Nothing Changes

[bigcatdiary]

FROM my memory the dispute started because Coventry felt the goalposts were being moved after they had agreed a double spearhead of Andersen and Kaspzrak ... Harris had already been told he could go. Peterborough had signed and paid a big fee to Rye House for Lunus Sundstrom which they might not otherwise had done. Initially at least it certainly had nothing to do with Matt Ford. That particularly dispute between Matt and Allan Trump festered and grew but it wasn't the trigger.

 

And we had that wonderful blueprint for the future from Peter Adams suggesting we change the PL to EL conversion rate which by a strange coincidence mostly affected Peterborough (Sundstrom) and Coventry (Larsen).

 

 

 

There were lots of issues swirling around at that time. Stuart Douglas set out his position in an interview with SS in November 2010 but a number of clubs didn't want to listen to his ideas for stopping spiralling costs and the result is clubs now making bigger losses so we look like losing a lot of top riders in 2014 which is the very thing Duggo was trying to avoid if you read the article.

 

Also when Cook and Douglas were calling for an independent body in May 2010, 6 months before the AGM Trump and Frost never came out at that stage and said "Yeah, great idea", it was only when it suited their purpose they started on about it.

 

We can argue until the cows come home on the rights and wrongs of the winter of discontent, but nobody is going to change their opinion on it at this late stage. I am not saying that Cook, Douglas or anyone else is whiter than white. The issue that collectively the promoters have the sport in exactly the same position that two of their number were complaining about nearly 4 years ago.

 

There may or may not be reasons why their cannot be an independent body, but there is no reason why there should be the "wall of silence" from the SCB that was being complained about. This is what really annoys me. The SCB are the body delegated by the ACU to have authority over the sport. On vitually every issue the fans are treated with the "wall of silence". Nothing is every explained, nothing ever clarified.It leads to speculation, some it accurate, some not so accurate, and fans be kept in the dark are leaving the sport. It would cost no more money and no more effort for the SCB to be more forthcoming and it would do a lot of good, but it never happens. It just leads me to wonder, who is it at the SCB, or who has control over the SCB that is responsible for this wall of silence?

 

 

SCB Members - E Bartlett (Chairman); A Harkess; A F G Noel, G Thompson & C Van Straaten.

 

Anyone there ring any bells.

Edited October 2, 2013 by bigcatdiary

[BritPete]

And we had that wonderful blueprint for the future from Peter Adams suggesting we change the PL to EL conversion rate which by a strange coincidence mostly affected Peterborough (Sundstrom) and Coventry (Larsen).

 

Not to mention another rule that suddenly appeared, stating that no team could have more than one

eight point rider, affecting only Coventry, according to my memory, then,hey presto! that rule vanished the following season, thus allowing Ford to include terrible twins in his side. Just coincidence, i'm sure!

Edited October 2, 2013 by BritPete

[G the Bee]

And we had that wonderful blueprint for the future from Peter Adams suggesting we change the PL to EL conversion rate which by a strange coincidence mostly affected Peterborough (Sundstrom) and Coventry (Larsen).

 

And only, of course, after Wolves had benefited from the rule with Tai Woffinden and Poole had benefited from the rule with Chris Holder and Darcy Ward in the seasons leading up to it.

[LagutaRacingFan]

And only, of course, after Wolves had benefited from the rule with Tai Woffinden and Poole had benefited from the rule with Chris Holder and Darcy Ward in the seasons leading up to it.

 

And this after PK was sent to BV to "relax" his average and then end up at Wolves the season after on a low average.

[Bees_Man]

Couldn't make it up could you 😉

[E I Addio]

 

 

I agree.

 

They may have said that 3 years ago, but what have they done in the mean time ?

 

 

 

That is the point. We don't know what they have done because we are not old. We were told via Speedway Star that the Poole -v- Lakeside cancellation was going to be discussed by the SCB on 10th July and since then we have been told nothing. We have not even been told if that actually discussed it as planned or adjourned to another date. Then we have the Kings Lynn -v Peterborough appeal seeping out on the day of the Bellevue-v- Poole meeting and people are bound to think the worst. The whole thing gives the impression of being a big stitch-up and conspiracy. I am not saying it is a stitch-up but that's how it looks from a distance. The SCB could kill all this speculation by a few press releases on their website keeping the fans informed, and it is that lack of information, more than anything else that is sending the sport downhill.

[BWitcher]

Because they wanted a 45 point limit that would have pushed Belle Vue and Eastbourne out of the EL. Swindon and Poole were also in favour of a 45 point limit but they discussed it rationally without walking out and were bright enough to see the damage that would be done. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the situation walking out is not the way to do business. The root of it all was that animosity between Ford and Trump. They were washing their dirty linen in public well before the AGM and it was always going to blow up between them for one reason or another.

 

Bottom line is that in over three years nothing but nothing has changed apart from more fans leaving.

 

The way business was done was one promoter who wanted a 45 pt limit, but knew he had a great team lined up for a lower limit anyway, secured the support of the mug promoters who wanted the lower pts limit by agreeing to go with it. I'll give you a lower limit if you help me stitch up the evil team who beat us in the Playoff final.

 

Sadly the mug promoters went along with it and thus are completely to blame for the continued deterioration in the sport and the league.

[G the Bee]

Not to mention another rule that suddenly appeared, stating that no team could have more than one

eight point rider, affecting only Coventry, according to my memory, then,hey presto! that rule vanished the following season, thus allowing Ford to include terrible twins in his side. Just coincidence, i'm sure!

 

Then, of course, there was the changing of the rules regarding assessed averages for foreign riders. To ensure that Bees could not have tracked Shamek on an average of 4 (I think that was the figure it was previously).

 

As it stands, I felt that the rules regarding assessed averages and PL to EL conversions had needed looking into for some time. But it was oh so convenient to look into all of these rules in the year when certain clubs did not stand to benefit from them and one team, run by an owner whose face did not fit, did.

 

We all know that Coventry had assembled a team which would have made them dead-cert favourites to retain their EL title in 2011. Therefore it was pretty much in all the other clubs interests to weaken the Bees over the winter so that's what happened. Bees and Peterborough stood alone.

 

The annoying thing is that this was the third time, following a Bees team winning the league, major changes were made to the points limit so it's hardly surprising people sensed a conspiracy.

 

Now, three years on, and irrespective of whether people believe Coventry and Peterborough were right or wrong for making the stand they did, a few things to me are clear:

 

Speedway is still crying out to be run by an independent body with no vested interests

The sport is in a bigger mess now than it has ever been

Coventry, as a club, have never really recovered from those events in the winter of 2010/2011.

 

I wonder if, with the benefit of hindsight, whether certain promotions now wish they had stood alongside Bees and Panthers during the winter of discontent.

[kingbee]

FROM my memory the dispute started because Coventry felt the goalposts were being moved after they had agreed a double spearhead of Andersen and Kaspzrak ... Harris had already been told he could go. Peterborough had signed and paid a big fee to Rye House for Lunus Sundstrom which they might not otherwise had done. Initially at least it certainly had nothing to do with Matt Ford. That particularly dispute between Matt and Allan Trump festered and grew but it wasn't the trigger.

It also had something to do with the converted averages changing from prem league riders going into the elite ie Sundstrum to PB and Larson to Cov .The year before Ward had gone to Poole on a low average the they changed the percentage

[E I Addio]

 

 

The way business was done was one promoter who wanted a 45 pt limit, but knew he had a great team lined up for a lower limit anyway, secured the support of the mug promoters who wanted the lower pts limit by agreeing to go with it. I'll give you a lower limit if you help me stitch up the evil team who beat us in the Playoff final.

 

Sadly the mug promoters went along with it and thus are completely to blame for the continued deterioration in the sport and the league.

 

Belle Vue and Eastbourne said they would go under if they had to build to a 45 point limit so if that measure was passed they would have to leave the league. You call those clubs mug promoters but they know better than you how their income stacks up against their outgoings. You have only got to look at the crowds Eastbourne and BV were getting at that time to see they would have difficulty building with quality riders to 45 points. They struggled enough at 42.

 

Fair enough your opinion that its only those who sided against Cov and Peterborough are completely to blame, as you put it for the continued deterioration in the sport and the League but my view is that the SCB bear a massive responsibility as well. we will have to agree to differ on the SCB's culpability in all this.

[orion]

Belle Vue and Eastbourne said they would go under if they had to build to a 45 point limit so if that measure was passed they would have to leave the league. You call those clubs mug promoters but they know better than you how their income stacks up against their outgoings. You have only got to look at the crowds Eastbourne and BV were getting at that time to see they would have difficulty building with quality riders to 45 points. They struggled enough at 42.

 

Fair enough your opinion that its only those who sided against Cov and Peterborough are completely to blame, as you put it for the continued deterioration in the sport and the League but my view is that the SCB bear a massive responsibility as well. we will have to agree to differ on the SCB's culpability in all this.

And ? they were willing to let Boro and Cov go under ...Them not getting there way is the same as Eastie and Belle Vue, both not willing to take part in the league if certain rules were in place

[E I Addio]

And ? they were willing to let Boro and Cov go under ...Them not getting there way is the same as Eastie and Belle Vue, both not willing to take part in the league if certain rules were in place

 

As said before we can argue for ever and a day and it won't change opinions now. Boro and Cov at that stage had financial support from their owners, BV and Eastie were (and still relatively are) at the budget end of the market. Nobody forced Cov or Boro to buy/sign riders before the rules were finalised at the AGM, but that's water under the Bridge now. The sport didn't get into its present state simply because of 2010. The point of the thread is that we have exactly the same situation today that was being complained of by the promoters in May 2009.

 

If you and others are of the opinion that its all down to what happened in the winter of discontent, fair enough, but personally I think the sports problems are much wider and deeper than that, and that the buck stops with the SCB. The SCB didn't want to rock the boat over the Poole cheating claims in 2009 and don't want to rock the boat in 2013, once again in matters that seem to involve Poole. The big question is why is the SCB, the sports ruling body, so secretive and so inept.

 

 

[Halifaxtiger]

That is the point. We don't know what they have done because we are not old. We were told via Speedway Star that the Poole -v- Lakeside cancellation was going to be discussed by the SCB on 10th July and since then we have been told nothing. We have not even been told if that actually discussed it as planned or adjourned to another date. Then we have the Kings Lynn -v Peterborough appeal seeping out on the day of the Bellevue-v- Poole meeting and people are bound to think the worst. The whole thing gives the impression of being a big stitch-up and conspiracy. I am not saying it is a stitch-up but that's how it looks from a distance. The SCB could kill all this speculation by a few press releases on their website keeping the fans informed, and it is that lack of information, more than anything else that is sending the sport downhill.

 

I actually have a lot of time for Cook and Douglas but my point was what have they done since May 2009 ? Sod all by the looks of things. Its all very well making an annoucement of that nature but if you don't follow it up its both worthless and meaningless.

 

I think you are absolutely right in that the decisions that come out of the SCB are grist to the mill of the conspiracy theorists because they only ever provide rulings, not explanations for those rulings. You could argue that they never provide reasons simply because those rulings break the laws of the sport and are twisted to suit the needs of individual promotions.

 

I have always said that the creation of the rule book must be left to those who run the clubs, ie the BSPA. However, rulings on disputes between clubs must be made by an independent adjudicator with no financial interest whatsoever, and the SCB are anything but.

[wealdstone]

I think most would agree that walking out was the wrong call. On the other hand it is generally acknowledged that RF was told to F Off by Ronnie Russell.. One of the problems for those used to observing the norms of general business practice is they fail to grasp such practices do not exist within BSPA.

 

Spivs and Wide Boys

[orion]

As said before we can argue for ever and a day and it won't change opinions now. Boro and Cov at that stage had financial support from their owners, BV and Eastie were (and still relatively are) at the budget end of the market. Nobody forced Cov or Boro to buy/sign riders before the rules were finalised at the AGM, but that's water under the Bridge now. The sport didn't get into its present state simply because of 2010. The point of the thread is that we have exactly the same situation today that was being complained of by the promoters in May 2009.

 

If you and others are of the opinion that its all down to what happened in the winter of discontent, fair enough, but personally I think the sports problems are much wider and deeper than that, and that the buck stops with the SCB. The SCB didn't want to rock the boat over the Poole cheating claims in 2009 and don't want to rock the boat in 2013, once again in matters that seem to involve Poole. The big question is why is the SCB, the sports ruling body, so secretive and so inept.

No one force Eastie Belle Vue to say they were going pull out of the league, the bottom line is they were the same as cov and Boro they were not willing to take part in a league under certain rules . Nothing has changed since 2009 but after writeing that piece it makes Douglas and co even worst than the others .

[BWitcher]

As said before we can argue for ever and a day and it won't change opinions now.

 

You are wrong on this because there are an awful lot of people whose opinions have changed given the subsequent events.

[Halifaxtiger]

You are wrong on this because there are an awful lot of people whose opinions have changed given the subsequent events.

 

I have been told that Rick Frost changed his opinion. He apparently deeply regrets that he sided with Coventry.

 

I didn't have a problem with what Coventry were saying but I most certainly did with the way they went about it. In fact, if they had handled it better we may now have the changes that they proposed.

[The White Knight]

That is the point. We don't know what they have done because we are not old. We were told via Speedway Star that the Poole -v- Lakeside cancellation was going to be discussed by the SCB on 10th July and since then we have been told nothing. We have not even been told if that actually discussed it as planned or adjourned to another date. Then we have the Kings Lynn -v Peterborough appeal seeping out on the day of the Bellevue-v- Poole meeting and people are bound to think the worst. The whole thing gives the impression of being a big stitch-up and conspiracy. I am not saying it is a stitch-up but that's how it looks from a distance. The SCB could kill all this speculation by a few press releases on their website keeping the fans informed, and it is that lack of information, more than anything else that is sending the sport downhill.

 

I AM!!!!! :mad:

[TonyE]

No one force Eastie Belle Vue to say they were going pull out of the league, the bottom line is they were the same as cov and Boro they were not willing to take part in a league under certain rules . Nothing has changed since 2009 but after writeing that piece it makes Douglas and co even worst than the others .

 

Given the lack of transparency in speedway BSPA/SCB - it is impossible to know whether or not proposals were made, voted upon/rejected etc. All we get is the 'compromise' arrived at for the season ahead.

 

Those that run speedway suffer from a complete lack of faith in the people they most rely on to sustain their businesses - the fans. The fact there is never an explanation or reasoning given to decisions re rulings/appeals etc only fosters suspicion that there is indeed something to hide.

[E I Addio]

 

 

Given the lack of transparency in speedway BSPA/SCB - it is impossible to know whether or not proposals were made, voted upon/rejected etc. All we get is the 'compromise' arrived at for the season ahead.

 

Those that run speedway suffer from a complete lack of faith in the people they most rely on to sustain their businesses - the fans. The fact there is never an explanation or reasoning given to decisions re rulings/appeals etc only fosters suspicion that there is indeed something to hide.

 

Spot on.That's the point I was trying to make earlier and which Halifaxtiger has already touched on. Unless we get clear statements from The SCB given a few facts relevant to their decisions there will always be a mixture of fact, fiction, gossip and speculation being discussed and that leads top disharmony in the sport especially amongst the paying public and that ot not a good thing.

 

 

No one force Eastie Belle Vue to say they were going pull out of the league, the bottom line is they were the same as cov and Boro they were not willing to take part in a league under certain rules . Nothing has changed since 2009 but after writeing that piece it makes Douglas and co even worst than the others .

 

According to them, money forced them. They said they couldn't sustain the costs likely to be incurred under the proposed higher points limit on the crowds they were getting in.