MattK

What about all the concerts, weddings, conferences etc. that the stadium manager has to organise?

Joe Jacobs new average is 4.78 - his EL average last season was 5.14

How will Doyle's average drop? In a watered down SGB Elite Premierrubbish whatever league he will average well over 10, which means 14+ for team building purposes.

Max Clegg is on a bargain 4.04 - his EL average last year was 4.15!

I don't think it will work like that somehow, otherwise all teams will be well under the team building limit after the first greensheets. I assume that for team building purposes all riders will use their PL converted (multiplied by 1.4) averages for the whole season.

It depends. Morris is actually very attractive on his average of 8.87, compared to say Brady Kurtz on 9.22 - despite them having almost identical EL averages. Sedgmen on 7.6 is about middle of the road. Doyle's average is too high in my opinion. If we go with him then we will need four very low average riders, something like: Doyle (13.41) Milik (7.94) Watt (7.56) Wright (6.59) Nielsen (5.53) Adam Roynon (5.05) Danny Ayres (3.56) 49.64 Without Doyle we can have a bit more strength in depth: Kildemand (9.94) Morris (8.97) Milik (7.94) Watt (7.56) Wright (6.59) Steve Boxall (5.15) Danny Aires (3.56) 49.71

If that is the case, then a team building limit of 50 is horrendously low.

Reading between the lines, it does look like an attempt to make the top tier riders significantly less attractive.

Nicolai Klindt on 5.42!

That doesn't make any sense. Nick Morris would be 7.81 and Brady Kurtz 9.22 - despite currently have almost identical EL averages.

Wouldn't Lakeside need to declare their intention to run PL at the start of the AGM?

This thread as an example. Apparently Brady Kurtz will be "in demand" despite having an average of 6.44 gained mainly from riding as a secondstring, Morris on the other hand doesn't get a mention even though his average is similar (6.41), but it was gained from riding mainly as a heat leader. Morris isn't without his faults, but he has more than held his own riding in the difficult third heatleader role for the last two years and to that end tends to have his achievements overlooked in my opinion.

40.5

What does the GTR have that Jawas and GMs don't?

Assuming he doesn't retire or go back to Oz, I reckon Davey Watt could be in line for a renaissance next season and plenty of teams will have a five and a half point hole in their line-ups.

The biggest challenge with this idea is how you "sell" the weaker league to fans. If you charge EL prices for your main league, then your big league will only be a pound or two cheaper (based on current PL entry prices). Will fans attend the weaker league meetings if they are only a quid cheaper than the Elite League?

Given the strongest team (Poole) finished with total averages of just over 46 and the weakest (Leicester) just over 37, I think someone is pulling your leg.

Morris is a massively underrated rider. He was easily our best rider in 2015 and did more than enough in 2016 to justify a team place next season.

If you look at the average of the third heat leader at the start of this season, it was 6.34. This to me makes Kurtz and Lambert very poor value, as they are not heat leaders IMO. For me, Batchelor is a steal on 5.26, Richard Lawson looks very good value at 5.83 and has a lot of potential to improve. Nicholls would make a good secondstring on his average. Harris for me is a no. He lost nearly a point off his average riding at a track he should know like the back of his hand. He is only on a downward spiral and on his average would most likely be forced to ride in a heat leader position.

That makes absolutely no sense. The play-offs are the reason that each season five or six clubs have meaningful fixtures right up until the end of the season. Without the play-offs it would only be the two or three clubs in the hunt for the top spot who have anything to ride for.

I think it will be the same criteria and riders as 2016 but they'll move back to the old heat format.

Because there is more profit to be made from building houses on the land than running a greyhound/speedway stadium. The land around the existing stadium had a covenant designating it for employment use. It was originally owned by Motorola who also used to own the futuristic looking building next to the stadium. A consortium of Stadia UK and property developers bought the land and through clever lobbying and a promise to build a new stadium were able to get planning permission to build houses. Some argue that too much money had been spent on the stadium plans for it to be simply a ruse to get planning permission to build houses. Those more cynical think that investing a few hundred thousand in plans for a pretend new stadium in order to unlock tens of millions of pounds worth of housing developments is a good long term strategy. Those of us who live near the stadium will have noticed that the house building has progressed with gusto, while the stadium development is conspicuous by its absence. I guess only time will tell.

Has planning permission actually been granted? On the council planning site the application still has a status of "Received" and on the minutes for the Planning Committee there is no mention of the stadium in the last few months, strange for such a high profile project.

The most up to date plans are here: http://pa1.swindon.gov.uk/publicaccess/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=O7RY9CPTHSC00 If you go to Documents and then "MASTERPLAN - ALTERED SITE" or "DEVELOPMENT LOCATION PLAN", they are the best views of the new stadium. As I said, you can see stands on the plan, but there is no detail of their construction, elevation or capacity, which I find a bit strange as this is supposed to be detailed plans. Likewise, the stadium building looks very basic. It has been described as "modular" which suggests something like shipping containers bolted together. Mike Bowden claimed on Facebook that "Large scale electrical work going on today" - that was on Thursday

I do find it strange how little detail i included in the planning permission. As other have stated, there is nothing about the size of the proposed track and I can't see to find anything about the elevation or capacity of any of the new stands.