arnieg

Jonas started his British career with Reading Racers in the second tier. (Although I can't imagine a 2004 average is still valid)

As tenants with tough planning restrictions Birmingham are never going to be able to offer too many opportunities for practice. But one of the problems is that those tracks that can, often put in time and effort only seeing their best prospects enticed away by higher paying teams. If that disincentive isn't removed then the danger is that fewer tracks will make the effort to introduce youngsters to the sport.

Personally I preferred the suggestion of making the SWC biannual and then reintroducing the Pairs in the intervening years. Then perhaps after a few years if one competition appears to be working better than another we could go to just SWC or just Pairs.

When a client of mine won the league he made a substantial loss. And that was at a time when there was a fixed pay scale.

There's a lot to be said for variety. My three best meetings last year were a league match (P'boro v Sheff), an individual (PLRC at Belle Vue) and a 4TT (@ Mildenhall). Unfortunately not enough people find other meetings attractive to make them financially viable for the most part, so they will remain an endangered species.

Yes I was once commissioned to write and submit a paper rebutting a rather mad idea for recalculating averages that one of the leading lights of the BSPA was pushing for.

Zagar, Kolodziej and Richardson all rode in the PL for the Racers

You can add Craig Cook (Buxton) to your list of NL riders who went on to the GP Peterborough Thundercats tracked three riders who rode at Cardiff as wildcards - Stead, Howe, King

Fine, but how long do you think a top division of just four teams would last?

While the general point is not unreasonable I can't imagine there are many people who would think the NL would be better off without Jon Armstrong. And would Isle of Wight be running if their pool of potential signings were restricted by the exclusion of Ben Wilson and James Cockle? And if David Mason had been kicked out of the NL five years ago would he still have been around to save Birmingham?

I knew he was I'll, but it is still a shock. RIP

Today's Iwade meeting rained off

In which case the sport's governance is more dysfunctional than I thought. A hearing should be part of a quasi-judicial process and not subject to debate by committee. It would be like allowing MPs, who hadn't been in court to hear the evidence, decide the outcome of a trial at the Old Bailey.

Unlike most other countries a two minute exclusion is not counted as a ride in the UK for the purposes of averages or complying with minimum ride rules. It does count for the purposes of maximum rides.

Surely McKinna's sick note would have to be presented to the referee before the start of the meeting - but as he wasn't injured until proceeding to the start in heat 4 that would not be possible, so I'd say no guest. Given he appeared on track I'd credit McKinna with an appearance. But if instead he'd tripped over in the pits on the way to mounting his bike prior to heat 4 then I'd be inclined to say no appearance.

Interestingly Swedish and Polish averages generally do include 2 minute exclusions as a ride.

I did 73 at 22 tracks - guess that makes me a part timer. I think when Redcar named their team for Sheffield the season reached its low point.

Ronan Tungate,who turned up at Somerset last season but withdrew injured before the start is probably the closest scenario from last season. Personally I would not count that as an appearance. However had he been announced as riding, and only withdrawn after the start of the meeting, but before his first ride then I am uncertain. Had he been announced as riding in heat 3 and then excluded under 2 mins then what? In Poland it is possible for riders to be named in the main body of the team and not get a ride. PZM do credit such riders with an appearance. In Russia however such riders are not credited with an appearance in the averages I have seen published. Another variant. What if a meeting is called off after heat 10 (so result stands) and before the rerun of a race from which a rider has been excluded. The race hasn't been completed so surely doesn't count. But that means the excluded rider won't be credited with a ride. So a rider could be excluded as the primary cause of the stoppage from heat 15 and still have a maximum per official figures!

So I'm not the only one.

Agree with that analysis. I would just add that for commercial reasons the final pick must be a Dane. If so then I'd go for Iversen but I can understand the claims for Pedersen. Either way it is tough on Lebedevs as SEC champion.

I agree too - with the caveat that we can't recreate the seventies (or even sixties) the world has moved on. It is time to break the sport's current financial model (where the main beneficiaries are engine tuners and Easyjet)

Positive development. Maybe this will help persuade Ippo ad P'boro to stay in the Championship and stop it becoming a regional league. Having back some old favourites that the fans can relate to would be a smart move

I have no idea. My figures were speculative and illustrative, and I think I will leave further speculation to others who know more about the mechanics of the TV contract.

I'd love to know the criteria for this judgement.