no place on this forum. It looked to me, opinion again, that he was doing it to try to be smart and outflank the moderators, which I feel was just a little silly. I gather his absence is temporary, and look forward to his return. Right, that's me finished with posting opinions - for now anyway!

No I didn't. Read the press release. Firstly I said that we would be unwilling to start the season either with or against guests. This is simply to do with not wishing to cheat the public nor our broadcast partners, Sky Sports. If it means that we have to delay the start of the season then surely that's entirely reasonable. As a league, we should be looking to deliver the best entertainment and not seek compromises. Secondly, I said that, if the visa problem was a long term issue, I would hope that the teams would work together to ensure that we were as equal as possible. At present, five out of the eight Elite League teams are impacted by what's happening, with only Wolverhampton, Kings Lynn and Lakeside being unaffected. Out of the five, Poole are probably best placed to cover the situation, but that would still leave a huge imbalance in the league something that is unacceptable to us. If we have to leave Holder, Doyle, Batchelor, Woodward and Fricke out of our league, we either have to find five suitable replacements, and I'm not sure where, or revisit our team building limits. I was involved in the 2007 Belle Vue promotion that was ill supported by the rest of the league resulting in us putting together a really poor 1-7 and would hate to be party to any decision making process that would do that to anyone again. We want to win, of course, but we also want to entertain. And if we have teams built to 34 and teams only able to build to, say 30, I reckon Poole would be competitive but too many teams would not. Where would be the entertainment in that?

I'm a few hours ahead of Glasgow so already in 2015. Which means that my many unbroken years of co-ownership of Glasgow Tigers have finally ended. I've done what I could to support the team, more away from the track than at it because of the location of my home base, with varying degrees of success but it's the highs that keep you coming back. The end game for me was to find an ownership that would work to safeguard the future of the team. I thought that had happened two years ago, and, when that was n't working, I stepped back in. Now, in Gerry and Michael, I can happily walk away content that the future is secured in the best possible way. In my last programme piece in 2014, I wrote that the plans for the future were amazing and they certainly are. Not just for 2015 but far beyond. So, it's au revoir, but not goodbye, from me, with a heartfelt thanks to Alan Dick, Stewart Dickson, Colin Hamilton, Derek Smith, Ian Adam, George Barclay, Cami Brown, Craig McCurdy, all the volunteers, the track staff, the supporters and, of course, Davie on the tractor. Have fun at the bells and a very Happy New Year to one and all

Ask Blobby. He seems to know everything 😃

No. He was wrong despite his close connection to those at the top of BSPA who should know better than disclose confidential information. Especially when they're not in full possession of the facts. The Record's report is wrong, the Herald's more accurate. I have no idea which company bought the stadium, but I certainly did not transfer my ownership of the promoting company to Allied Vehicles.

Blobby has eyes and ears at the top so he must be right. Mind you, the draft purchase/sale document that I've seen doesn't mention Allied Vehicles at all, so maybe he's wrong this time? Or maybe it's me. Don't tell me I'm negotiating with the wrong people? 😄

Please be assured that I am hugely excited and entirely supportive about everything planned for 2015. Any change of ownership is to do with the continuation of Glasgow speedway, not waiting for a cheque 😄

I tried to PM you but it failed!On the future at Glasgow, your informants know more than me, and I still own the company I have the outline of an agreement in place but it is only that, nothing formal as yet. As soon as there is something to say, you won't be able to shut me up but, until then everyone, especially me, has to be patient

The Pinjar Park website takes you to a Facebook link that gives the top four, including Declan Adams getting third. Pinjar are running more meetings on Sunday so that may be why information is a bit short

The information that I have been given bears out your conclusion but, as I said, I have only had one side of the story. I am sure that the riders involved can speak for themselves should they so wish, and, it would wrong for me to be publicly critical when I don't know all the facts.

If it had been possible for the Tour to have gone ahead then it would have happened. BSPA has put money behind it as have many others but what was needed was people able to provide accomodation, bikes, mechanics etc. In the past, this has been organised and often provided by Beverley and Marcus Williams but, with the uncertainty following the desperate injuries to Marcus, the riders, with one exception, decided not to travel. That was a huge disappointment to me especially as steps were being taken to try to make the Western Australian part of the trip continue as before but, as I have not spoken to any of the riders involved, it would be wrong of me to draw any premature conclusions. I have spoken to Kyle Newman, however, who, as has been noted elsewhere, is still making the trip to WA and the Scholarship will arrange for bikes to be shipped nearly 5000km to him. He is then making his way to Townsville and hopefully will find plenty of meetings to ride on the eastern side of Australia.. Knowing Marcus, he will already be planning for November 2014, although I suspect that a different set of lads will be offered the privilege of being part of the Scholarship

The "organisers" are Marcus and Beverley Williams. They are the ones who have put up countless thousands of their own money over the years to create and support the scholarship and they are the ones who throw open their house to accomodate the visiting riders. Marcus was severely injured riding for Exeter at Newcastle in the 1980s and it is to his and Beverley's credit that they have been giving back to a sport that took so much from them. He has been working on the 2013/14 Tour since late last year and his accident is a huge blow to everyone involved, whether it's riders, sponsors or helpers. He now has to spend his time concentrating on getting as well as possible and I am sure Beverley's time is committed to supporting him. Under the circumstances, something had to give and that something is the Scholarship. I am sure that the invited riders are absolutely gutted at the cancellation but I am also sure that every single one understands what has happened and wishes Marcus a speedy recovery. I understand that there are steps afoot to try to reinstate some of the planned meetings but I have no further details at present. On the matter of funding, I am one of those that has contributed to the costs, albeit in a fairly minor manner, and there is absolutely no way that I would consider asking for repayment. The money has been spent and the bikes will be ready for next year - all I can hope is that Marcus makes as full a recovery as possible and is able to offer Tour places 12 months from now. If anyone wants more information, please contact me directly at gordonpairman@hotmail.co.uk

I am hopeful that the majority of the tour will go ahead but there might need to be some rearranging of venues. I understand that the riders on the tour have all been made aware of what is happening

I had assumed they were Saturday same as all the other rounds. My mistake. But it means there are no excuses for not heading for Berwick!!