MattK

If you look at the huge increase in popularity of fantasy football and online gambling, I think the statistical side of sport is massively popular. In my opinion, speedway doesn't emphasise the statistically side of the sport enough. There is a vast potential markets of statos which could be targeted.

Really? No TV deal is a triple whammy for us. Firstly, like other teams we get no share of the TV money. Secondly, TR doesn't get his commission which no doubt has helped finance us in the past. Thirdly, GoSpeed are likely to have to still pay for their rights, which likely means less money to Swindon for running costs.

I know this goes against everything then BSPA stand for - but why don't they put PPV out to tender and see what responses they get? On a side note, when was the last time BSPA/GoSpeed publiclly advertised any commercial opportunities?

I don't like these arbitrary rules. Presumably it means NKI's average goes down while Woffinden, Zagar, Kildemand etc. goes up? Should have used the 1.08 multiplier.

I'd imagine the biggest technical challenge is finding a fast enough Internet connection to send the coverage to the servers which stream the content. I agree in theory though, if no TV deal is forthcoming, this should at least be trialed to determine indicative numbers. Surely all meetings would be streamed?

If you watch the ReRun highlights on the SGB site the quality is excellent. OK, it is from a single camera, but they seem to have got the ideal angle, just over the first bend, which gives a good view of the start, plus throughout the entire race. It obviously helps that the cameraman is a speedway fan and focuses on the action, rather than the leader. The other problem with PPV for speedway is that it's a closed market. I subscribed to the McGregor/Mayweather fight, as I had no way of attending (it was in Las Vegas after all) and even if I was there I probably couldn't afford a ticket. Speedway simply doesn't have those barriers to attendance or indeed the wider potential audience. With PPV at best you are gaining a few hundred away fans and at worst you are cannibalising home supporters by offering them a cheaper (and dare I say more convenient) alternative to attending in person.

The flip side to this is how many home fans would stay at home and watch on PPV for 3 quid, rather than pay £17 to attending in person? I agree that superficially PPV sounds like a fantastic idea, but I can't get past the fact that I don't think the numbers add up.

No, it won't change his Premiership average. Don't forget, in 2019 the rules are likely going to change again. How often are these arbitrary limits kept for more than one year?

Forward thinking Championship clubs might be able to sign Morris and Thorrsell at a discounted price (per point) on the assumption they will be able to top up their earnings with lashings of Premiership guest bookings. Similarly, a big bonus of signing for Swindon is that it will free up a rider's availability to do Premiership guest bookings.

3.67

Every year there is some kind of completely arbitrary rule designed to break up the successful teams. Last season it was the 38-point limit, previously it was one GP riders or similar. Every year the supporters of the club(s) impacted moan and complain as if it is the first time it has ever happened.

I quite like the look of those. I also fancy Sedgmen for 5.64 and Summers for 4.69.

Interesting, thanks. I was going off here which had him down as riding in only one meeting.

He didn't ride in Sweden last year.

Given that Musielak has signed for Elit Vetlanda and Czestochowa, will he be allowed to sign for Swindon?

Presumably, riders will still be subjected to a minimum of three rides, largely to avoid that type of scenario?

It does seem a strange rule, as I can't see any team going with Morris or Thorssell as their #1, so it can't be about sharing around who's available.

Five million households receive BT Sport. I'm not sure how many people go to speedway on a weekly basis, but I'd guess there is some potential to attract new fans there.

Serious question, but what exactly are the "highlights" of speedway? We don't have goals, knockouts, touchdown etc. Would you show the best heat from each meeting? That doesn't exactly articulate the balance of a meeting, in the same way showing the goals from both teams shows the ebb and flow of a football match.

I think a lot will depend on whether a TV deal is forthcoming.

OK, I appreciate that this will come across as quite negative, but I thought I’d post it anyway! The main problem I have with most of these "blue print" type posts I read on here and indeed published above, is that they do not lay out the problems they are trying to solve, before launching into a vast array of changes. For example, averages are one of the few things speedway does well - when it doesn't fiddle with them. They are mathematically pure and are the best indication of a rider’s ability. This article doesn't describe the problems it is trying to solve, before proposing multiple complex and perplexing changes to how averages are calculated and used for teambuilding. Rounding up to the nearest 0.5 is a terrible idea and will have the opposite effect to what the author is suggesting. For example, he states "a rider is deemed 'too good' to fit into a team because his average is 4.02, not 4.00 I don't see how rounding up an average to the nearest 0.5 helps. For example, a rider with an average of 3.76 will be rounded up to 4.0 which could potentially put him out of a ride. The author also suggests that it would "remove instances of a single engine failure could be the difference" - when in fact it exacerbates the problem, as in my example above, a 3.76 rider who suffers one engine failure and sees his average drop to 3.74, would be rounded DOWN to 3.5 - a huge difference in terms of teambuilding for the sake of a single ride. I don't like the idea of riders having a consistent average over the course of the season, as this penalises teams who sign improving riders and then have to "weaken" if they ever need to bring in a replacement. Again, I don't understand what problem this change is looking to solve. I don't like the "single average". Just say no to multipliers kids. Look at the absolute s**tstorm which resulted this year. Why would we want to replicate this? Riders perform differently in different leagues, I don’t have a problem with that. The August 31st cut off is an interesting idea, but is there really a problem with average manipulation at the end of the season? I like the idea of assessing averages based on scores in foreign leagues. I'm sure that rings a bell somewhere. Although, however it is done needs to be transparent. I am deeply ambivalent on the tactic ride. The suggestion of one big league doesn't address any of the concerns that was usually raised when one big league is suggested, namely halving the number of meetings for most riders who currently double-up, the huge disparity in quality of the riders and how teams with smaller payrolls will be able to field a competitive side. Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of one big league, it just feels right with only 18 teams. However, there are insurmountable issues in its implementation, which no one has yet managed to suggest workable solutions to.

I guess we will find out at the AGM. However, for me a bit of flexibility is required to allow club to migrate to the new fixed race nights. As I suggest, it does not seem impossible for some clubs across leagues to ride on the same night in the short term, while longer terms arrangements are put in place. With proper fixture planning enforcing fixed race nights from day one seems unnecessary.

I don't think it is an insurmountable problem with some intelligent fixture planning. There are 34 weeks from the start of March to the end of October. Last season Sheffield rode 26 home meetings on a Thursday. If the new Premiership moved to fixed race nights and the eight teams are equally distributed, the worse case scenario is a Thursday club (let's use Swindon as an example) needing to ride 24 fixtures on a Thursday (16 home and 8 away). Of course, in reality Swindon won't ride all of their home meetings on a Thursday, as several will be held on Sundays (bank holiday weekends) and Mondays for TV. Obviously, Thursday Championship clubs like Sheffield will have to compromise and move some of their home meetings to an alternate night, but just like some Premiership clubs will have to compromise on their race nights, we need to look at the bigger picture.

Holder averaged 8.95 in the much tougher 2016 Elite League. Anyone can see that last year was a blip.

With any lucky, that will be addressed at the AGM too.