Sir Sidney

IOW has more than 'a sprinkling of NDL riders' as you put it in the speedway based meetings. Of course, as they run a varied programme, there are meetings that may attract a different client base. Every promotion in the UK could benefit from watching how the IOW run meetings. As a customer I feel valued from the minute I arrive in the car park to the moment I leave, and often that is extended to the ferry trip home.

Maybe you haven't checked who is racing. National League standard racing and I am quite happy to pay to watch. On top of that I also get all the added value that isn't provided elsewhere. Give it a try. You might just like it. All delivered at pace and with first class customer service.

On Facebook Lee Complin has posted that the track was 'spot on' which seems to confirm that the more experienced riders can get round without issue. Since the NDL was weakened 3 years ago or so the impact has been that there are too many riders in teams who probably shouldn't be racing at that level. I very much doubt BSPL will do anything about it as they caused it, but it leaves tracks like Mildenhall in an invidious position.

I confess I have never thought of Sheffield as being a wide track. I would imagine the air fence has narrowed it a bit more compared to the upright engined days

That's what he says, but that is disputed by others who say they have the letters that show that to be false. In the thread I linked even Phillip Rising said he had seen the list and it was stretching it - and Phillip said he was a friend of Peter's and was carefully choosing his words. In the end we all have to choose which story, based on the info available, we believe is most credible In any event, isn't it the case now that the current owners do let ex riders in free with the only requirement that they contact Mark lemon in advance to say they are coming? Given that the seats are numbered that doesn't seem unreasonable

You only need to read back in this thread, and the one I linked earlier in the thread (page24), to read the alternative versions of events. After that you can take a view on which of the versions you believe - but it would be remiss to only rely on what is written in the book

Not a clue

A safety review to start with. There might be some inexpensive changes that could improve things.

Andy Hawthorne I would imagine

I shall be very interested to see how Phil's role dovetails with the role of the SCB, especially as his role is focused on the Premiership. Jim Lawrence, in his role at SCB, made a big play in his Speedway Star interview of his intention to re-write and simplify the rule book. I hope part of Phil's role is to work with SCB on this. What happens if they disagree? Presumably SCB has the final say? In terms of interpretation have all Premiership clubs agreed that his interpretation is final? How long before one team is aggrieved and appeals to SCB? What happens if interpretation is required in the Championship or NDL? Do the BSPL Management Committee make those decisions? I predict Phil's role will need to be widened before the season ends or there will be tears!

On Facebook you can find information on Wightlink Warriors Shale Track Racing Club Isle of Wight ARH Heathens Shale Racing Team I don't have any info on Plymouth or Iwade I'm afraid

The SCB just appears to tie its self up in knots. Presumably, if 3 above were to be true, then any of the Young GB riders involved in the practice / training session ( but not competing for Team GB ) in Macon, France last week would not have been entitled to any funds or benefits from the SBRF.

Perhaps not within the control of the speedway promoters. If you want to hire the Peter Craven suite you do so via Better Leisure, as a part of the Belle Vue Leisure complex ( same with pitches in the centre). https://www.better.org.uk/leisure-centre/manchester/belle-vue-sports-village/facilities Isn't speedway just a tenant on agreed dates now, rather than in control of the stadium?

Surely the whole issue here is that PC's recollection / presentation of his request is at odds with others who say they know. In the end you have to decide who you believe. This was discussed on the forum some time ago, with even the late Phil Rising saying he had seen the list of names, and that it amounted to a substantial number, some of which had no connection to Belle Vue. Someone more adept at searching the forum will no doubt be able to find it. Whatever the truth, it doesn't diminish the completely hurtful inscription he made in the book Steve Casey paid for, nor explain why PC has allowed a dispute with Belle Vue to go on for 35 years ( according to his apology) Edit: I've found the previous thread. It is under Peter Collins Article By keepturningleft, October 26, 2017 in Speedway News and Discussions It's worth a read, because many of the same arguments were aired then, and for anyone who has Speedway Stars from then there will be two articles to look at

As an ex Councillor who saw fraud happening did you report it? I accept that objections to a planning application may be given weight that is not justified, but that is in the public domain.

Frankly that is just nonsense. There are controls and oversights in place to prevent such things.

I'd like to see some more detail about the legitimacy of this claim. Given the size of the proposal, excluding the speedway element, I find it unlikely that two Councillors would have delegated authority to dismiss such a proposal without further reference to a designated Committee or without Legal oversight of the process

All looking OK so far. Bikes warming up.

There should be a full disclosure from Speedway GB, Belle Vue and Kings Lynn on this, and an investigation by SCB. It's false advertising as a minimum

That simply depends on why the ref excluded Tobias. If she excluded him for hitting Brady, which he did and I don't think is disputed, then at that point Brady was at worst in second place. In accordance with the rules, Tobias was excluded and the others promoted one place at the time of the cause of the exclusion. Simple

Our posts crossed. See previous. Not cock eyed at all and covered by the regs

Or of course you could just read the regulations 011.1.15Awarding a Heat If the leading rider has completed at least 2 laps, then the Referee shall have the sole discretion to either order a re-run or award the heat based upon the positions when it was caused to be stopped; riders, other than the one disqualified being advanced one place. So my interpretation is what caused it to be stopped was Kurtz being hit by Musielak. Therefore, given that at that point Kurtz was on his bike it is perfectly correct for the ref to award him the race win. The regs are available to download online. No mystery, no secrecy, no conspiracy. Give it a go. They are quite interesting

Without the SCB revealing exactly what caused the test to be failed it is pure speculation if he was putting others at risk. Remember the case of British skier Alain Baxter, who lost his Bronze medal and received a three month ban for testing positive, after using a Vicks nasal inhaler. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/winter-sports/35292538

I'm assuming that Edinburgh speedway has had feedback on why its bid was unsuccessful. Is that the case? Was the speedway bid for a higher or lower sum than the chosen bid?

Nether the less, would you not be interested in seeing what Edinburgh speedway's offer was for the site, and the justification for the decision? Even if the Labour councillors have a majority on the Committee and voted on party lines there is still a Council process to follow.