Speedways Future

[TonyM]

Lots of threads since the start of the season about the demise of speedway (particularly the top flight) in this country and various possible remedies to get speedway out of the downward spiral from those that think it is in one

 

Two frustrating things for me from these type of threads are

1)the narrow range in which many of us speedway fans ideas are constrained by - ie ‘drop the points limit to 40 and all will be well’ type postings; and

2)the continual ‘my club has been wronged’ / ‘nothing wrong at my club so stop complaining’ type posts – this is exactly how I imagine the BSPA conferences to be and would like to think that we as a group could look a little further than our own clubs present situation to come up with ideas that are good for the sport as a whole

 

Rather than finding answers (which we don’t seem to be able to agree on anyway) perhaps we could take a step back and come up with the right questions. So from my point of view there are a number of groups to be considered and accommodated in any changes and would like some thoughts on whether the assumptions of their needs are realistic, this is not a thread about how the needs of a particular group can be met rather a discussion of what each group is looking for from the sport in the future

 

Promotions (aka clubs) – financially viable (difficult for many sporting organisations) maybe partially offset by higher profile for owner, may also be linked to sponsors requirements

 

Sponsors – fall into a couple of categories, those that support a rider / club as it is their ‘hobby’ and those that do it as a commercial business decision – these are likely to be putting more in but will rightly want more out in terms of exposure be it national, regional or local media coverage and association with a successful club in a successful higher profile sport

 

TV/Media – exciting matches, variety of teams, ‘personalities’, credible league competition, certainty of scheduling and fixture taking place

 

Fans – as for TV but bias towards successful home team, sensible meeting schedule, good facilities at stadiums, continuity of riders over a period of time

 

Riders – again I would split these between the ‘professional’ and the semi-pro / amateur. Professional wants to maximise earnings but also balance that against financial risk so a more stable earnings pattern would perhaps be a better way of putting it, I am guessing both groups would want sensible fixture scheduling although perhaps even more important for the semi pro / amateur. Good practice and coaching opportunities and chance to move up the earnings scale with sufficient ability

[AndyM]

All excellent points, Tony. For my own part, I'd want to start with that step back with a 10-year review. That is:

 

1) conduct a thorough 360-degree review of the past 10 years of UK league speedway management and use honest appraisal to complete a SWOT analysis to pick up the best and the worst

2) develop a vision for how speedway should look in 10 years time, covering all aspects of how it is run at every level, how many clubs will operate, how financially viable it will be etc.

3) use scenario analysis to review what must change to get to that point, and what external influences will impact on the change process.

 

Only then can you start developing realistic solutions without the usual knee-jerk reactions. Take that long-term review process and you start to realise how much needs to be done and how we can only win by being much more ambitious and radical than we've previously considered. Let's be blunt about this - the survival of domestic UK speedway is at stake here and we have to take it very seriously.

[Kevin Meynell]

Rather than finding answers (which we don’t seem to be able to agree on anyway) perhaps we could take a step back and come up with the right questions.

 

I think the main question to be asked is whether itinerant riders should have a future in British speedway. In other words, should be continue to employ riders who have multiple commitments in multiple countries, or should we attempt to have a more self-contained league? The most obvious manifestation is whether British speedway should try to co-exist with the SGP, but equally riders having many employers has been problematic.

 

Of course, a loss of 'overseas' riders would mean a reduction in the supposed quality of British speedway, and the need to develop and promote more home-grown (by which I don't necessarily mean British) riders. However, I think this British speedway really must break from this mentality as this commitment to employing the "world's best riders" regardless of the long-term consequences will eventually doom the sport here. How much longer will fans tolerate matches between sides cobbled together from whoever could be bothered to turn-up that particular week. It would be much better to have stable line-ups, even if this means supposedly 'lower' quality. In any case, new stars would eventually be born.

 

The second question is how to devise a sensible team equalisation system. Most people agree this is desirable, but any system should allow a degree of medium-to-long term planning, and should not be so punitive as to penalise middle-of-the-table teams. The principle of the points limit isn't a bad one, but the current system been misused over the years and does nothing to encourage team building from one's own resources.

[Kevin Meynell]

For my own part, I'd want to start with that step back with a 10-year review.

 

Whilst we know how short-term thinking has damaged the sport, the reality is that most tracks undoubtedly struggle from season-to-season. They cannot afford to think about what will happen in 5 or 10 years because they might not even last through the following season.

 

I have to say that I'm not a great fan of long-term strategic approaches, as I'm more a here-and-now person. I'd start with making incremental changes that are unlikely to have an adverse effect in the short-term, but which have the chance of improving things over a longer period.

[AndyM]

I have to say that I'm not a great fan of long-term strategic approaches, as I'm more a here-and-now person. I'd start with making incremental changes that are unlikely to have an adverse effect in the short-term, but which have the chance of improving things over a longer period.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Then you're condemned to make the same mistakes repeatedly. Incremental changes need a medium or long-term vision just as much as radical shifts - even more so if you want to avoid the sort of aimless knee-jerk approach we know so well.

[Kevin Meynell]

Incremental changes need a medium or long-term vision just as much as radical shifts

 

Yes, there obviously has to be some sort of longish-term idea behind the changes, but I think it's pointless to have targets for (say) the numbers of tracks in 10 years.

[TonyM]

I think the main question to be asked is whether itinerant riders should have a future in British speedway. In other words, should be continue to employ riders who have multiple commitments in multiple countries, or should we attempt to have a more self-contained league? The most obvious manifestation is whether British speedway should try to co-exist with the SGP, but equally riders having many employers has been problematic.

 

Of course, a loss of 'overseas' riders would mean a reduction in the supposed quality of British speedway, and the need to develop and promote more home-grown (by which I don't necessarily mean British) riders. However, I think this British speedway really must break from this mentality as this commitment to employing the "world's best riders" regardless of the long-term consequences will eventually doom the sport here. How much longer will fans tolerate matches between sides cobbled together from whoever could be bothered to turn-up that particular week. It would be much better to have stable line-ups, even if this means supposedly 'lower' quality. In any case, new stars would eventually be born.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Looking from the professional end of the riders spectrum;

1) you think they should be able to make a living from the UK alone and that it should be a 'full time' commitment?

2) the chance of 'progressing' to SGP level but if that is achieved they would have to relinquish their UK riding place?

 

From a club position - only UK based riders could be contracted (obviously this would allow overseas riders to come over and then be based here for the season but not flying in on a meeting by meeting basis)

 

The second question is how to devise a sensible team equalisation system. Most people agree this is desirable, but any system should allow a degree of medium-to-long term planning, and should not be so punitive as to penalise middle-of-the-table teams. The principle of the points limit isn't a bad one, but the current system been misused over the years and does nothing to encourage team building from one's own resources.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Didnt want to get into too much detail as regards how teams are assembled / regulations that should be in place but essentially looking for clubs to have a more stable team membership (within the confines of team equalisation) with a commitment to develop their riders

[TonyM]

Whilst we know how short-term thinking has damaged the sport, the reality is that most tracks undoubtedly struggle from season-to-season. They cannot afford to think about what will happen in 5 or 10 years because they might not even last through the following season.

 

I have to say that I'm not a great fan of long-term strategic approaches, as I'm more a here-and-now person. I'd start with making incremental changes that are unlikely to have an adverse effect in the short-term, but which have the chance of improving things over a longer period.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The point of the thread is to try and look at the sport as a whole rather than individual club issues, clubs may come and go for all sorts of reasons but unless there is some pretty radical change and soon then I fear it will be reach a point where even the 'good' clubs will struggle to carry on

 

What do you think clubs need / want from speedway?

 

As an aside I'm not a great fan of incremental changes as they often have the effect of giving the illusion of change whilst side stepping the 'big' issues

[AndyM]

Yes, there is nobody currently within speedway with the ability to see big picture. Everybody is so involved in the day-to-day running of the sport or individual clubs they can't see the wood for the trees. Besides which, this process needs a different skillset. Bringing in outside skills is arguably the only way we're going to get an aggregate view about which direction speedway needs to follow.

 

Certainly thinking of season-by-season survival only won't help - we have to make assumptions along the lines of what proportion of clubs will keep going, which will fold and which new ones will replace them, if any.

[Kevin Meynell]

1) you think they should be able to make a living from the UK alone and that it should be a 'full time' commitment?

 

Whether they 'should' and whether they 'can' are different things I think. I think that British speedway be less tolerant of intinerant riders, or at least only employ those who are willing to limit their commitments elsewhere.

 

The question is whether riders can make a living by solely riding in Britain, or perhaps one other league as well. If they can't, then perhaps we need to consider moving to a part-time set-up, because the current arrangements are pretty unworkable.

 

2) the chance of 'progressing' to SGP level but if that is achieved they would have to relinquish their UK riding place?

 

I don't see that the SGP and the British League are compatible, especially if the SGP moves to more rounds (although we shall have to wait and see if this happens). The fact is though, that riders certainly can't make a living from the SGP at the moment, so they'd have to make a choice in accordance with who pays their wages.

 

Didnt want to get into too much detail as regards how teams are assembled / regulations that should be in place

 

Yes, but I believe this is a key issue for speedway's future success. The current merry-go-round makes it difficult to build-up fan interest and loyalty in teams, which in turn affects their viability. It's a fine balance as a degree of team equalisation is also desirable to maintain fan interest, but at the moment, you really might as well draw riders out of a hat at the start of the season.

[TonyM]

Thanks Kevin, I was just trying to clarify what you were proposing. I was hoping this thread could be more about what the sport would/should look like and come to some consensus (well you, Andy and me!) view rather than putting forward suggestions (however valid) without having a framework in which to assess them

 

Yes a mechanism for rewarding loyalty sounds a good idea as it fits in with the framework for fans in having rider continuity over time but ideas cant be viewed in isolation so we need a workable framework first (some ideas may work for one group but not for another - fans may want weekly speedway for £1 per meeting but riders want to be paid and clubs want to make money so there will always be an element of compromise with some proposals)

[iris123]

From a club position - only UK based riders could be contracted (obviously this would allow overseas riders to come over and then be based here for the season but not flying in on a meeting by meeting basis)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

How would that be viable?.I mean how would you compensate riders for loss of sponsorship?If you look most foreign riders have foreign sponsors.Not only Nicki Pedersen,but riders below that like Mads Korneliussen,Kenneth Bjerre,Henning Bager,Kenneth Hansen.During the winter the riders had a big shock when they thought the Danish Superliga had been scrapped.The chances were,without a "top" league they would be losing their sponsors.If you sign a foreign rider and then tell him he must be based in the UK and have no other foreign league commitments how do you compensate him for the loss? Then how do you think the foreign clubs and federations will take to losing their top riders(i guess you only want foreign riders of a certain level)for the season?They might find themselves not picked for prestigious International meetings,and further drain their bank balance

[Kevin Meynell]

I mean how would you compensate riders for loss of sponsorship?

 

Many of the problems in the sport is caused by trying to keep the riders happy, rather than what's good for the sport. It's all very well riders claiming they have to ride in four leagues or whatever to make it pay, but it's ultimately undermining the whole structure.

 

Ideally, it would be better if the main leagues (Britain, Poland, Sweden and Denmark) could come to some sort of agreement to coordinate their competitions, so that there wasn't the issue of fixture clashes and rider burn-out. However, the major leagues seem to think they can go it alone, and are essentially in competition with one another (even though there's no reason why they should be). Therefore, the BEL must either decide to do what's best for itself, or ultimately slowly go out of business.

 

If you sign a foreign rider and then tell him he must be based in the UK and have no other foreign league commitments how do you compensate him for the loss?

 

You work out what British speedway can afford (and sustain) and then make the riders an appropriate offer which they can take or leave. If you don't get enough riders wanting to ride in your league full-time, then you need to consider making it semi-professional or whatever.

 

I realise this sounds rather brutal, but I'm afraid that British speedway really needs to take control of its future. It still offers fairly good money and a lot of meetings, and if Polish teams can ban their riders from competing abroad, then I don't see why British speedway shouldn't be thinking along the same lines.

Edited May 16, 2007 by Kevin Meynell

[Kevin Meynell]

I was hoping this thread could be more about what the sport would/should look like

 

Well, I could give you the 'blue sky' vision, or the more mundane vision which I've already offered. Unfortunately, the 'blue sky' vision would require the cooperation of several groups across several countries, so I suspect it'll never happen.

 

Firstly, the major speedway leagues (Britain, Poland, Sweden and Denmark) should form a G14-type organisation (let's call it S14), to coordinate their national league competitions, agree which riders should ride where, and act as an powerful interest group to counterbalance the FIM. Eventually though, it should move towards being an organisation that runs its own competitions.

 

The top teams in each country should eventually move towards forming a 12-16 team European League (run by 'S14'), in which the top riders should compete exclusively. This could either take the form of a monolithic league, or a conference-type system based on the existing national leagues but with international fixtures.

 

It might be possible for 'S14' to peacefully co-exist within the FIM, but it should look to taking control of the SGP which would be run for the benefit of its member tracks, not a private company. If ways could not be found for the FIM to handover the rights under its own banner, then 'S14' should breakaway from the FIM and establish its own GP series and World Cup. Without any of the top riders, the 'official' SGP and SWC would soon cease to be viable.

 

With respect to Britain, the remaining tracks should be organised into a couple of leagues of (say) 12-14 teams each. Without the four or five 'big' tracks from the BEL, the remaining teams might join with the top BPL teams to form a more financially viable (for the BEL teams) Division 1, perhaps pitched slightly higher than the current BPL. The rest of the BPL teams plus the standalone BCL teams might then form a Division 2 pitched around a similar standard to the current BCL.

 

With respect to things that might improve the spectacle of the sport, priority must be given to reducing rainoffs. I've long thought that roofs that cover both the terraces and the track, but which leave the centre green uncovered, are the way forward in terms of spectator comfort and preventing rainoffs. The speed skating stadiums used at places like Assen (where ice speedway is also held) provide ideal examples for this, and I don't think they're vastly expensive to construct (although still expensive for speedway).

 

Perhaps some consideration also needs to be given to developing electric or fuel-cell powered bikes. I realise a lot of traditionalists wouldn't like this, but in the days of noise and other environmental regulations, I think quieter, cleaner bikes definitely need to be investigated.

Edited May 16, 2007 by Kevin Meynell

[MARK246]

Good post Kevin,

The BEL should be reduced in size to maybe 8 teams and run on the same format as the Swedish elite league.It could be run on say, thursday night if the other main leagues took different nights you could then have your top stars available for all matches and run extra GPs as well.With more earning potential you can reduce wage bills too as the top men can ride 4 nights a week and a GP.

 

The PL could be used as a feeder or training scheme,but due to league set up currently in GB I dont see the promoters of successful clubs being happy to release star riders.Maybe a better way is to encourage dual teams, one in EL one in PL on the same track on alternative weeks.

 

The main problem with rain offs cant imo be solved until promoters become stadium owners so their investment can remain as an asset. At the moment any improvement is not in the lease holders interest as promoters only hire facilities.

 

Just a thought or two.

[Trackman]

Future. 3 topics on the Future? .. is that a new rule then?

Regards.

[Engine man]

An interesting thread - I 'll add a few comments and historical views.

 

 

Originally speedway started with one-off tracks where large numbers of spectators could be accommodated. (a successful format)

 

The continental longtrack/grasstrack meetings still operate on a similar basis with large crowds of paying spectators. UK grasstrack struggles with attendances (much less than the 1970's).

 

UK and especially Swedish Speedway started (like all motorbike sports) as an individual sport, but then prospered for many decades through the innovation of teams and leagues. Teams were a combination of a few top stars and mostly local lads (travel was much more difficult than it is now)

 

Tracks sprung up then (30's and 40's) with little problem of health and safety or town planning - (much more difficult now.)

 

The whole motorcycle sport paying audience has shrunk as new sports have been established in the UK and bike ownership has dropped. (although speedway doesn't have the usual bikesport audience - this is a finding of one consultant's report)

 

Having talked at length with one fairly successful elite league promoter, speedway makes less money for him than stockcars, because "the riders have to be paid" (and audience is smaller).

 

NOt exactly a SWOT analysis I know - but I suspect BSI did that when setting up the SGP series - incidentally I also spoke at length to a rival bidder for that event. He might have some ideas.

 

The involvement of another organisation taking over the SGP series is adding more confusion. But the fact is BSI drew riders and spectators in through two things - a credible World Championship event, and creating publicity opportunities leading to sponsorship. True- they relied on having the leagues developing riders and providing bread-and-butter income for them - and that was smart thinking. Can some canny league promoters perform a similar business success? I can think only one or two I'd put my money on.

[MACK1]

Whilst we know how short-term thinking has damaged the sport, the reality is that most tracks undoubtedly struggle from season-to-season. They cannot afford to think about what will happen in 5 or 10 years because they might not even last through the following season.

 

I have to say that I'm not a great fan of long-term strategic approaches, as I'm more a here-and-now person. I'd start with making incremental changes that are unlikely to have an adverse effect in the short-term, but which have the chance of improving things over a longer period.

Speedway is a business and like all businesses has to consolidate,improve and move forward.Unfortunately it is not doing this.The way forward is to appoint a small independent controlling body.3 people max.Obviously these people have to be of the right calibre to do the job.Will it happen? I doubt it.

[Humphrey Appleby]

But the fact is BSI drew riders and spectators in through two things - a credible World Championship event, and creating publicity opportunities leading to sponsorship.

 

Running a handful of events at the highest level of any sport is totally uncomparable with running sport on a week-to-week basis, particularly if you don't have to pay a living wage to the competitors. I still think BSI don't do such a great job given their privileged position, and only look good because the rest of the sport is so shambolic. Their big success was to secure television coverage, but beyond that I don't think the sport has advanced greatly under their stewardship.

 

[Jeff.]

Running a handful of events at the highest level of any sport is totally uncomparable with running sport on a week-to-week basis, particularly if you don't have to pay a living wage to the competitors. I still think BSI don't do such a great job given their privileged position, and only look good because the rest of the sport is so shambolic. Their big success was to secure television coverage, but beyond that I don't think the sport has advanced greatly under their stewardship.

 

Pre BSI, (pre GP system) world finals were held in fields (Norden, Pocking) with a few edited highlights shown a week later.

 

The GP system was the catalyst to SKY TVs coverage of the Elite League, and the 3 hour Saturday Night GP programme gave each club prime time advertising FOC.

 

It is not the fault of BSI that the british promoters chose to fight the GP system, King Canute style, rather than grow their product on the back of it.