moxey63

Not saying he's rubbish. Just questioning the consistency and class of those around him. We may talk about professionalism being better than it was and all that. But who's gaining from this professionalism? Not the fans, who are nodding off in their droves. Give me the chance to watch the likes of the 2018 band of GP stars and the ones from 10 years ago, and I just wish there was a system restore button on this speedway thing. Has professionalism taken away the character of today's riders and made them robotic?

If only Jason Crump had been more professional and stopped messing about, he could have nosed out Rickardsson to win all those titles which he finished second. And Leigh Adams, who it took years to even win that first GP round because the opposition was extremely strong. No need to go off on one, BWitcher, it is my opinion. No science in it, just an opinion.

Nobody will kid me into thinking today's riders are any better than previous decades. I am not going to criticise anybody by name-calling, but we have had a rider winning three titles when the main opposition has been from a 45-year-old, who it took 20 years to take his second crown (when the top names were disappearing) and a rider who has risen up the ranks to become champion purely because genuine top riders have retired. I regard my top riders for what they do in domestic racing as well. But even there the total lack of genuine star class has helped push names up the scoring ranks who would have previously been decent second strings. Only my view.

Don't think Tai winning three titles, if he goes on to, will make him best Brit ever. Did winning most British Finals make Scott Nicholls the best Brit ever? Suppose it helps who your opposition is. Think it's quite poor, has been for several years since the real stars - Crump, Gollob, Rickardsson, Adams etc, left the stage.

It isn't all about the racing, is it? If there were overtakes on every bend, it would become the norm and we would, therefore, be wanting more overtakes. My attraction wasn't about exciting racing. It was about my team beating the other, whether from the gate or through overtaking. The racing didn't matter. I suppose it would if you didn't know what was going on - a first-timer perhaps. In fact, sometimes the gap between both sides scores was more entertaining than the racing, and at other times the huge difference in scores between teams in a match didn't always portray what superb racing we had seen out on the track. First out of the gate it may be, but sometimes it's the effort put in of those behind that matters.

Seriously, though, the big showpiece turns into a farce. Defend it all you wish. The Play-Offs do this, as injuries happen and they are highlighted more when so much depends on the last few matches of the season. It wouldn't be as noticeable in the old league system.

Call an ambulance?

The Play-Offs are so anti-climatic. It's like Christmas. Build up all year and don't get the pressie you want. Oh, hi, and you can't get rid of the guests.

I don't think it should be engaging with kids alone. Other age groups should be encouraged, either as first-timers or try and entice old fans back. But the product must be good enough to make them want to return.

Some people really do need a little restraining. So what, speedway on the BBC? Now we're talking about Woffinden even getting a mention on SPOTY. The sport is at an all-time low. The Beeb did not want to know when it was at an all-time high and apparently did everything in their power to stop speedway winning the top prize, all the big big stars back then. What makes you think they'll change now when the sport is so void of character and genuine star names, that riders who would have never had a chance of being Champion are winning it like it were Scott Nicholls and his British Championship haul? I have slowly drifted away from speedway, not just in the UK, but globally. Be honest, speedway is the ugly boy in the class. Every so often he'll have an hair cut and hope the pretty girl in the corner will notice him.

There are really two options. Cut cloth and try to rebuild the sport by using affordable riders... or run only league matches - one home and one away - so clubs don't lose that much money if the stars actually return. Won't be as costly as running for seven months.

Tuning in occasionally to the Swedish and Polish leagues, I don't really notice better racing. Alright, the stars are there, but I doubt they are the stars of the past that used to attract thousands even for a meaningless individual meeting. Today's stars, compared to even 10 years ago, are plastic stars. If a speedway star can be manufactured - we have them. British speedway will be better served in the next five-to-10 years by riders it can afford. Stars will come from that.

The current plight of speedway isn't new. Back in 1987, the amount of tracks that were asking fans to pledge this much or that, so they can be sure of seeing their beloved boys racing next season, is very much like today. There has always been a belief from promoters that fans will dig deeper into their pockets to keep the track alive. No need for them to try and promote. For so many seasons we had it at Belle Vue it was like that boy who cried wolf. Play on the generosity of the fans when all else fails. But how far the few still attending will be able to afford in future if they're having to bail out for the lost fans?

I think the BSPA must be part of the government's austerity drive. The same values are shown to our roads - you pay more but don't necessarily get back what makes you happy, with little bits of tarmac surrounded by potholes. All the years of neglect may be irreparable.

Just think of all the old riders who were eventually forced into retirement by rules and difficulty being fitted in. Then think about today, when a rider must be looked at as being a bit daft if he isn't doubling up and down. And Simmo was a class act. A brilliant, stylish rider who also had a colourful side, someone who had a story to tell and which interested us for many an hour. I think his last fullish year with Arena Essex in the late 80's tarnished his image somewhat. If I recall, he kept them hanging on a bit when out injured and didn't really want to race again after the Gundersen crash. I watched him at 43, in his last but one match in a short-lived comeback for King's Lynn in '93 at Belle Vue. And, do you know what, god rest his soul, if he was racing at Belle Vue tonight, I'd be there in a shot.

I loved the old tac rule, six points behind and all that. But, for speedway's credibility and forward thinking, my modern-day take on this rule is not to have it. If it allows team managers behind the scenes telling their riders to accept a certain position and nothing else so that his team can either utilise the rule or stop the other team using it, although I like it, perhaps the aim for pure speedway racing overrides a rule I once loved (probably might still).

In the olden days, like when Simmo dropped points to enable a switch to the NL, it really didn't concern me one bit. The race-fixing allegation, also. I loved the sport back then and brushed away its impurities. But for some reason, things I readily accepted for years - like riders drifting back to drop a place to allow their team the use of the old tact-sub, I was brought up with that, were encouraged in other realms of the sport. I just think any rule that allows a rider to contemplate dropping the gas should be reviewed and scratched. We all recall the Crump v Pedersen slowest race-to-the- line in speedway history about 15 years ago, when one country wanted to use the Joker and the other side didn't want them to, so the leader dropped off the gas on the third turn and the second placed rider did likewise when he saw what the first placed rider had done. It was silly. The sport should be better than that.

I understand that. But just the inkling that a rider may be dropping points on purpose takes away from a brilliant race in the long run. The number of times in my latter years of watching did I ponder if a good pass was a good pass or just that the leader was going to get some form of advantage from it or had been told by his team to do so. I grew too cynical. I watched too many dodgy things happen in the latter years. And don't get me going about how Poole fans were calling for Matt Ford to quit just months back, crowds were dipping, the team were getting weak, weak enough to bring aboard riders to strengthen, but just in time to roar ahead in the title chase. Seems like a fairy tale, a wrestling match, but not the spot I believe in too much nowadays.

But the rule allowed him, encouraged him to do so, did it not. Like the mysterious engine failures the Poole boys suffered in the early qualifying matches of the league season about five years ago, there was even an investigation to see if they had (don't know how they'd have proved that one). so they could jettison a few under-performing riders and welcome aboard a few stronger one. If a rule is there to encourage cheating, it means some cheats may be encouraged.

Gordon Kennett was forced to quit in the mid-90s because he had performed too well in matches for Wolves at reserve, moved into heatleader spot after the first averages, struggled, was dropped by Wolves, wanted to go to Oxford in the second division, but his average was too high. Another stalwart forced to quit.

How can they (the league) have been a standard they're supposed to have been when at least one rider is purposely dropping points to get into the other league?

I don't blame Simmo for dropping the points so he could race in the NL the following season, he must have lost money, I do blame the fact that rules drawn up by the sport's governors meant he had to do so. Speedway fans will put up with it, to a point. The problem comes when you try to attract new support and there are still aspects of points dropping to allow a team to reshuffle during the same year. Even if Malcom Simmons would have gone through the 1985 British League season with a 12-point average, he couldn't have bettered that figure when he drooped down. So why encourage cheating. Surely it would have been better to assess him on a 12-point (the highest you can have) figure instead of making the sport look silly and encouraging him to throw races.

Malcolm Simmons was a smooth and classy rider. Winner of the British Final in 1976 during a period qualifying for the meeting itself was hard enough, there was always a whiff of controversy about him. I suppose the race fixing allegations in 1984 topped the lot, then there was his sacking by Poole in 1980 when he apparently threw a race, his honesty in saying he purposely dropped points one season so his average allowed him to race in the second tier the next year. An interesting rider. If anything though, the number of vehicle breakdowns on the way to meetings he subsequently missed tell how lax he was on his breakdown cover.

The beeb just didn't get speedway, often having a posh gentleman on commentary on the very rare occasions it was on which was more alined to all the other sports they covered. Just didn't seem right for speedway. The thing is, these sort of cheats by SPOTY to keep speedway out of the limelight possibly caused all sorts of damage in attracting new fans. Then it prevents the question, just what is the programme all about, when it has to dodge votes for certain sports. I recall sitting through the snoozefest, the last time about 1980 during England's Grand Slam, just hoping to catch a five-second glimpse of a speedway rider in many a show usually a horse would be paraded on as a sporting personality. Now I think it should be replaced by a programme looking at where all the personalities in sport have gone. It'll end up one day soon going the same way as Top Of The Pops.

Yes, superbly described. Was that you, the other person in the stadium? Think it was a human, could just about make out a silhouette on the far side.