TeamBouchard Posted January 8, 2009 Report Share Posted January 8, 2009 Reference is always made to the "Shawcross Report" of 1964/5 when discussing the creation of the original British League in the mid-sixties. Has anyone ever seen a copy of the full report? I've often wondered what exactly it contained and just how bg a volume it was. I wonder if anyone out there is able to shed any light on the matter! Cheers! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
25yearfan Posted January 8, 2009 Report Share Posted January 8, 2009 The Shawcross report revolutionised speedway and was certainly more productive than the Beechings report which was also conducted around the same time! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHALEWAY69 Posted January 9, 2009 Report Share Posted January 9, 2009 Reference is always made to the "Shawcross Report" of 1964/5 when discussing the creation of the original British League in the mid-sixties. Has anyone ever seen a copy of the full report? I've often wondered what exactly it contained and just how bg a volume it was. I wonder if anyone out there is able to shed any light on the matter! Cheers! I would think that Reg Fearman may be able to advise on the availability of the Shawcross document. I have found no reference to it on the internet and it is possibly the most important doument in Speedway History. There must be a copy in the British library archives surely. Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted January 9, 2009 Report Share Posted January 9, 2009 I don't remember all the details, but this is more or less what happened. Wolverhampton won the Provincial League in 1963 and the Speedway Control Board tried to force them to move up to the National League (which was down to six teams). In 1964 the Provincial League ran "black" - outside of any control, other than its own.The ACU (or maybe it was even the RAC) appointed Lord Shawcross to chair an enquiry; that enquiry found that the SCB had acted unlawfully. The recommendation of the report was for a restructuring of the SCB and a combined league. The way things stand now as we enter 2009 I'm waiting to see how long it is before history repeats itself, at least in part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Humphrey Appleby Posted January 9, 2009 Report Share Posted January 9, 2009 (edited) The ACU (or maybe it was even the RAC) appointed Lord Shawcross to chair an enquiry; that enquiry found that the SCB had acted unlawfully. The recommendation of the report was for a restructuring of the SCB and a combined league. I've never been able to find a copy of the report, but Lord Shawcross was also the chief British prosecutor at the Nuremburg War Trials. I guess he never reached those heights again if he ended-up writing speedway reports! He actually only died about five years ago at the age of 101, having creating a bit of scandal by marrying his housekeeper at the age of 95. He lived in the same village as my partner's aunt who knew him in passing. Edited January 9, 2009 by Humphrey Appleby Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucifer sam Posted January 9, 2009 Report Share Posted January 9, 2009 (edited) He lived in the same village as my partner's aunt who knew him in passing. Humphrey - is this a late entry for the most obscure "claim to fame" thread that was running a couple of weeks ago. All the best Rob Edited January 9, 2009 by lucifer sam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHALEWAY69 Posted January 10, 2009 Report Share Posted January 10, 2009 I don't remember all the details, but this is more or less what happened. Wolverhampton won the Provincial League in 1963 and the Speedway Control Board tried to force them to move up to the National League (which was down to six teams). In 1964 the Provincial League ran "black" - outside of any control, other than its own.The ACU (or maybe it was even the RAC) appointed Lord Shawcross to chair an enquiry; that enquiry found that the SCB had acted unlawfully. The recommendation of the report was for a restructuring of the SCB and a combined league. The way things stand now as we enter 2009 I'm waiting to see how long it is before history repeats itself, at least in part. Following up on Ian's excellent posting, which clearly outlines the scenario, the report was commissioned by the RAC, it was originally due by 31/12/1964, in time for the annual promoters conference in January 1965. The promoters opted for one league prior to the report being released which was not until February 1965. By the time the report was handed down the promoters had already put into action the main recommendation. A copy made be found in the RAC LIBRARY AT 89 Pall mall London TONY Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DK Rides Again Posted January 11, 2009 Report Share Posted January 11, 2009 Following up on Ian's excellent posting, which clearly outlines the scenario, the report was commissioned by the RAC, it was originally due by 31/12/1964, in time for the annual promoters conference in January 1965. The promoters opted for one league prior to the report being released which was not until February 1965. By the time the report was handed down the promoters had already put into action the main recommendation. A copy made be found in the RAC LIBRARY AT 89 Pall mall London TONY So, do we assume that the promoters had a rare moment of clarity as regards to the long term future of the sport (and their bank balances) or, that the Shawcross report was deliberately delayed and leaked to the promoters in advance? Or, (more likely) I'm applying 21st century cynicism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iris123 Posted January 11, 2009 Report Share Posted January 11, 2009 So, do we assume that the promoters had a rare moment of clarity as regards to the long term future of the sport (and their bank balances) or, that the Shawcross report was deliberately delayed and leaked to the promoters in advance? Or, (more likely) I'm applying 21st century cynicism. My thoughts entirely DKRA.I find it hard to believe the promoters implemented the reports recomendations by coincidence Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyM Posted January 11, 2009 Report Share Posted January 11, 2009 The way things stand now as we enter 2009 I'm waiting to see how long it is before history repeats itself, at least in part. Would that we could have a Shawcross for the 21st Century to kick speedway up the proverbial. But neither the ACU nor speedway itself could afford such an esteemed barrister! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHALEWAY69 Posted January 11, 2009 Report Share Posted January 11, 2009 THere were 18 promters present at that meeting, there are only four who are still with us today. Len Silver, Ian Hoskins, Reg Fearman, and Wally Mawdsley are the survivors , it would be interesting to hear their feedback on how they came to make the decision before the report was tabled. although I guess it was the only path open to them. Fearless and McHoskins are no strangers to forum world so we might get a feed back The power structure of speedway has always been complex. If you recall the Australian who brought speedway to England in 1928, yes A J Hunting, threw his hands up in horror after 18 months and never returned to Englands shores again. That last statement should gain a reaction!! I left England in 1981, but I believe there was another inquiry in the mid eighties as result of some newspaper reports but I do not have any evidence. Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
25yearfan Posted January 11, 2009 Report Share Posted January 11, 2009 This winter the BSPA had the opportunity to do a similar thing! The top flight of Britsh speedway has to be made the mostattractive League to be in! The EL is on its knees mainly because of the low number of team 9! What should of happened was that 6 teams from the PL should of joined the 9 to make a 15 team EL. Any PL riders with an average 7 or over would of gone up as well. Only 1 2008 EL riders with an average 8 or over would be allowed in any 1 team! 1 GP rider per team! The The remaining 8 PL teams would of been joined by the IOW, Mildenhall, Plymouth and Weymouth making a 12 team set up. Any new team wishing to join one of the 2 top Leagues in the future would have to join the PL 1st! Only 1 2008 rider with an average 7 or over would be allowed per team. Prmotion between the EL and the PL could involve a play off situation involving the bottom 2 EL teams and the top 2 PL teams Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted January 12, 2009 Report Share Posted January 12, 2009 The top flight of Britsh speedway has to be made the mostattractive League to be in! The EL is on its knees mainly because of the low number of team 9! What should of happened was that 6 teams from the PL should of joined the 9 to make a 15 team EL. I'm not quite sure why the EL "has to be made the most attractive league to be in". Either it is or it isn't, and I'd suggest that right now it isn't. Why on earth should PL teams be obliged to move into a leage they don't want to be in just because the EL has got itself into a mess? There was something else that happened after the amalgamation in 1965 which no one has reffered to yet. The "star" riders were supposed to be shared around evenly between all competing tracks - I think there were eightee tracks. The former National League tracks were reluctant to release riders though. I'd imagine the same thing would happen again, and we'd be back into the old system of "rider control". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miro Posted January 12, 2009 Report Share Posted January 12, 2009 THere were 18 promters present at that meeting, there are only four who are still with us today. Len Silver, Ian Hoskins, Reg Fearman, and Wally Mawdsley are the survivors Who represented Oxford at that meeting? Was it the outgoing Cy Melville or the incoming Danny Dunton and Ted Flanagan? Dunton is still alive to the best of my knowledge, I've no idea if Melville is. I do know he held meetings with Parker about amalgamation in 1964 at the Eastgate hotel in Oxford High Street. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHALEWAY69 Posted January 14, 2009 Report Share Posted January 14, 2009 miro Danny Dunton is alive and well and lives in Berkshire I think Closer scrutiny of the information I have on the January 16 1965 promoters meeting at Poole, brings up some interesting facts Firstly my research is from reports in the Speedway Star 15 and 29 January 1965. My deduction from whom was present is from a photograph of the attendes. Absent from the photo , which has 17 promoters are are reps from Oxford, Ipswich, Rayleigh, Norwich Kings lynn, Weymouth, Middlebro and Eastbourne, all tracks that ran in the 1964 season. Reg Fearman represented 2 tracks and Mike Parker 4. there were 3 officials present Dave Stevens, Les Clarke and Eddie Glennon. Wether the missing reps had already left the meeting or never attended is one for debate . The criteria for attendance appears muddled because John Hoskins was there representing Cowdenbeath which had not opened at that tme, whilst new club Kings Lynn han no representation. The fact is the Shawcross report was not handed down till February 17. the RAC library has failed to find a copy although they do have 10 other records, so much for record keeping, but i must say that there libarian Trevor Duncombe was most helpful. . There are 2 books published on the history of the british league, Peter Morrish states the report was handed down in December 1964 , not true, Peter Oakes in his great book on the British league makes no mention at all about it's formation. In summary this lack of archive material makes it impossible to compile an accurate speedway history. I am given to understand that when Bryan Seery was manager of the BPA excellent records were kept, where they are now is anyones guess. maybe this is a mission for the speedway museum. Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star ghost Posted January 18, 2009 Report Share Posted January 18, 2009 Norwich Stars had already ceased to exist at the time of the Shawcross Report. Cyril Crane & Maurice Littlechild did not look into the possibility of Kings Lynn before thay had investigated a continuation in the Norwich area. Kings Lynn were then told they had to run a series of open meetings before getting in a League. I think this caused Cyril & Maurice to get quite heated as Crystal Palace got accepted later though they never had a track or had run any meetings Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DK Rides Again Posted January 18, 2009 Report Share Posted January 18, 2009 Norwich Stars had already ceased to exist at the time of the Shawcross Report. Cyril Crane & Maurice Littlechild did not look into the possibility of Kings Lynn before thay had investigated a continuation in the Norwich area. Kings Lynn were then told they had to run a series of open meetings before getting in a League. I think this caused Cyril & Maurice to get quite heated as Crystal Palace got accepted later though they never had a track or had run any meetings Crystal Palace????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted January 18, 2009 Report Share Posted January 18, 2009 Crystal Palace????? I don't think so either. Surely Crystal Palace was a pre-was track only? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DK Rides Again Posted January 18, 2009 Report Share Posted January 18, 2009 (edited) I don't think so either. Surely Crystal Palace was a pre-was track only? 1928 - 1940, as I'm sure Norbold can confirm, at length! Actually, at the time of the Shawcross report, CP Speedway stadium was under the National Sports Centre, so it would've been impossible to reopen. Edited January 18, 2009 by DK Rides Again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norbold Posted January 18, 2009 Report Share Posted January 18, 2009 1928 - 1940 on and off... But I think star ghost is correct. I believe they were looking at Selhurst Park as a possible speedway venue in 1964/5. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.