Grachan

You reckon? There's plenty more where that one came from.

Ah right. That's the good old UKBA and their ever changing rules then, which I'm sure they do purely to catch people out so that they can refuse them. It's basically a way of doctoring immigration figures by punishing those who try to do things properly because it's easier than trying to do anything about those who don't.

Maybe his appeal was too late. You only have a certain amount of time between when you get your refusal and when you can appeal. But you can still re-apply with a new application.

It seems that Sam Masters initially failed on a "technicality". And because of a "new rule". Strange that nobody seems to want to say what this technicality or new rule is though. http://www.edinburghmonarchs.co/news/article.asp?id=1271

I guess there must be a bit more detail to it then. Maybe he had old documents or whatever. You get riders joining mid-season sometimes and applying for work permits. You can apply for one any time. So there must be some specific detail missing.

Deadline applied by whom? The BSPA? I don't see how there would be a UKBA deadline.

Even if you can't appeal, you can re-apply. It's not the same thing. An appeal is based on the application you put in whereas if you re-apply it is a fresh application and the previous one has no bearing on the outcome. The current Government are becoming biger and bigger pains in the backsides over visa rules lately. You can't afford to cut corners any more.

If they were legally settled in the UK and you were born here or if you were born here before 1983 then yes.

He probably put in a bad application, so I would imagine it's a case of re-applying. The clubs need to take a lot of responsibility with visa applications in my opinion. they are, after all, the sponsors and it would be partly up to them to prove that Doyle is worthy as well as making sure all the documentation is in order. You would only qualify if your parents are legally resident of the UK. I don't know his situation, but presumably they weren't. Yes, if they are settled here then their kids would qualify as citizens.

To be fair, a lot of people have mentioned it and a lot of people have been bothered. Second strings could effectively ride themselves out of business for next season if they turn in an 8 point average. Who's going to take a second string on 8 when they can get a heat leader on 6? This could, effectively, see an end to averages being used in team building. They may have tyo go back to grading, with riders assessed on the standard of heat that their scores were attained.

Poole could not have got that meeting abandoned on their own. It needed agreement from Belle Vue and the referee too. I agree it wouldn't have been called off if Poole didn't have the required points though - probably because Poole would have insisted they carry on.

Didn't Darcy Ward have a visa problem last year? I remember Troy Bachelor having problems too not so long ago too.

He would probably be applying for a Tier 5 - Creative and Sporting visa. This lasts for 12 months, so he would, presumably, have to go back to Australia and reapply each year. http://www.workpermit.com/uk/uk-immigration-tier-system/tier-5-temporary-workers.htm The UKBA are getting more and more strict with applications under this government, so it's possible the documentation wasn't enough and he'll have to reapply (just guessing). It would also be up to his sponsor (presumably Leicester speedway) to prove that he is "internationally established at the highest level in your sport, and/or their job must make a significant contribution to the development and running of sport at the highest level."

I remember Brian Leonard selling speedway bikes in his shop in Thatcham. It must have been the late 70s and they were about £500-£600 if I remember correctly.

I feel he came short because, for many years, just on riding ability alone Hans Nielsen was totally in a class of his own in the British League. There was nobody who came close. When you rode against Oxford it was like winning the match if anyone in your side managed to beat him. A rider of his ability should have won about 10 world titles and could have been the undisputed greatest of all time, but in world Finals he often over rode and made errors - including when he won it Poland and should have been excluded in one race for bringing off Tommy Knudsen. So on World Titles alone I feel he under achieved, but as a league rider he was possibly the greatest of all time.

Top tier - the three big ones: 1. Ivan Mauger 2. Tony Rickardsson 3. Ove Fundin (because I never saw him, so he had to come third) Second tier: 4. Barry Briggs 5. Erik Gundersen 6. Hans Nielsen (best league rider I ever saw, but individually often came short) 7. Ole Olsen Number 8. So difficult to choose 8, but I'll go with the most naturally gifted rider what I ever did see. 8. Michael Lee

He's in the side to take points off three pointers. Should be able to manage that.

Yeah. Until you look at the other sides and realise that they are all crap as well.

I don't know if this rider being assessed at 4 is right or wrong. That's because I don't know how good he is. But if he is assessed at 4 then that would be a judgement on how good he was LAST season, not how good he will be NEXT season. And it would seem he is a still improving rider. Maybe he will average over 4. I'd say that's highly likely bearing in mind the standard of reserves for next year. But his assessment of 4 would be based on how he might have performed against teams of last year's strength.

Yeah. do it. Maybe in Years Gone By.

Ha! Yes, you could well be correct about the Russians.

The one about putting British juniors in the reserve berths of top flight teams? That must be been about 25 years ago.

The incident that caused Dave Lanning to accuse the Poles is here at about 3 minutes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1eOmHuX2Lk To be fair, Dave Lanning's commentary on that World Final was nonsense. The original referee's decision (which Lanning was complaining about) seemed fine to me. Plech was leading, was brought off by the Chlynovski. The ref excluded the Russian and ordered a re-run. What's the problem with that? It was only when everyone started going crazy about it that the ref changed the decision under pressure, so it was a weak referee. The original decision seemed ok to me. And as for the Poles trying to get a champion and it being a stitch up - had that been the case, then Plech would have been awarded heat 19 to put him in the title run-off, but wasn't. He was leading at the time of incident after all. As for Szczakiel, he was definitely a bit of a surprise champion, but he had scored a maximum in a World Pairs Final previously so he certainly wasn't a no hoper. And regarding the run off. Mauger fell off. Yes, the race should have been stopped, but even if it had Szczakiel would still have won. There was some strange refereeing going on that night, but Jerzy Szczakiel won the tile fair and square and it was another Pole - Zenon Plech - who suffered most from the poor refereeing.

Sorry, but you're still coming across as someone who is determined to undermine this in any way that you can. I'm not really sure what your motivation is here. So, the BBC SPOTY programme - which is nationally known competition - proved more popular than a vote for a minority personality on a minority channel. Well, of course it did. We all know that. I just don't see what you're trying to achieve with your posts other than try to knock the fact that Tai Woffinden won a vote on a TV show. Maybe I'm just missing your point. Or are you going to try and say that you're not making a point but merely bringing up facts without opinion? (No offence, but this is a speedway forum, so if you constantly try to say how rubbish speedway is to speedway supporters you must expect some opposition.)

Considering the minimum average is 3.00 then he'd probably be right.