RobMcCaffery

Glad to see the penny is beginning to drop in the SGBC.

You can go with him. Never forgiven you for your little 'joke' of substituting a housing estate on a map of Brandon Stadium. How do you feel now that's about to happen for real? Probably nothing. You've been the classic troll both here and in other previous discussion groups. You niggle and provoke,post one-sided bull, then play the innocent when people respond or resort to the childish 'fishing for bites'. People like Gavan only respond to situations YOU create, along with your half-witted fellow Poole fans. You've been poisoning speedway discussions for years and once more your hypocrisy is nauseating.

No, there have been several cases on here lately of people stating quite clearly that they think some tracks should close. We had one guy claiming that all short tight tracks should go while others seem intent on only having a small number of tracks putting out highly expensive teams. We get those who seem to be delighted at their local rivals closing while others seem to think that if a track closes it can easily be re-opened. I suspect those days are gone. I saw speedway go through a phase in the nineties where there were strong suspicions that there was a 'cull' going on of the smaller, weaker clubs. It was extremely distasteful then but if you were at the sharp end of it you'd be sensitive too. For some the efficiency you quote seems to be at the expense of those who can't fall into line. In answer to your point about the wealth needed to play that power game, yes, I think you'll find there are some rather wealthy people involved, even if they don't stay that way for long. A sane, sustainable future can only be grasped by getting the foundations of the sport correct - a healthy grass roots tier feeding into a higher league not just riders but tracks. They need to be based on sensible budgets respecting the fact that any future profits will come from people who are attracted to the sport but don't have a clue who these over-expensive 'stars' are. If there is a high level that can attract expensive international stars then fine, but it must not be at the expense of that sustainable foundation. We need to recruit and train riders AND supporters. Tracks bankrupting themselves to sign riders who might put a few hundred on the gate but who need thousands on the gate to pay for them are the real ruination of the sport -and 'fans' who think names are more important that than good racing and entertaining matches and turn their noses up at anything that doesn't meet their standards or isn't 'meaningful' enough. Good God, we have people claiming some league matches aren't meaningful now! This damaging snobbery has to go. We need people who will accept change and realise that the sport is bigger than the individual, including them. I pray this is only a BSF disease but I do wonder...

I'd have thought most bookmakers would be very interested to hear of result 'adjustment' to manipulate averages or in international meetings to help riders sharing the same sponsor, or taking a bung to put out a weakened team, irrespective of the result, or riders failing to turn up for events that are being bet on because they don't like the money, have 'man flu' or have found a more lucrative meeting elsewhere or fancy a day off.. Very interested.....

A promoter who was losing a grand a meeting, which had to be banked in cash weekly alongside the takings, once sighed "Ah well, it was this or a Roller". I don't think he was talking track equipment. I got the impression it was all an expensive power game for many promoters. Still, if it is, many supporters have seen more years of their team than economics and common sense would have allowed which is surely no bad thing. Some people are far to keen to see tracks close, as long as it isn't theirs of course........

Many a true word spoken in jest (?). I think we can link the decline in interest in meetings other than league matches to the huge increase in real terms of speedway admissions (along with many other sports thanks to football) over the past 30 years. The increases are way above the rate of inflation and speedway, like most other sports is now a much more expensive product than in the past, even allowing for general rises in prices and incomes. People are inevitably much choosier since for most it's no longer a casual thing to pay out for sport admissions.

I am as I am spelt, I think I can still spell my name, Rob McCaffery, ex-ScreenSport, KM Video, occasional Speedway Mail and Backtrack contributor and former jobbing announcer, mainly Rye House and paying supporter for 43 out of 46 years, . The other guy came on the scene just as I left TV. My mother in Cheshire got a phone call once from a friend congratulating her that I'd got a job on BBC Radio Merseyside. It wasn't me. He went on to work for Granada, then Sky before heading off to the Middle East. I'm unsure if he spells his name ery or rey. Mine gets constantly misspelt. You get used to it. Many thanks Steve. It was a long time ago. Yes, we relied on Rediffusion until the main multichannel cable networks were built. Sadly it took so long for the income to flow that I had to get out, and Screen Sport ended up being taken over by Eurosport. As I mentioned elsewhere we were criticised for being a threat to Canterbury Speedway. As I suspected, most would be like you, watch it at 5 then head off to the track. Well, that was the hope that we could persuade people to get out and see the sport for themselves. This is why it depresses me to see people claiming that TV stops people going to speedway, having devoted a lot of time and money to use TV to sell the sport and achieve exactly the opposite. I've had other media involvement in local radio and with the BBC outside the sport so do keep a very close eye on the industry, and the sport's involvement with it, hence my contributions on the subject here. Anyway, this is about speedway finance, not a minor attempted former helper of the sport. ;-)

Yes he was one of the early ones and great company. The first show featured Chris Morton. The studios were in Knutsford so we tended to feature riders racing at Belle Vue that evening, sometimes Stoke or Cradley. Had to do the whole thing off the top of my head since the station didn't have autocue.....

We couldn't afford to do it live ;-) Budget was £1,000 an hour. Times really have moved on.

So because Sky rip you off you won't do business with BT out of principle? How curious. Sky dumped speedway but still rip you off so you punish BT and yourself. You're not being held to ransom. Sky overcharged so naturally competition came in. BT cover speedway because Sky dropped it, first internationally, then domestically There is a service, and that has a price. Nobody's kidnapped your gerbil. ;-) (Principal has a different meaning by the way).

I regularly listened to Doug's work at Ellesmere Port where he worked wonders in creating atmosphere with such meagre crowds. A true professional, informed and witty. For quiet authority though Ted Sear was the best. For wit and mischief it had to be John Earrey.

One match less for the three southern Championship tracks. 12+1 cup tie. That's ludicrous.

The BSPA bother to communicate with the followers of the sport (I really can't use the word 'fans' given what I see here) and that just gets torn apart and the cranks spit their venom against Pearson, thinking because they don't like him (are jealous of him?) and those they talk to here that they must be right. God help anyone who works in speedway and actually tries to help it. Aside from football it must be the most obnoxious and ungrateful sport and with some of the worst spectators I know. I am profoundly grateful to have got out before you all found somewhere to hide behind false names and throw poison at all and sundry. It's hard to avoid the feeling that many of you still cling to the sport just so you've got something to constantly shoot down. Yes the BSPA makes mistakes but the way too many talk here it's clear that they will only be satisfied once their prophecies of doom finally come true and the sport in Britain goes under. I'm sure there are genuine fans on here who really do want to help but they seem to be drowned out by those banging on about the same petty gripes. Philip Rising has said here many times that those who actually make the TV coverage happen are perfectly happy with Pearson. Just because a lynch mob has formed on the BSF it doesn't mean the guy has no respect outside their own very limited circles. Yes there were ways in which the video could have been tweaked but if I'd been involved and wanted to try to help the speedway public to understand what's gone on I'd really be wondering why I bothered, as I did a few years ago and got clear of iot all. I love the sport with a passion but some of the people it attracts on both sides of the fence really, really make me despair. I visit this forum because amongst all of the rubbish there are the occasional insights and genuine information but there are times when you have to push so much to the side to get to it it's sickening. In my days of being paid to talk into microphones, and that wasn't just in speedway, or sport for that matter I often came across a very important motto. "It's not about me" Perhaps some of you might like think about that one and maybe put speedway ahead of your own selfish wants?

Because the BSPA are quite rightly boycotting these artificial events run by One Sport that are just adding to the clutter of international events that are seriously damaging British Speedway.

Good luck with your four team league....

How odd that the major Polish Speedway website should carry an attack on BSI when the Ekstraliga clearly sees the SGP as a hindrance to their business and there is a rival Polish contender for staging international events that I suspect is connected to the website and which I am sure would soon ditch its own current events if they ever got their hands on the SGP/SWC? Anyone would think they wanted BSI out of the way so that Polish Speedway could run all the major events, domestically or internationally. Now, if you wanted to destabilise BSI how would you do it? Hmmm...how about some lame knocking copy on a compliant website? . How very odd, eh? ;-)

If the BBC scrap something they always know that something can be soon be developed to replace it. Can speedway? The budgets are a little different I believe. The BBC has about £3.7 billion to spend each year. How much does speedway? It's a pointless and useless comparison. We've got people on this thread wanting tracks to close because they don't like the shape. What are they supposed to be replaced with or are we to operate in some ridiculous pipe dream of half a dozen wonderful race tracks with people travelling huge distances to watch after their own tracks have been closed? Yes, bad speedway IS better than no speedway, but then what someone believes is bad speedway will delight others. I've visited plenty of full-throttle large tracks where the only interest has been the speed, with riders strung out thirty yards apart. I've also seen classic racing such as a Hyde Road. Equally I've seen good and bad racing at smaller tracks. Hackney wasn't the largest of tracks but the racing was superb, despite the risks of those lamp standards. I take it that those who look down their noses at "any speedway being better than no speedway" would be happy to see lesser tracks in lesser leagues close? Try losing your track. It hurts. Now, anyone want to do worthless comparisons of speedway to other irrelevant examples? How about United Nations? Microsoft? BMW cars? Sony?

So, you actually want to see tracks close because you don't like the racing there? Someone can support a team for years, allow it to become a large part of their lives but lose it all because someone decides the track's not big enough? I've seen some selfish rubbish on here over the years but this beats all! If you don't like a track don't go - don't deny others that chance just because your preference is different. I do get the feeling some people would be happy to see just a half dozen tracks running - as long as theirs was one of course!

Where the hell is this rule that if you watch speedway on TV then you can't watch it live? Of course there isn't one and life is a damn sight more complex than option A - watch on TV - or B - Go to a match. And they try to claim that promoters are blinkered! I am happy to watch as much speedway as I can, either in person or on TV, because it's a sport that I love and have loved for nearly fifty years now. I have watched the sport live and on TV, and have helped to make it happen both live and on TV. In recent years ill-health has denied me the chance to watch live and TV has been a lifeline. Thankfully things are set to change for me next year and I will be able to get out to see meetings live. In the past I've watched live speedway seven nights/days a week and would now if I could. I can't but I don't see why I should be denied the chance to keep in touch via TV. Noggin's point about losing tracks is a very relevant one. In my case I lost my track 44 years ago! I find it deeply insulting that some simple-minded 'supporters' think that you can't watch on TV AND go to meetings live. Life isn't just made up of binary choices - one extreme or another! I'm sure I'm not the only person who loves to do both. It's simplistic, lazy and stupid thinking to 'think' that it has to be one or the other. You can give coherent, complete coverage of a 15 heat match easily in half an hour. No need for 'highlights' packages. Most sports that have lost TV coverage or have never had it are desperate to either get it back (ice hockey/basketball) or have been prepared to pay to get coverage started (netball). Only speedway could be so moronic to even think of turning TV away.

Old sets work fine with a Freeview set top box. Another myth to sell hardware, like Sky's attempt to hoodwink the public with the lie that after Digital Switchover Day if viewers didn't have Sky then their screens would go blank. They've always tried to tell the public that there's no real alternative to opening a financial vein to Sky and anything else is just too complicated to bother with. It's pretty hard to buy a modern TV set without a Freeview tuner built in. I expect the exceptions have Freesat installed instead. While old analogue TVs would now be generally old enough to have been replaced there is no reason at all why they can't still work with a set top box fitted. Indeed you could use a 1960s black and white TV as long as it had UHF on it. I even know of some who use old VHF 405 sets from the 60s and before to use digital boxes using a standards converter to change UHF to VHF. Lord knows why - presumably because it can be done! (You don't just get odd people in speedway - I remember a group of Linux devotees trying to install Linux on an X-Box (which is just a stripped down Windows pc) just to spite Microsoft)

It's just a branding of the standard digital terrestrial TV service, as opposed to cable or DTH satellite. Because Murdoch has such a hold on British commercial TV it was felt necessary to give it such a branding. Murdoch was trying to suggest that after the switch to digital you could only receive TV from his Sky (Fox) service. So, anyone receiving TV through a standard aerial/antenna can receive 'Freeview' but the number of channels you get depends on whether you're on one of the main transmitters or one of the local relays. You have to be receiving one of the main transmitters to get Freesports, and until recently only if you had an HD receiver. Unlike the States we fouled-up digital switchover totally by phasing it in around the country rather than nationally on one day as in the US. As a result the who;e subject and the multiple brandings are very confused. There's even 'Freesat' which is the DTH satellite service minus the pay-TV channels which is intended for those who can't or won't receive 'Freeview'. Murdoch's Sky is the main satellite service while BT use a mix of DTT and internet to deliver their rival service. The cable is virtually all Virgin Media, owned by Liberty Global.

Time to repeat my personal experience from years back, for the benefit of those who haven't heard it before. From 1984 to early 1986 I presented a weekly news review on the old Screen Sport TV channel which was transmitted about 5 pm on Saturday evenings. One of the areas that had a large cluster of towns carrying the service on cable was Kent so when I always finished the programme with a look at the week's fixtures (a personal choice to get the message out when viewers could watch the sport live for themselves), I always emphasised that there was a meeting at Canterbury at 7 pm. We had weekly speedway then. How quaint, eh? We received feedback that the then Canterbury promoter was objecting to our programme harming his crowds. How anyone could think half an hour of me talking to camera unscripted with a couple of interviews and a preview of a race from that week' recorded match was preferable to going to Kingsmead was way beyond me. After all this time you do hope that things have changed. Clearly not. Looking on thankfully from the sidelines now it does seem that speedway gets far better coverage than those running it deserve. Look at how shabbily the excellent BBC Radio WM service has been treated by certain tracks when they wanted to cover away matches. Yes, there is a local BBC that not only gives full match commentary when they can on Wolverhampton and Birmingham matches but are also keen to cover the away fixtures! Somehow they still bother although the service has been relegated to the BBC website only now. Re the 2017 BT coverage, I thought with the exception of the ill-advised coverage of the promotion/relegation matches the televised meetings managed to avoid most of the vices of the sport this year - mass rider absenteeism, multiple guests, rider walk-outs and races to just get 10 heats run and finish for the night. Perhaps the lack of clashing fixtures elsewhere on Mondays helped? Despite some dodgy camerawork the whole feel of BT's coverage felt a step up from Sky despite what appears to be a very limited budget. The role of Natalie Quirk in achieving this, along with Steve Brandon cannot be praised enough. If you just watched the BT coverage and ignored all other matches, speedway news and social media you'd think you were looking at a pretty healthy product. That was a pretty skilled job, climaxed by the ability to ignore the obvious yawning gaps in logic of the relegation play-off where true discretion was used in not saying why key parts of the Leicester team were missing ;-) I hope they're back next year.

It was closed for many years pending this complete rebuild. It looks like there's little of the old Speedway World Final stadium left.

The British speedway season runs from March 15th to October 31st. If certain tracks wish to close early and have their end of season booze-ups during the season then that is their choice, but they cannot dictate when others finish their fixtures providing they fall within those dates. Perhaps the greatest indicator of the present weakness of the sport here is that whereas in the past tracks staged as many meetings as possible through that period now the aim seems to be reversed, with it appears a record low being targetted next year if an 11 match home season is introduced in the Premiership. From over 30 to a dozen . That's how far speedway here really has fallen.

While I sympathise with Somerset here, the main track where I was involved over the years avoided such clashes by staging their event in November. But then, we weren't full of overseas riders who have better things to do in November. (Mind you, most seem to have better things to do between March and October). Where I do not sympathise is the comment that there are 'meaningless fixtures' taking place on Friday. All three are league matches and if they are now 'meaningless' then god help the sport. Okay the titles have been decided but that does not make completing the season 'meaningless'. - it's completing the season. Almost any other team sport I know would find it laughable that league seasons could not be completed. Only in speedway is it accepted, which is one more small reason why it lacks respect in the outside world. Okay, so if these three matches are 'meaningless' and should not be run, where exactly do we draw the line? Once it's mathematically impossible for a team to make the play-offs should they cancel all remaining fixtures since they are now 'meaningless'? During a meeting, once a side cannot mathematically win do we abandon the match and cancel the 'meaningless' heats? Do fans get refunds on their season tickets? 'Meaningless' is a stupid concept and is corrosive to the sport. It's only one small step for people to decide the whole sport is without meaning. Why can't we just enjoy speedway - and complete the season without these damaging comments? A speedway meeting is worth a thousand booze-ups