Sir Sidney

Most teams will lose most of their away meetings. Northampton are unfortunate, because of circumstances, to have four of their first five meetings away, and doubly unfortunately that two riders are already injured. It's also a bit of a head scratcher that the captain didn't check the size of his home track before signing! Stick with them. Season 1 will be a challenge, but beyond that will be the real test of team strength.

Yes, they can get there. Various flights available but not a lot of leeway

Don't give up on them after 1 home meeting. They will need all the support they can get, to remain viable. Given the lateness with which the team was put together it was always going to be a challenge this year. Klindt acknowledged at Belle Vue yesterday that his performances have not yet been up to scratch. The question is who would be available to come in to improve the team now, and I suspect the answer is that there are very few options

No dust nor blue groove though at Phil's house

There are parallels in cricket, where players have opted out of international cricket to play the more lucrative white ball circuit

Tickets bought. Let's hope it's a great success

As per the fixture list, but, admittedly not much leeway for postponements

More likely to be as at Kings Lynn and Scunthorpe, where the speedway fence rests against the stock car fence, and is higher than the steel posts and wire, and then with a polyfoam fence attached to that on the bends

The referee should clearly be taken to task.

Surely to goodness Northampton have already had a conversation with SCB and it's track inspector about what is required to get a licence and what they need to have in place before his visit. Tuesday should just be a check to make sure it has been done. I would also be amazed if someone hasn't already ridden a bike around there to test that there are no hidden horrors in the surface. I cannot believe that this has all been left to chance on Tuesday

Per the Regs 02.2.11 Duties of Referee g) where provided the Referee must use multi angle re-play technology supplied by Eurosport, BSN and the tracks own streaming service via a monitor

There are many parts of this that need to be fully clarified. I don't see how the Chairman of an organisation that has led this can survive. Firstly, what is actually in riders contracts this year and how does it compare to previous years? Secondly, who is actually saving the money? I believe Ben Barker had previously said that riders had £5 per race deducted to cover insurance. If that was the case, and that is not happening, then surely it is the riders and not the clubs making a saving. If the riders were aware then they could have used this to take out their own personal accident insurance, as some have published that they have done. Whether that is comparable is another matter. If the clubs were paying the insurance previously, and now are not and are making a saving, then surely they are complicit in this - even more so if they didn't explain this to their riders. If clubs either took out insurance to the same value, or advised their riders of the change - allowing riders to negotiate a contract so that they were no worse off, then the club may be exonerated. It remains a completely unedifying, and very seriously situation

I'll bet the SCB still fines them both

Why would he? He has nothing to do with the Championship

Thanks for the update and for being so open. From that it sounds like you received no explicit guidance about the change in insurance levels, and only as a result of the annual licence application - and because Luke hadn't previously had a specific deduction to cover insurance you didn't know what the difference was between the insurance cost in 2025 and the extra licence cost in 2026 - I've seen a figure of £28 mentioned. On the face of it, and unless Luke has had an uplift in his points money to reflect it, then it seems like the club is making a saving ( if it is no longer making insurance premium payments), and Luke has incurred an extra cost as he has had to take out an additional policy to provide a level of income protection against loss of income if he is unable to do his scaffolding job. I of course do appreciate that you can only comment on Luke's position and not on others, but if we assume a lot of riders are in the same position then it is understandable that Ben Barker is really pushing this. By the same token, were I a rider, I would not ride without taking out a personal policy as Luke has done, because the risk is too great. I very much hope that BSPL / SCB issues a much more transparent statement, with a chronology of events which can be substantiated with evidence - and that this dispute can be brought to a conclusion that sees riders in a comparable position to previous seasons without any significant cost issue. Thanks again for taking the time to provide some clarity, albeit as you rightly say, with the caveat that this is how it applies to Luke