grovesred

Nail hit squarely on the head. I particularly agree with the statement about "accompanied by an adult" - once kids are into their teens, they don't generally want to go everywhere and do everything with their parents in tow; they're finding their feet as independent human beings, so encouraging them to start (or continue) coming to speedway with their mates instead of mum and dad seems a sensible thing to do. I stopped attending speedway very soon after I flew the nest and stayed away for nearly thirty years, but football, which I have always attended with friends rather than family has kept me hooked since the age of eleven. Everyone has their own unique experience, but promoters need to start looking beyond the "speedway is a family sport" mantra and realise that there is more to modern society than a series of nuclear families consisting of a mum, a dad, and two kids who remain eight or nine years of age for ever. There is no "one size fits all" solution; each track needs to assess the demographics of its own locality, see who's missing (young, old, black, white, gay, straight, men, women, whatever) and start to construct a marketing strategy accordingly.

The way these young women are encouraged to parade and pout is decidedly sleazy. Eighty years ago, a woman's place was on a speedway bike, competing alongside the men - until they were banned for getting too good. Now, it seems we're telling our daughters that if they love speedway, the best contribution they can make is to squeeze into a leather outfit and wiggle their backsides into the lens of a TV camera. Worse, we're passing on the message to our sons that women are there to be ogled and drooled over, and if ogling and drooling are OK, why not groping (and worse) too? Plenty of other sports manage to attract big audiences both on TV and in the stadia without resorting to "glamour" (what a euphemism that is, dating back to the time when the top-shelf w*** mags called themselves "glamour" magazines). Speedway fans deserve better.

Congratulations to Swindon on finishing top. Whilst of course I hope Belle Vue are able to the trophy away in the end of season knockout lottery, in my old-fashioned and outdated view, Swindon are the champions.

For the most part, I enjoy BT's coverage. As others have said, Natalie is an excellent presenter, and I do like the summary of the rest of the week's action from around the country. My negatives are minor gripes, really and are in part about TV coverage in general, not BT's league coverage in particular: 1) It's a shame they don't give the race times. At the very least it would provide a solid reference point for the commentators to compare different heats. 2) I realise BT have no control whatsoever over the coverage of the GP's but the portrayal of women there is straight out of the 1950s; embarrassingly so, when shots focus and linger on the "models" pouting or wiggling their backsides and chests at the cameras, like some third-rate porn flick. 3) And finally, a truly petty pet hate: the constant use of teams' nicknames ahead of the place/club names. Personally, I'd never say I was going to watch the Stars against the Rebels on TV or that I was off to Manchester for the match between the Aces and the Lions, I'd simply say I was going to watch King's Lynn against Somerset or Belle Vue against Leicester. It all sounds rather Americanised to me, and I can't help feeling that emphasising the places where the clubs are based would help audiences begin to identify with their own nearest team. 4) Like everyone else, I think the camerawork needs improving.

No. I don't care if a rider is from Timperley or Timbuktu, as long as he gives of his best, and his best is good enough for my club. If he then moves on to better-paid work in a better league, good luck to him.