Scunthorpe Saints - Not Entering N L 2013 :(

[montie]

 

 

What Scunthorpe fans need to remember is that there was an NL/CL producing riders before they came along, and there will be an NL/CL producing riders after they leave. That goes for any club at this level. Talent and determination will always shine through. The question is, do they want to be a part of that process?

 

What Stoke fans need to remember is that they would have be screwed without Scunnys NL work this year,One bright spark you had was Birks,and then you cant even pay him..........The NL has been such a success for Stoke hasnt it

 

It matter not who is in the league,who develops the riders, or who pays what,crux of the matter is the league is dying....slowly yet most are so blind they cant see it a plod along doing the same

 

There is a place for Dudleys ,the FenTigers and the likes of Buxton,Lynn and i hope Scunny,but there has to be compromise in what the league is about

[June]

Vog, Nothing to do with the fans!!.......N/L C/L producing riders before Scunny come along. I'll not argue with that, up to a point, BUT where were most promoters in the dead cold of winter on Sats and Suns whilst Rob, Richard Stuart and their gang of helpers were freezing, working their socks off clearing water, frost, snow, burst pipes etc. Flag men on the centre court being blown to bits and freezing to the bone, to a point I felt sorry for them. all so that the youngsters could get out on track in practice/ AM meetings. Rob made it clear that the youngsters in the Saints team last year were on a 2 year course. and would hopefully be ready for prem in 2014. So why do some team promoters think that they have the god given right to poach our team riders. Surely promoters Could/should have a gentlemans agreement to honour each others plans. Robs motto of laps and more laps for trainees has worked. I for one want to see more british riders come through the ranks. without Scunny with its 24/7 track time I fear the amount of british kids coming through may reduce. Looking on the bright side. Our Prem team are the Champions! COME ON SCORPS, LETS DO IT AGAIN!

[Halifaxtiger]

HT, there's no doubt of the strength of the 2007 Scunthorpe Scorpions. However, they were not the biggest payers in the league, and the riders were not "poached" from other teams, as Ben Hopwood was from Oxford by a south-western team. The strength of the Scunny side merely took advantage of the low grades given to younger riders at that point.

 

You're implying there's a big double standard here. If so, please could you name the rider who Scunthorpe pinched off another club in either 2006 or 2007. Thanks.

 

All the best

Rob

 

I am certainly unaware that Scunny have poached riders from other clubs but do know that that has happened to them before. Personally, I agree with Malcolm's view on the subject but the BSPA/SCB hardly condemn the practice and indeed some might say they condone it. I don't think it matters if it is a 15 year old novice or an established international that is tapped up and if memory serves me correctly that is precisely what happened in the Miedzinski case earlier in the season. Not only were Poole not punished, they were actively found to be in the right.

 

Tapping up, though, isn't my point here. I have listed below a couple of quotes you have made earlier in this thread and presume they are reflective of the Scunthorpe promotions view:

 

'The National League is a training league. If each team is bringing in two new 3.00 riders each season, the points limit is about right, although I'd like to see it reduced to 36 or 38.

 

Where things go wrong is when clubs start to push up the costs to going all-out to win.

 

The National League is first and foremost a training ground. Any team success is just a bonus'.

 

Accepting for a moment that team strengths at the time were based upon averages not gradings, what I am asking myself is whether the Scunthorpe promotion would have advocated such a position at the start of 2006 or 2007, or would they have supported or endorsed it if it had been made by another club ?. Would they have agreed that their young, capable and attractive team could have been torn apart due to the points limit, or that they could not introduce PL riders when the strength of their team was reduced due to injury ? Would they have actively supported the position of Buxton or Sittingbourne that pay rates had to be the agreed NL ones and nothing above ?

 

I think its absolutely clear that in 2006 & 2007 they would have objected (possibly violently) to the position you have stated and therein lies the double standard. When it suits Scunny to have super strength teams, pay over NL rates and go all out to win, its acceptable. When it doesn't, it isn't.

 

National league professional....your having a laugh arnt you bwd???.the nl always was a training league...now it seems to be lacking any real purpose or direction.

 

Personally, and aside perhaps from the overall organisation, I think that the NL needs no lessons in professionalism from either the EL or PL and could teach them a thing or two.

 

What Scunthorpe fans need to remember is that there was an NL/CL producing riders before they came along, and there will be an NL/CL producing riders after they leave. That goes for any club at this level. Talent and determination will always shine through. The question is, do they want to be a part of that process?

 

Little harsh. Although Rob Godfrey did make a commitment to be in the NL for two years the circumstances of last summer had awful consequences for virtually every speedway team and if he is looking to cut costs the first thing is to protect core business and lose peripherals so I don't blame him if, on financial grounds, he chooses to not run NL.

 

It matter not who is in the league,who develops the riders, or who pays what,crux of the matter is the league is dying....slowly yet most are so blind they cant see it a plod along doing the same

 

There is a place for Dudleys ,the FenTigers and the likes of Buxton,Lynn and i hope Scunny,but there has to be compromise in what the league is about

 

I don't think the league is dying. Although it is disappointing to see Scunny go, Coventry are replacing them nad Buxton are staying. Moreover, three new tracks (Cornwall, Bristol & Norwich) who have all intimated that they will run NL are in various stages of obtaining planning permission. A good summer might have seen the Saints continue.

 

Your last point is spot on. The thing is, though, in my experience Scunthorpe are the one side who don't seem to be interested.

Edited November 25, 2012 by Halifaxtiger

[Pete Greenwood]

Just one important point i would like to make is that because of the increasing costs in riding speedway we made a desision to look for a club nearer to home.It was Oliver and i who contacted Coventry Speedway about riding for thier N.L.Team in 2013,before that we had no contact from them .

I feel it is important for every one to understand that Coventry Speedway did not poach Oliver.

Oliver enjoyed his time at Scunny and made a lot of friends there and we would like to thank all of the people who gave us thier support.

 

Thanks,

Pete Greenwood.

[lucifer sam]

Tapping up, though, isn't my point here. I have listed below a couple of quotes you have made earlier in this thread and presume they are reflective of the Scunthorpe promotions view:

 

'The National League is a training league. If each team is bringing in two new 3.00 riders each season, the points limit is about right, although I'd like to see it reduced to 36 or 38.

 

Where things go wrong is when clubs start to push up the costs to going all-out to win.

 

The National League is first and foremost a training ground. Any team success is just a bonus'.

 

Accepting for a moment that team strengths at the time were based upon averages not gradings, what I am asking myself is whether the Scunthorpe promotion would have advocated such a position at the start of 2006 or 2007, or would they have supported or endorsed it if it had been made by another club ?. Would they have agreed that their young, capable and attractive team could have been torn apart due to the points limit, or that they could not introduce PL riders when the strength of their team was reduced due to injury ? Would they have actively supported the position of Buxton or Sittingbourne that pay rates had to be the agreed NL ones and nothing above ?

 

I think its absolutely clear that in 2006 & 2007 they would have objected (possibly violently) to the position you have stated and therein lies the double standard. When it suits Scunny to have super strength teams, pay over NL rates and go all out to win, its acceptable. When it doesn't, it isn't.

 

HT, I see. But you made a big assumption that my views were those of the Scunthorpe promotion. If that was the case, I would have said so.

 

The views of the Scunny promotion are those on the BSPA website / Scunthorpe website and there is nothing about team strengths on there.

 

As for the economic climate, well the whole country is in a different situation to 2006/2007. In case you hadn't noticed, we're in the middle of a great big recession. Scunny were never the biggest payers in the first place, but there's a good argument for the whole league to tighten its belts. Dudley and Mildenhall are probably OK, but to help the likes of Scunny, Buxton, King's Lynn and Rye House, a rigid pay structure would help. After all, for Dudley to thrive, ideally they also need the other teams in the league to be thriving as well. At the end,of the day, Dudley are always going to end up as one of the strongest teams in the league, and this isn't a problem - and the amount of away supporters they take is a boost to other tracks. Dudley and their vocal and large support are a good thing for the National League.

 

But the situation where the standalone teams can pick from the cream of those riding for the second teams needs to stop, or otherwise the second teams simply won't bother to run, because you're taking away their main purpose - to develop riders for the senior team. You have to remember that any club running two teams is currently taking a double-hit during the recession - so there needs to be good reasons to continue running two different teams. The National League membership has shrunk in recent seasons from 13 in 2003/2004 to just 8 in 2012, largely due to the disappearance of most of the second teams.

 

The National League has always been a compromise between teams with different agendas, but currently that balance is not quite right. Good luck to all the teams running in the National League next season, but I do wonder if measures are still needed to ensure the long-term survival of what is a crucial league to British Speedway, as it is the training ground to the leagues above.

 

And these views are my own.

 

All the best

Rob

Edited November 25, 2012 by lucifer sam

[villiers210]

 

 

HT, I see. But you made a big assumption that my views were those of the Scunthorpe promotion. If that was the case, I would have said so.

 

The views of the Scunny promotion are those on the BSPA website / Scunthorpe website and there is nothing about team strengths on there.

 

As for the economic climate, well the whole country is in a different situation to 2006/2007. In case you hadn't noticed, we're in the middle of a great big recession. Scunny were never the biggest payers in the first place, but there's a good argument for the whole league to tighten its belts. Dudley and Mildenhall are probably OK, but to help the likes of Scunny, Buxton, King's Lynn and Rye House, a rigid pay structure would help. After all, for Dudley to thrive, ideally they also need the other teams in the league to be thriving as well. At the end,of the day, Dudley are always going to end up as one of the strongest teams in the league, and this isn't a problem - and the amount of away supporters they take is a boost to other tracks. Dudley and their vocal and large support are a good thing for the National League.

 

But the situation where the standalone teams can pick from the cream of those riding for the second teams needs to stop, or otherwise the second teams simply won't bother to run, because you're taking away their main purpose - to develop riders for the senior team. You have to remember that any club running two teams is currently taking a double-hit during the recession - so there needs to be good reasons to continue running two different teams. The National League membership has shrunk in recent seasons from 13 in 2003/2004 to just 8 in 2012, largely due to the disappearance of most of the second teams.

 

The National League has always been a compromise between teams with different agendas, but currently that balance is not quite right. Good luck to all the teams running in the National League next season, but I do wonder if measures are still needed to ensure the long-term survival of what is a crucial league to British Speedway, as it is the training ground to the leagues above.

 

And these views are my own.

 

All the best

Rob

I really don't get your argument. Who exactly are you accusing of creaming off the riders from the "second teams" ?

[norwichkev]

Rob,

 

Can understand where you are coming from but not convinced that rigid pay terms would fix anything.

 

If he who pays most wins that has to be even more prevalent as you move up the leagues, are you suggesting e.g Scunthorpe pay the highest rates in the PL? If allegedly Dudley are the big bad boys in paying OTT what did they win last year? so hardly worked there.

 

The clubs with second teams surely should have the advantage as they have the carrot to move NL riders up into the main teams, give them extra rides after the PL meetings etc - most standalone tracks do not have either of those facilities.

 

Is not one of the real reasons that in these financially difficult times supporters of the 2 tier clubs cannot afford to support both sides - possibly more double headers with these clubs could be the answer? would spread the cost across a wider support base and also bring in the traveling fans at a higher price.

 

Can NL riders now be contracted to a club? If not why not - that would stop this so called tapping up or there would be a financial implication. How many of last years Scunny NL side were contracted? if none then a) why could a rider not move if he so chooses and what long term were Scunny offering the riders.

 

Also reading the thread suggesting that Swindon were looking for one of their riders to get more experience on bigger tracks, riders surely have to take that into account as they develop.

 

NL is a good product and produced some cracking racing last year, it should be no different in structure to the rest of the leagues - NL should be a feeder to the PL and the PL should be a feeder to the EL - until the sport puts it right at the top it will never produce a grounding for British riders.

 

Kev

[Albert]

Robs answered some of the questions.. http://scunthorperac...splay&thread=83

 

We've been here before..Scunny can give riders free use of the track..practice sessions, amateur meets, second halfs etc... develop them the correct way. In Max and Olivers case, they're both 'on the up' solid NL standard riders with great potential. I can understand riders wanting to ride for their local track, no problem with that...but to throw these development opportunities away (particularly at their current stage of development), to me smacks of bad timing and disrespect....they were on a good progression course, why ruin it? I only hope for their sake they get similar opportunities elsewhere and that they can still progress at the rate they were doing. Scunny have a proud record of bringing young brits up to premier league level and beyond...these two lads were on course to achieve just that. I'll watch with interest to see how these two get on now. Others riders have taken a similar route and not done too bad (Howarth and Ashley Morris spring to mind)...possibly they'd be much better riders had they stayed at Scunny another season, that we'll never know ?

 

But these are difficult times... if riders get offered the money, they gotta consider it. Sadly Loyalty is the loser.

 

Speedway is also going through difficult times, promoters, management, riders and fans need to work together to get us out of this mess....sadly it seems that certain agents/promoters are still going behind backs, tapping up, whilst destroying the time and effort other clubs have put into a riders development. Sad....Its also sad (but understandable) why Scunny feel the need to pull the plug on NL next season.

Edited November 25, 2012 by Albert

[vog]

Little harsh. Although Rob Godfrey did make a commitment to be in the NL for two years the circumstances of last summer had awful consequences for virtually every speedway team and if he is looking to cut costs the first thing is to protect core business and lose peripherals so I don't blame him if, on financial grounds, he chooses to not run NL.

 

Maybe it was, but I'm fed up of Scunthorpe fans who seem to preach like they are the saviours of British Speedway. The NL is it's own league. If it was just to develop riders, we wouldn't keep score. Having seen riders grow up on one track, often it is better for the rider to go to another track early in their career to learn a different style, or they end up becoming fantastic on one track (A problem that Sheffield always had) Surely Scunthorpe's overall aim is to have riders move into their PL team. If they have a rider who has only cut his teeth at Scunthorpe, they often won't be as well rounded a rider, and will need to learn away tracks pretty quickly, whereas a season at, for example, Dudley (Using Monmore's tight confines) can actually make them a better rider, which would benefit Scunthorpe in the long run.

 

The simple fact is that there are more teams in the NL who want to win it than there are teams who want to develop riders for their senior team (I include Buxton as a team who want to win it, as I'm sure they would love to again!) Riders don't develop when they ride against people at the same level, they develop when they learn from people at a higher level. If every team were only out to develop new riders, it would probably have a negative effect, as these riders coming through would never be able to test themselves against the top riders in the division.

[Lewis]

I think you are being very harsh there VOG, Scunny are not the saviours of any league and I certainly have never said that but youve nicely put us all into your view of the world. The simple fact is that Rob G had his riders poached a couple of years ago & then it has happened again, before some of them became assets due to their age & before some of them where able to be blooded into the PL team. A lot of time & effort has been put in to give these guys track time & a lot of time put in by the riders themelves. For a team then to just offer more point money to get the riders without Scunthorpe being compensated is quite ridiculous & I can fully understand why Rob has pulled out this year, to be honest as long as this situation stands I dont think you will see Scunny back in the NL ever again, I could be wrong on that but I could understand it.

 

Scunthorpe have actively allowed there riders to go to other teams to experience other tracks, this has often been arranged by the Scunny management & sometimes by the riders first, this is often without a loan fee expecially when the riders have moved into PL for the first season e.g Richie Worrall springs to mind. I am convinced if Ashley Morris had stayed at Scunny when he was poached a couple of years back he would already be a strong 2nd string like Birks, instead he is a 3 pt reserve for Worky, okay I think he will push on now but is 1-2 years behind Birks. So the short term points money increase he gained in the NL is blown away by the money he has potentially lost being a 2nd string in the PL.

 

There is a need for both Standalone teams & 2nd teams in the NL, if it was all "win at all costs" or "training only" it couldnt survive but the 2nd teams need some protection from poaching from some of the standalones or from EL teams with plenty of money to burn e.g. Coventry. Scunny fielded a NL team for the future riders in the PL team or to sell on/ loan, if they dont get either then there is no point.

 

Good luck to the teams running next year, I wish you every success but I do think the NL is a weaker product without Scunthorpe.

[Halifaxtiger]

HT, I see. But you made a big assumption that my views were those of the Scunthorpe promotion. If that was the case, I would have said so.

 

The views of the Scunny promotion are those on the BSPA website / Scunthorpe website and there is nothing about team strengths on there.

 

As for the economic climate, well the whole country is in a different situation to 2006/2007. In case you hadn't noticed, we're in the middle of a great big recession. Scunny were never the biggest payers in the first place, but there's a good argument for the whole league to tighten its belts. Dudley and Mildenhall are probably OK, but to help the likes of Scunny, Buxton, King's Lynn and Rye House, a rigid pay structure would help. After all, for Dudley to thrive, ideally they also need the other teams in the league to be thriving as well. At the end,of the day, Dudley are always going to end up as one of the strongest teams in the league, and this isn't a problem - and the amount of away supporters they take is a boost to other tracks. Dudley and their vocal and large support are a good thing for the National League.

 

But the situation where the standalone teams can pick from the cream of those riding for the second teams needs to stop, or otherwise the second teams simply won't bother to run, because you're taking away their main purpose - to develop riders for the senior team. You have to remember that any club running two teams is currently taking a double-hit during the recession - so there needs to be good reasons to continue running two different teams. The National League membership has shrunk in recent seasons from 13 in 2003/2004 to just 8 in 2012, largely due to the disappearance of most of the second teams.

 

The National League has always been a compromise between teams with different agendas, but currently that balance is not quite right. Good luck to all the teams running in the National League next season, but I do wonder if measures are still needed to ensure the long-term survival of what is a crucial league to British Speedway, as it is the training ground to the leagues above.

 

And these views are my own.

 

All the best

Rob

 

Forgive the assumption, but your view is almost identical to that stated by the Scunthorpe promotion in the past.

 

I have no difficulty with a more rigid pay structure, I am just not sure how it might be policed.

 

I can very much see your point on tapping up, but other than having punitive fines for those that make illegal approaches (ie without the permission of the parent club) I really don't see how you can stop other clubs poaching assets. At the end of the day in most cases the rider will leave.

 

I would have hoped that loyalty and gratitude for the time and facilities given would count for a bit more; sadly not.

 

 

 

 

Good luck to the teams running next year, I wish you every success but I do think the NL is a weaker product without Scunthorpe.

 

I don't think its a weaker product but certainly the more clubs the better. The Saints will definitely be missed.

[Pete Greenwood]

Robs answered some of the questions.. http://scunthorperac...splay&thread=83

 

We've been here before..Scunny can give riders free use of the track..practice sessions, amateur meets, second halfs etc... develop them the correct way. In Max and Olivers case, they're both 'on the up' solid NL standard riders with great potential. I can understand riders wanting to ride for their local track, no problem with that...but to throw these development opportunities away (particularly at their current stage of development), to me smacks of bad timing and disrespect....they were on a good progression course, why ruin it? I only hope for their sake they get similar opportunities elsewhere and that they can still progress at the rate they were doing. Scunny have a proud record of bringing young brits up to premier league level and beyond...these two lads were on course to achieve just that. I'll watch with interest to see how these two get on now. Others riders have taken a similar route and not done too bad (Howarth and Ashley Morris spring to mind)...possibly they'd be much better riders now had they stayed at Scunny another season, that we'll never know ?

 

But these are difficult times... riders get offered the money, they gotta consider it. Sadly Loyalty is the loser.

 

Speedway is also going through difficult times, promoters, management, riders and fans need to work together to get us out of this mess....sadly it seems that certain agents/promoters are still going behind backs, tapping up and taking away the time and effort others clubs have put into rider development. Sad....Its also sad (but understandable) why Scunny feel the need to pull the plug on NL next season.

I would like to put the record straight with regard to Oliver’s move to Coventry. It was my decision to contact Coventry and ask that they consider Oliver for a place in their 2013 NL team, The only time Coventry contacted myself or Oliver was after they had spoken to Rob at the AGM a couple of weeks ago and agreed a deal. We can all put 2 and 2 together but in this case it made 3 .Oliver was very happy at Scunny this season, made a lot of friends and is thankful for the help he was given . However there were reasons beyond his control of which I will not go into on this forum .So to sum up Oliver was not poached.

Regards

Pete Greenwood

[vog]

I don't think its a weaker product but certainly the more clubs the better. The Saints will definitely be missed.

 

One could argue that it is, currently, the same strength product, as you have lost one developmental minded team from last season and replaced them with another. Granted, the top riders will leave the league, but that is the nature of the NL.

[TMW]

I would have hoped that loyalty and gratitude for the time and facilities given would count for a bit more; sadly not.

 

.

 

On the plus side not all riders are the same. I'd put money on Ellis being 'tapped' but he appears to have signed for the I.O.W who I don't imagine pay megabucks. I'd like to think that gratitude and loyalty played a part there but I maybe wrong.

Edited November 25, 2012 by TMW

[Jonny the spud]

Adam wasn't at all "tapped". He had periods in the UK, all of which involved 2500km round trips from home and tried to squeeze in as many second halves as possible. Lots of offers were made and he chose the IOW because he liked the set up and the people. He's only 16 and will be living away from home which is a big gamble, but the island is close to where he's being based and falls in nicely within the area of his biggest help/mentor Matt Read. It certainly wasn't money driven as he was offered more to ride elsewhere. More a question of trying to get the right help in terms of starting out and getting the right people to start a career. It's a big gamble for one so young being so far away from home !

[21st century heathen]

I have just approved a very important post (#93) in this debate. I urge everyone to read it please.

 

--------------------------------------------

 

There is one thing that I think predominantly the Scunny fans here are missing. The club does do a fantastic job in giving opportunity to young riders, of that there is no doubt. But if some of those riders did not move on to other teams the whole process would grind to a halt. You can't bring in new riders every year, or two years, if some are not moving on. There's only 7 places (8 really but that seems to be ignored by most - including Heathens) available. It's unlikely many will go from 3-point reserve to PL only in just a year or two so those riders have to be accommodated somewhere, hopefully with a view to improving and coming back to you as a more rounded rider in the PL team. The statement on the Heathens website gives the impression that Clegg has not been signed on full transfer. It's likely that Heathens will go PL next season as it's the last year in the 5 year plan to acquire a piece of land for our own track. Next season is likely to be an all-or-nothing last ditch effort. With that in mind Clegg is almost certain to return to Scuuny I'd have thought. A year away for a rider is hardly something new for any club. A lot of our fans are moaning about Ritchings and Perry being made available to other clubs. If Ritchings improves with a year away on a bigger track and Clegg improves with a year away on smaller track then that will have proven to be the best thing for both riders. Ultimately what we all want is to see all the Brits improve and move on to the PL. Perhaps in a couple of years time we'll see Scunny v Heathens in the PL with Clegg and Ritchings back 'home' where they belong.

 

With regard to the ongoing debate, or is that accusation , that the Heathens are the big hitters when it comes to handing out points money - I wouldn't be so sure that's necessarily the big draw. Last season Ritchings was in desperate need of a new engine after some problems and Morris had an engine to sell. When the management team became aware of it they were reluctant to help with the cost because of these accusations of splashing the cash. When the fans found out a collection was quickly arranged and hundreds pledged quickly. A fans collection is regularly held and a total of many hundreds/thousands is given to riders over the course of a season, and that's without some individuals offering private sponsorship to a greater or lesser extent to a rider. Dwyer, for example, was given £70/£80 when he guested for us after a collection was held on the coach. He most certainly isn't the only one. I know one rider that came to the Heathens was speechless that fans were offering him money before a wheel had been turned. One of our riders was offered private sponsorship for the cost of tyres. I'm not suggesting for one minute that the Heathens fans are the only ones to do this, far from it. I'm quite sure fans at every club do but with a large fan base it adds up quite a sum. Riding in front of a large crowd is also a draw to many a young rider. Also, there's a rumour going around that a rider the Heathens had shown interest in has been offered a bike to go elsewhere, something that the Heathens were not prepared to match/better. So is it the club's or fans' generosity that a draw to some riders?

 

Just as a foot note - I feel Morris is a poor example of a good point. He came on loan to the Heathens when he was still 15 and was signed by CVS as soon as he turned 16. He's just signed on for his fourth season with the Heathens, and of course he is from Wolverhampton so riding locally is not a great surprise. Of course the time he got at Scunny was a vital part of his early development but the Heathens have more than played a part in his development as a rider since then.

 

Greenwood had some experience previously but he's come back to the sport with the Heathens and there is talk of trying to make him a full asset with a view to the future.

 

Ritchings was our number 8 at 15 and has had the last two seasons with the club. He may have had a few meetings previously but it's the Heathens that have given him a team place.

 

Perry has developed into the rider that finished second in the averages from a new-comer to speedway in 3 years with the Heathens.

 

So, some of the comments about developing young riders is a little unfair. The Heathens have done what they can with what they've got. For me the dream would be a track./stadium of our own with EL and NL teams.

 

I'm sure I'll get shot down but a few points to ponder.

[Halifaxtiger]

I have just approved a very important post (#93) in this debate. I urge everyone to read it please.

 

--------------------------------------------

 

There is one thing that I think predominantly the Scunny fans here are missing. The club does do a fantastic job in giving opportunity to young riders, of that there is no doubt. But if some of those riders did not move on to other teams the whole process would grind to a halt. You can't bring in new riders every year, or two years, if some are not moving on. There's only 7 places (8 really but that seems to be ignored by most - including Heathens) available. It's unlikely many will go from 3-point reserve to PL only in just a year or two so those riders have to be accommodated somewhere, hopefully with a view to improving and coming back to you as a more rounded rider in the PL team. The statement on the Heathens website gives the impression that Clegg has not been signed on full transfer. It's likely that Heathens will go PL next season as it's the last year in the 5 year plan to acquire a piece of land for our own track. Next season is likely to be an all-or-nothing last ditch effort. With that in mind Clegg is almost certain to return to Scuuny I'd have thought. A year away for a rider is hardly something new for any club. A lot of our fans are moaning about Ritchings and Perry being made available to other clubs. If Ritchings improves with a year away on a bigger track and Clegg improves with a year away on smaller track then that will have proven to be the best thing for both riders. Ultimately what we all want is to see all the Brits improve and move on to the PL. Perhaps in a couple of years time we'll see Scunny v Heathens in the PL with Clegg and Ritchings back 'home' where they belong.

 

With regard to the ongoing debate, or is that accusation , that the Heathens are the big hitters when it comes to handing out points money - I wouldn't be so sure that's necessarily the big draw. Last season Ritchings was in desperate need of a new engine after some problems and Morris had an engine to sell. When the management team became aware of it they were reluctant to help with the cost because of these accusations of splashing the cash. When the fans found out a collection was quickly arranged and hundreds pledged quickly. A fans collection is regularly held and a total of many hundreds/thousands is given to riders over the course of a season, and that's without some individuals offering private sponsorship to a greater or lesser extent to a rider. Dwyer, for example, was given £70/£80 when he guested for us after a collection was held on the coach. He most certainly isn't the only one. I know one rider that came to the Heathens was speechless that fans were offering him money before a wheel had been turned. One of our riders was offered private sponsorship for the cost of tyres. I'm not suggesting for one minute that the Heathens fans are the only ones to do this, far from it. I'm quite sure fans at every club do but with a large fan base it adds up quite a sum. Riding in front of a large crowd is also a draw to many a young rider. Also, there's a rumour going around that a rider the Heathens had shown interest in has been offered a bike to go elsewhere, something that the Heathens were not prepared to match/better. So is it the club's or fans' generosity that a draw to some riders?

 

Just as a foot note - I feel Morris is a poor example of a good point. He came on loan to the Heathens when he was still 15 and was signed by CVS as soon as he turned 16. He's just signed on for his fourth season with the Heathens, and of course he is from Wolverhampton so riding locally is not a great surprise. Of course the time he got at Scunny was a vital part of his early development but the Heathens have more than played a part in his development as a rider since then.

 

Greenwood had some experience previously but he's come back to the sport with the Heathens and there is talk of trying to make him a full asset with a view to the future.

 

Ritchings was our number 8 at 15 and has had the last two seasons with the club. He may have had a few meetings previously but it's the Heathens that have given him a team place.

 

Perry has developed into the rider that finished second in the averages from a new-comer to speedway in 3 years with the Heathens.

 

So, some of the comments about developing young riders is a little unfair. The Heathens have done what they can with what they've got. For me the dream would be a track./stadium of our own with EL and NL teams.

 

I'm sure I'll get shot down but a few points to ponder.

 

I agree with most of this although if you are offering twice the amount per point and twice the amount per mile that other clubs do that is undeniably likely to make you more attractive to riders. Its not all about that, but its a big part.

 

I would say, though, that if any club is found guilty of tapping up they should be fined to the extent that they would think very hard about doing it again.

[TMW]

I would like to put the record straight with regard to Oliver’s move to Coventry. It was my decision to contact Coventry and ask that they consider Oliver for a place in their 2013 NL team, The only time Coventry contacted myself or Oliver was after they had spoken to Rob at the AGM a couple of weeks ago and agreed a deal. We can all put 2 and 2 together but in this case it made 3 .Oliver was very happy at Scunny this season, made a lot of friends and is thankful for the help he was given . However there were reasons beyond his control of which I will not go into on this forum .So to sum up Oliver was not poached.

Regards

Pete Greenwood

 

Thank you for clearing that up.

 

I supose if you live close and have an association with Cov then had they have run a NL side there then that would have been where Olly started which is always a consideration.

Adam wasn't at all "tapped". He had periods in the UK, all of which involved 2500km round trips from home and tried to squeeze in as many second halves as possible. Lots of offers were made and he chose the IOW because he liked the set up and the people. He's only 16 and will be living away from home which is a big gamble, but the island is close to where he's being based and falls in nicely within the area of his biggest help/mentor Matt Read. It certainly wasn't money driven as he was offered more to ride elsewhere. More a question of trying to get the right help in terms of starting out and getting the right people to start a career. It's a big gamble for one so young being so far away from home !

 

Being contacted and offered more money to ride is my defifnition of being tapped but Adam clearly chose not to

Edited November 26, 2012 by TMW

[Jonny the spud]

So just how are you supposed to get a team ace when you live 1200kms away ? My definition if being tapped up is when one club has nurtured a rider only for another to come along and take advantage. In Adams case he'd spent thousands of euros and a lot if the summer travelling to tracks to show what he could do. When you're a free agent I can't see how clubs coming to you to offer team places can be counted as tapping up

[21st century heathen]

I agree with most of this although if you are offering twice the amount per point and twice the amount per mile that other clubs do that is undeniably likely to make you more attractive to riders. Its not all about that, but its a big part.

 

I would say, though, that if any club is found guilty of tapping up they should be fined to the extent that they would think very hard about doing it again.

 

On the first point - I'm not going to make a statement of fact on it as I don't have the facts. So please don't think I don't believe you - I just don't know. There are two aspects to it and I can see both sides of it. One side is that costs need to be controlled but paying out 'x' is not going to buy you the title. You have to win it on track. The other side is that if a club can afford to pay more to its riders then should it be allowed to. Ultimately we want riders to develop and improve. How often do people state young riders in other countries receive more sponsorship? If, for arguments sake, three NL clubs can afford to pay more then that's 21 Brits, mostly young riders making their way, being given a leg-up. I'm not sure I can settle on one side of the fence or the other as I really can see both sides of it.

 

With regard to 'tapping-up' I can make my feelings abundantly clear. It absolutely should not happen. I don't care which club it is, I will not change my stance on this. However, as we've seen it's very easy for accusations to be thrown around and a presumption of guilt to take hold. It's not necessarily the case and thanks should go to Pete Greenwood for signing up and putting the record straight with regard to his son and Coventry linking up next season. There has to be a process that proves beyond any doubt that a club is guilty before we start talking about punishing any club. If Heathens were ever found guilty I would support any action that is within the rules. (I don't know if it's covered in the R&R off the top of my head)

 

Being contacted and offered more money to ride is my defifnition of being tapped but Adam clearly chose not to

 

It's really whether a club makes an approach without permission from the Promoter that 'owns' the rider rather than the offer that's made in itself. If a rider is made available, such as Ritchings or Perry, then a bidding war can follow. Of course if the rider is a free agent then it's a free-for-all to snap him up.