Jeff Scott

I'll be going along to watch & to try to sell copies of my latest book Bouquet of Shale Reviewers have said: “Jeff Scott ….. the sport’s most single-minded evangelist since the Rev David Sheppard strode out to open the batting for England.” Northern Echo “entertaining and informative…an engaging writer with an incredible eye for detail….plenty of humour in the writing, many astute observations” Speedway Plus

Shouldn’t we let the due process of the disciplinary procedures take place first rather than rush to prematurely judge, castigate and scapegoat Edward Kennett?

I will be along too to try to sell copies of my book Bouquet of Shale Reviewers have said: “JEFF SCOTT ….. the sport’s most single-minded evangelist since the Rev David Sheppard strode out to open the batting for England.” Northern Echo “entertaining and informative…an engaging writer with an incredible eye for detail….plenty of humour in the writing, many astute observations” Speedway Plus

Possibly only supernatural intervention can ensure an error free speedway book gets written Returning to the real topic of this thread, Ray's book remains fun and a worthwhile purchase. Quotes that give a flavour of his approach here

No, it's a "date" error Not originally mentioned by you (or part of your subsequent textual analysis) but - freakishly it now turns out - unconsciously predicted by Mystic Norbold

the erroneous use of the word "for" wasn't immediately obvious as your objection originally (thank you for clarifying) A speedway book with a word choice error, where will it all end?

this must be the almost right word, then

Not sure of the objection here? Quote is factual...invented by Fred Monkford in 1932. Used at New Cross.

It appears on page 30

a review of Ray lambert's book Keep Turning Left appears here

Sorry you feel that way George. If you add the telly audience to the attendances figures issued there looks to be a shortfall even allowing for all the mitigating factors you suggest.

Well, George, you've certainly come up with quite a few novel mitigating factors! I like your creativity. Considering all these it's a marvellous achievement they cobbled together more than 10 viewers Let's not forget it could be bath night or, perhaps, clothes needed ironing or maybe a mass turn off after horoscopes warning of back luck for any Gemini's or Aries watching too much satellite telly? Wish I'd been invited to one of those Third Place Play off "world cup parties and barbecues"

Firstly, my article discussed many factors while the comment you quote from the BSF also has a context you're taking it out of &, er, to answer your query: since the Cardiff SGP rounds in 2009 & 2010 both started at 5pm - the 79,000 shortfall this year is an apples with apples comparison (rather than an exceptional new explanatory circumstance I'd failed to mention as the other gentleman had noted). Apparently some feel the 104,000 shortfall in 2009 was exceptional circumstance prompted by changing the start time from 7pm to 5pm rather than being any reflection upon the diminishing enthusiasm of the UK television audience (as recorded by BARB). This PoV ignores the trend towards falling audience figures for other SGP rounds (where the start times remained the same) in both 2009 & 2010

So, let's see, you think that Cardiff - the 'jewel in the crown' of the speedway grand prix - suffered a decline of 104,000 viewers that's caused by the switch to a 5pm start time and then further fall of 79,000 in 2010 was caused by a third place play off in the world cup that kicked off 2 & 1/2 hours after the GP did? The biggest viewing figures for Sky Sports showing Premiership Football usually happen on "Super Sunday" - featuring Chelsea, Man U, Arsenal etc - where kick offs are 1.30 & 4pm

The Cardiff SGP is a sports programme (not, as in your example, a soap like Eastenders) - when Manchester play live on the telly whether it's 1.30, 4 or 8 they get big audiences Either way, the SGP lost 79,000 viewers from 2009 to 2010 when both were staged at 5pm. So this "very important point" you claim undermines the various points of my article isn't a new (key) factor worth including or, more importantly, the explanation for the decline you seem to think it is