Gresham Posted June 16, 2016 Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 ... I know it's been touched on in another thread...but for the life of me I can't find where. However...it seems progress is being made for a big change that may come into fruition next season. It's been four years in the making....and the format run through a computer programme to look for glitches. One trial meeting has taken place with all promotors there. Another is being done again soon...to iron out a few ideas...then a public third meeting will take place to see what the public think and give input. Two equal sized leagues of between 10 and 12 teams. 3 promoted...3 relegated.... Done via a play off system. National league to stay the same, but a chance in future to move up the league ladder. Six rider teams... All have 5 rides. 15 heats. No RR and no double points scores. RR only if rider gets injured in meeting. TS's used most likely if team goes 3 or 4 points behind. With the format... Team managers will need a brain. All this according to Peter Oakes in todays SS. Exciting times ahead :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grachan Posted June 16, 2016 Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 Fine as long as the points limit doesn't restrict better teams too much. TS is 3 down? Who on Earth came up with that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gresham Posted June 16, 2016 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 Apparently in the trial meeting it was only 1 point. They want to keep meeting close apparently. Each sides No.1 will face his oppo 3 times. In heats 1,8 and 15. The number 6 will also meet his oppo 3 times. In the trial meeting...both teams led at one point or another and by no more than 4 points at anyone time. It's good that they are testing and trying it first, before implementing it. Has been thought out via a Newcastle co promotor and a season ticket holder there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waiheke1 Posted June 16, 2016 Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 Tactical sub at 1 point down? Seriously? How does that keep things even? Twk will have a heart attack. I presume that is a piss take, they couldn't seriously propose that surely...Surely? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gresham Posted June 16, 2016 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 Tactical sub at 1 point down? Seriously? How does that keep things even? Twk will have a heart attack. I presume that is a piss take, they couldn't seriously propose that surely...Surely? Like I said in my first post...the trial was with one point...after the trial, the general consensus according to SS, is that it would be more likely 3 or 4 points. It may change again...depending on trials I suppose. At least they are trying it out and it's not something that has been thought out on a whim. Four years planning and a computer programme put in place to sort out any possible scenarios that might be missed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waiheke1 Posted June 16, 2016 Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 3 or 4 points is still ludicrous, given that a tax sub can result in a 4 point swing. Maybe I'm cynical but I have little faith that this proposal will be a significant improvement. No idea why it would take 4 years to come up with such a proposal either? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gresham Posted June 16, 2016 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 3 or 4 points is still ludicrous, given that a tax sub can result in a 4 point swing. Maybe I'm cynical but I have little faith that this proposal will be a significant improvement. No idea why it would take 4 years to come up with such a proposal either? I'm guessing any proposal worth it's salt, would be put forward showing all the benefits and most points covered and able to be answered. Like I said...it's being tried and tested before implemented. Plus being shown to the public for their input. At least they are trying, which imo, is a good thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enotian Posted June 16, 2016 Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 Re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic then! But if it's been tested in a computer it must be the saviour!! Jesus. What chance of survival when the promoters don't even know what their customers want. Which is a professionally run sport with entertaining unpredictable racing Even assuming the riders accept the removal of doubling up and guest appearances for potentially one extra ride per meeting (although I can't see that Pandora's box ever being closed) what will this proposal improve? It makes no sense. The promoters have, to their credit, attempted to encourage more young riders which seems to be coming to some fruition and now they want to reduce the number of team place opportunities? Will promotion/relegation ever work? When you have promoters changing the ideal points system to guarantee 3 points for any home win because supporters were disappointed in getting only 2 (after seeing a close presumably entertaining match!!!) can you see them accepting a relegation? Are the supporters desperate for promotion/relegation??? I know that the ex promoter involved in this was frustrated because he wanted the Diamonds to be the best in the country but could never achieve that goal under the existing format. Is the answer to dilute the product even further? It isn't clear how rider replacement and guests would be removed but I can't see promoters/supporters accepting home defeats due to fielding an under strength team. Something needs to be done but what is the idea here? The article in SS doesn't say. I would have thought the carnage caused by changing the elite heat format and the resultant dysfunctional averages would have indicated that it's not really a good idea to have the same riders facing each other multiple times. You can just see the Poole no.6 starting on a 4 point average getting an inflated 9 point average thanks to the heat format and then being replaced by a genuine 9 point rider. Exactly the type of manipulation that has turned so many people off. Focus on improving quality (tracks, stadium facilities and riders) and run the sport professionally with integrity and you might stand a chance. After all, when speedway is good it's an amazing spectacle. Surely this is just another case of promoters missing the point. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsunami Posted June 16, 2016 Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 I'm guessing any proposal worth it's salt, would be put forward showing all the benefits and most points covered and able to be answered. Like I said...it's being tried and tested before implemented. Plus being shown to the public for their input. At least they are trying, which imo, is a good thing. There was a lot learnt by having the trial with much discussion on several contentious issues during and later on. The format and the rules that were tried are unlikely to reappear, but they will with modifications. Use of TS's and loss of a rider before, or during the meeting, will need to be rethought out. The return of a number 8(but a 7 in this case) is important. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobMcCaffery Posted June 16, 2016 Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 I am delighted that the BSPA are planning such a necessary re-structure and are testing it thoroughly first. Change is essential. I just hope the PL teams aren't shafted like in the 90s. It seems a very welcome shaft of common sense is piercing the current gloom and hopefully we'll all benefit, although I suspect some supporters will have to rethink their attitude to the sport. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikebv Posted June 16, 2016 Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 (edited) RR has never really been an issue to me as at least its the same teams riders taking the rides rather than a guest... Maybe the rider above the missing one could take two rides and any of the ones below can take the other three (as it will be if each rider gets five rides) with a max of seven rides per rider.. Presume guests will be a thing of the past if promotion and relegation comes in, which is great news... Cannot have a rider helping another team send his own team down.... But as this is British Speedway, you never know... Presume also that there wont be any DU's as you cannot have a rider helping promote one of his teams whilst helping relegate his other. If a play off is used he would end up riding against himself! But again as this is British Speedway etc etc etc... For me, the Danish model of five per team could be the one to use, thus meaning more 'replacements' available as supply may actually exceed demand... It may be less heats (not sure) but if it is, then tag on a compulsory 'Junior team' match every meeting and it could be value for money and create lots of track time for inexperienced riders... Whatever the detail though, its good to see some innovation being brought to the sport... Edited June 16, 2016 by mikebv Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
customhouseregular Posted June 16, 2016 Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 ... I know it's been touched on in another thread...but for the life of me I can't find where. However...it seems progress is being made for a big change that may come into fruition next season. It's been four years in the making....and the format run through a computer programme to look for glitches. One trial meeting has taken place with all promotors there. Another is being done again soon...to iron out a few ideas...then a public third meeting will take place to see what the public think and give input. Two equal sized leagues of between 10 and 12 teams. 3 promoted...3 relegated.... Done via a play off system. National league to stay the same, but a chance in future to move up the league ladder. Six rider teams... All have 5 rides. 15 heats. No RR and no double points scores. RR only if rider gets injured in meeting. TS's used most likely if team goes 3 or 4 points behind. With the format... Team managers will need a brain. All this according to Peter Oakes in todays SS. Exciting times ahead :-) Excellent and about time 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
singy13 Posted June 16, 2016 Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 I see the headline...'Replying to Next Season..promotion and Relegation'. And I couldn't help but wonder if there will actually be enough speedway teams left to accept this idea anyway.??? I mean how many of the current crop are going to survive after this season? I was reliably informed that my team had an attendance of 349 last Saturday.....there must be alarm bells ringing regarding that figure. And who knows how many other clubs have similar headaches to ponder over? Plymouth for sure, Redcar ?, Scunthorpe? others ?, and watching a video of a recent Rye House meeting the track terracing had more heaps of rubble around it than speccies. However that then makes it an ideal situation for using one league only...no promotion/relegation...then the doubling up would be kicked out, and a more varied fixture list would surely prove a bigger attraction.? Speedway is a fantastic sport and will hopefully recover from the current downward spiral.....but promotion/relegation is not a good answer. The formation of one large league, for now, is better for the future well being of the sport. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Blachshadow Posted June 16, 2016 Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 (edited) On the face of it, a good move but are all promoters happy with it? We know that there are teams in the PL that are only there because they want to be and don't want to move up, some having voluntarily taken the plunge. Will the attitude of these promoters change just because they finish in the climb zone? Are there enough teams willing to step up to even the divisions out for the inaugural season? It wasn't that long ago that a much heralded on Sky promotion/relegation failed because the team winning promotion didn't want to move up and no way was the relegation play-off losing team going to drop down. Sort that out, get all to agree and we could have a good product here - subject to Chapman's rule-book re-write and all promoters playing to the resulting set of rules. Edited June 16, 2016 by Vincent Blackshadow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allthegearbutnaeidea Posted June 16, 2016 Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 Belle Vue Coventry Kings Lynn Swindon Leicester Lakeside Poole Wolverhampton Ipswich Rye House Glasgow Peterborough/Sheffield Edinburgh Berwick Workington Newcastle Redcar Scunthorpe Sheffield/Peterborough Somerset Plymouth Birmingham Eastbourne Cradley/Kent/IOW/AN OTHER 12 in each with the rest in NL EL team having a GP rider 2 heatleaders 2 second strings and a 'reserve' who moves up full time from PL PL team has normalish team taking out the big number 1's from the league and some of the out of depth no.7's This is what I would do with league structure, my only problem is that I don't believe that all of the promoters from the PL will want to move up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foamfence Posted June 16, 2016 Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 It has all been suggested and even trialled before but most lower clubs didn't want to go up because it would cost more and most upper clubs didn't want to go down and probably lose some of their riders and some of their fans, so it all fell through. The reason MOST clubs are in their current leagues is down to cost, obviously a couple of premier league clubs could afford to move up, but they don't seem to want to. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevH Posted June 16, 2016 Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 It has all been suggested and even trialled before but most lower clubs didn't want to go up because it would cost more and most upper clubs didn't want to go down and probably lose some of their riders and some of their fans, so it all fell through. The reason MOST clubs are in their current leagues is down to cost, obviously a couple of premier league clubs could afford to move up, but they don't seem to want to. This is maybe something that could be addressed by sponsorship in a similar way that football's Premier League operates? If, and it's a big if, a substantial sponsor could be found, the finances from that are proportioned according to final league positions. In that way, far greater financial rewards are to be found in the higher league, which negates the higher operating costs. On the other side of the coin, a team who find themselves relegated may lose some fans, and therefore income, but the lower operating costs could allow them to survive and try to regain their top division status. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColinMills Posted June 16, 2016 Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 finance aside, promotion/relegation is perfect for fans, it makes every match meaningful whether you in top or bottom half. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCB Posted June 16, 2016 Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 (edited) It has all been suggested and even trialled before but most lower clubs didn't want to go up because it would cost more and most upper clubs didn't want to go down and probably lose some of their riders and some of their fans, so it all fell through. The reason MOST clubs are in their current leagues is down to cost, obviously a couple of premier league clubs could afford to move up, but they don't seem to want to. All you do is run both leagues on PL converted averages. Season 1 the PL has a 45 point limit and the EL 55. The following season you have points limit of 42 in both leagues. The conversion rate would be about 0.9. You wouldn't actually have a "stronger" league then, 10% isn't a lot but allows some improvement when you move up but more realistically when moving up a league you'd just be able to keep last years league winning team if you wanted. Same for the team dropping down. It would also make an inter-league KOC viable. The only issue I see is that at the moment the average EL clubs has what, 3 double uppers? 2 draft rider and 1 other. That means of the 8 EL teams they will have to find 3 rider riders eachs, thats 24 new riders. That either 30 new NL riders (not already riding EL or PL) or 30 new foreigners (by the time some riders retire/quit). I just don't see where they're going to come from! Edited June 16, 2016 by SCB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Science Posted June 16, 2016 Report Share Posted June 16, 2016 So we are going to have a full season of fixtures the promotion / relegation will be sorted out by the lottery of a play off ? 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.