Grachan

More than Hans Nielsen had. Hans had one serious rival.

I don't mean want it. I mean WANT it.

Not saying it is beyond anyone else, but I only see it being one of those 3 next year - and I'm no longer convinced that Jason Doyle really wants it badly enough. Likewise Hancock. Lindgren a possible dark horse. Janowski needs to up his game once he realises he is up with the leaders.

I never really felt it with Knudsen the way I did with Nielsen and Gundersen. Good as he was, I will always remember him mainly for falling off when doing a w This year I would agree there were several contenders. Next year I reckon there are 3 main contenders. Zmarzlik - can he make the final step-up that his ability indicates he can? Doyle - how he will now respond to no longer being Champion and how much does he want it now that he has already won it once? Woffinden - obviously.

Really? Above Nielsen? I certainly never saw it that way.

The only rider there that I would possibly consider as a serious contender would be Billy Saunders in 1984 - and that was only before the meeting as the Nielsen/Gundersen era quickly evolved. I was a dedicated Swindon fan, but wouldn't really consider Jimmy Nilsen as one until, maybe, 1990 - and Per Jonsson soon put a stop to that. It really was all about Hans and Erik for those 5 or 6 years.

The way it felt from 84 until the end of the 80's was, effectively, is Hans Nielsen going to win or is he going to mess it up? And, if he messed it up you pretty well knew that Erik Gundersen would win instead, even though Nielsen was obviously the better rider. There were no other serious contenders a few years there.

It's just a feeling, although I may be being swayed by the standard of riders in the British League being higher, plus most of the strength in depth now being in Eastern Europe. Of course, then again, maybe it was so hard for people to beat Hans Nielsen because the general standard of rider was lower. We can never really know either way.

To be fair, that is newsworthy as a human interest story so I don't see the problem. Incidentally, you say a female rider is needed for coverage, how much coverage did the BBC give Ana Currasco when she became the first ever female World Motorcycling champion? I didn't see much.

I don't get this argument really. So what if the equipment is different? Bikes have evolved right through from 1928 to the current day and will continue to do so. It has no bearing on the standards of the riders as all riders from each era ride the machinery of that era. If I was honest, I would say that the standard of rider in the 70s and 80s was probably higher - or at least there were more top riders - due to the popularity of the sport at that time giving it more strength in depth. Then again - the standard of rider from East Europe these days is probably a lot higher than it was back in the day. I think the fact that Greg Hancock began winning World titles again so late in his career indicates this as a possibility. Would George Foreman have won a Boxing World Championship in his 40s if he had fought someone the same standard of a young Muhammad Ali? Is Woffy the greatest British riders of all time? Possibly. I would say Craven, Collins and Lee would still give him a good run for that claim. One more World title would put it beyond doubt, though. I mean, one more and he is in the realms of Hans Nielsen and Barry Briggs. So, regardless of what era he is in, that would make it pretty undisputable. Mind you, he could probably win 7 titles and there are some people who would probably put him about level with Eric Broadbelt in the all-time list. But you can't please everyone.

You want 10+ riders? Simple. Merge the two leagues and use exactly the same ridrrs as rode in the UK this year and have a race format where the number ones meet only once. All of a sudden, the likes of Josh Bates and Stefan Nielsen become third heatleaders. So most number ones are nailed on 10 point riders. It doesn't make the league any stronger. It would actually be weaker teams than we have now.

There are only 6 nominees this year, and you could probably add Harry Kane and Lizzy Yarnold to those 4.

Surely nobody in their right mind would be a Speedway promoter.

Tai on BBC Breakfast this morning. Probably more publicity in 5 minutes than a whole season of riding in the British League would get you.

Did Alan Grahame ever make a World Final? I think the points limit was 48 at that time, but sure that, in itself, would make them a better side than the Oxford side with a compulsory junior. It depends if you compare them to others in the same year or as an individual side I guess. The 1980s points limits certainly led to dominant sides. Coventry had a couple too where they were easy league winners. I guess that's one reason the limits kept coming down as other sides tried to compete.

Not sure, although they had a few years of domination before the points limits finally caught up with them. I know there was a season when Hans Nielsen went undefeated away from home.

When you look at Cradley Heath 1983, I don't think there will ever be a team to top that. Just the sheer quality in that side - not even from 1-7 but they had Simon Cross at no 8 instead. Four riders with averages over 9. Two riders over 8. And at number 7, with an average over 7, was World Champ to be, Jan O. Pedersen. Just a remarkable line-up.

I'm not so sure. British Basketball, for example, has League Champions and then has play-off champions. The play-offs final is at the 02 and has crowds much bigger than any league match.

I do think that there should be some sort of recognition to finishing top of the league - perhaps a trophy of some sort. However, the play-offs need to remain the main prize.

He is clearly getting out while he is still ahead. Hopefully he will change his mind and stay as the sport needs successful promoters. I'm sure that Matt Ford sees what happens every year, with the sport getting weaker and weaker, and he can see that there is a risk of him losing out sooner rather than later if it continues down the current path. At least he is doing a better job of selling it than Peterborough, who are, effectively, saying that they are selling because they can't get crowds in. Hardly the way to encourage buyers. Yes, this is probably the weakest team to win the league. Last year was, also, until this year. And next year will probably be even weaker still.

Have they though? As Racers and Royals pointed out on the previous page, the only amendment seems to be that a rider cannot guest for both sides in the play offs. There's nothing about the 5% allowance being allowed for away fixtures.

I think Shawn McConnell still rides.

Would you have been happy with a 42.5 points limit if there were still 13 heats? With 39-39 being a draw it would then be more than half the points available to a team in a match.

A bit of a contradiction there. We don't need play-offs, yet injuries robbed Wolves, "undoubtedly" the best team in the league - even though they didn't finish top of the table.

Briggs would have probably won in 67 though.