SPEEDY69

Absolutely. There have been many cases of riders not being paid in both Sweden and Poland and the amounts in some cases are quite staggering. Let's wait and see.

Yes, but F1/Moto GP are not speedway! How many of those competitors are racing three other times in the same week in different countries for different teams at different riding positions. Their brand is their name, same as with other sports stars. Football is a team game and the shirts relate to the colours of that team and these are changed regularly so that fans but new ones - the ones with numbers on nearly always have the name of the person as well! I don't think these numbers are either a good or bad idea but I really can't get excited by it because to me they are irrelevant.

In my view it isn't better marketing at all. They have a brand already, it's their name! As was pointed out earlier, if you want to sell more then you have to make sure the product is changed regularly so that it becomes out of date - the number to me is a complete irrelevance and when number 45 rides in sweden as number 3 that makes it all the more confusing.

Good point. Most sponsorship comes with somethign in return. He could set up a fan club maybe and give out birthday cards as other used to do - or what about have a hat placed outside his van at meetings for people to drop money into? A decent porfoliio with wel lworked out deals for potential sponsors would be more successful than this and I think this belittles him.

Add helmet colours and that's exactly right, their number is irrelevant. With the old numbers at least for the new fan they could understand who the favourites might be.

It's not about following it though is it - the new numbers do nothing for the fans, you know, the ones who ultimately keep all the riders in employment. At least before their number gave an indication of rank, now it's completely irrelevant to the GP.

So you are arguing that 'riders with ambition' should be allowed to ride in more than one league, because they can't make one league pay, and then also saying that more than 2 years stifles their progress? Rather contradictory I think. Riders progress at different rates and for those who chose EL only, some cited their ambition as the reason behind the choice. Nothing wrong with them have an outside job as well to supplement income, it doesn't mean they are less ambitious. I've seen far too many amateur riders turn up at meetings with £6k worth of bikes and a £5k van only to pootle round and get thrashed by a 50 year old on a 20year old upright bike!

Nonsense. No-one is forcing them to be full-time speedway riders, or to have big vans etc. That's their choice but the income/cost ratio can be made larger if they want to.

And to think someone once said all topics migrate to Poole - who'd have thought eh?

I agree about attracting fans but I disagree that this is the way to do it. You wouldn't see more top riders, just different riders in different meetings.

Yep, sure was and yes, he probably did but fair play to Rory. Last year it was run in poor conditions and it should really have been cancelled which may have prompted this change - what makes them think March will be any better though!!

Is it a myth about top riders pulling out of the ELRC - at least in recent seasons? I remember the 2011 one at Swindon (cracking meeting by the way) and I don't remember many of the top riders being absent?

There are enough debates on her about fiddling as it is without opening up this can of worms. Janowski would never ride at Wolves or Cook never at Poole, additional Kevlars, how to restrict numbers/riders etc. all to pander to a few top riders who just want a bit of extra bunce & publicity. Rider commitments abroad have already had a detrimental impact on the top league here, why change everything again to suit the same few riders. Those comitted to a full season here should be the ones we reward. This could be the tipping point for me attending.

"a brilliant idea from a riders' point of view" - I'd suggest only for a few very well off riders who won't commit for a season. If they can't do it then stick with riders who will. Only then will British Speedway have a route to grow again. A squad system reduces the affinity of fans to their team and allows all sorts of horses for courses fixture planning etc. It also means less opportunity for other riders to get a team place.

From the posts on here I'm assuming that the line-up is not yet known. However, I agree with previous posts that those riders making a commitment to compete in the EL should be the only ones considered for the chance to win this event. Those who are not included because 'guests' are invited should rightly feel aggrieved - this includes, potentially, the winner from 2 of the last 3 years!

This seems a rather pointless change to me. As others have said before, the old 1-16 did give an indication of the riders ranking which will be lost. The main reason I think it's pointless is that the riders who compete change - fine that Hancock will be number 45 but will he be in the GP next year? Helmet colour and livery identify riders, not the number - unless they're planning to remove helmet colours I can't see how this adds anything for the spectator.

You're missing the point here. It's not all about Brits vs foreigners because there was at least one other British rider who was not asked to race at the challenge, and they were ahead of Harris in the qualifiers. Blatant favouritism. As I've said before, it's not his fault but not only have the FIM appeared to make a huge b**ls up, so have the BSPA.

Ahh, but they also ignored the GP qualifying when picking Harris. Kennett and Nicholls were not asked before him. Not Harris' fault I agree but unfair.

You're very trusting then if you've no reason to disbelieve what some poster said on here. Nicholls had not quit international speedway - he merely refused to ride in the World Cup in protest at what he saw as discrimination by the BSPA around the Euro Champs. Kennett at least got way further than Harris in the qualifiers. Both should have been asked ahead of Harris - if they were and refused, that's fine but if not, someone has shown favouritism again

No evidence as far as I can see for the first statement in bold. For the second one, why were Kennett and Nicholls not asked?(they both finished higher than Harris in the qualifiers). I do keep contesting this because people continue to overlook particularly key issues. Why all the smoke and mirrors with the FIM & BSPA - if evidence is presented then no-one can argue.

If you're being serious, this is actually quite amusing. See the Wilds Cards 2014 thread or the one for the GP Challenge if you want to see why.

I am not arguing black is white, nor professing to know more about rules, nor slating Harris etc etc. but my issue is with what you seem to accept as fact - I've put it on bold in the quote above, that "many many others clearly weren't". All I recall is Mr Rising mentioning that Craig Cook turned it down - nothing about others refusing. That is the issue and I doubt whether the FIM would let us know what's going on, as you point out but, as I believe Mr Rising said, it was the host federation who were finally asked to name the reserves. This is where the secrecy lies and if I think it seems unfair then I will only be swayed by fact, not supposition. Good luck to Harris and I will always support British riders but can't stand discrimination.

The fact that the chain of events has been shrouded in secrecy does little to appease thsoe who feel that unfairness has been at play. I've not seen, and although have asked have not had any reply, evidence that the two British riders ahead of Harris in the GP qualifiers (Kennett & Nicholls) were asked to take a reserve place at Poole - never mind the other 20/30/40 or so that were mentioned previously. Unless there's clarity I'll remain suspicious, especially where the BSPA/ACU are involved.

If it turns out true that Harris is in the GP then I find that really disappointing. Not only was he asked to compete at the challenge in preference to a whole host of other riders that were ahead of him in the qualifying (including two other British riders), he then gets in through the back door again on a controversial point - whether Gollob was confirmed in the series or not. Nothing against Harris but everything against unfairness.