uk_martin Posted January 2, 2017 Report Share Posted January 2, 2017 ...it is likely the new promoters will simply rent the tracks for the nights they require and the council will maintain overall control of the day-to-day operations. How will it justify the continuing name of National Speedway Stadium when it is not a national speedway asset and only gets used for speedway for 20-odd domestic speedway meetings a year? It would be ironic if another sport became the dominant user of the stadium at the behest of MCC in whose charge the stadium would be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g13webb Posted January 2, 2017 Report Share Posted January 2, 2017 Hi bw double, would you mind putting full stops in all the places they should be in your next posts. I was interested in what you were "saying" in the above post but it took me at least 3 reads to get the jist of the post, and of course I still may have guessed wrong. Sorry, But I for one don't like being corrected for menial grammar errors, or seeing someone else suffer the same fate. Posters come on here to air an opinion and do not want to be made to look substandard because he made some little mistake. They want to be welcomed and their points taken seriously. Someone acting like the school teacher is not appreciated. So what if he missed a full stop, does it matter, you had to read in 3 times. Not everybody had the same standard of education, and others probably found the expertise in other areas . I for one found Maths, Physics, Chemistry, Workshop Technology, Electric Techniques, Computer knowledge all quite interesting and sailed through those exams. English was a different proposition. 4 times I had to retake my GSE before I reached the required standard. I have been fortunate in life to manage this issue, as I have found my other areas of expertise more than compensated for this low-level of English ability. Probably you'll be more forgiving in the future when reading other poorly written posts.... ( Hope I haven't made too many mistakes!!) 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Scrutton Posted January 2, 2017 Report Share Posted January 2, 2017 Belle Vue Promoters or the owners must not keep it much longer to make up their minds as their are one or two riders wanting to know if they will be riding in 2017 . or whether they can try for Leicester who badly needs them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestGorton1884 Posted January 2, 2017 Report Share Posted January 2, 2017 (edited) Its a purpose built speedway stadium , i can't see any other sport being the preferred option ? And I'm sure the council are 100% committed to it remaining primarily a speedway venue , Edited January 2, 2017 by WestGorton1884 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uk_martin Posted January 2, 2017 Report Share Posted January 2, 2017 Its a purpose built speedway stadium , i can't see any other sport being the preferred option ? And I'm sure the council are 100% committed to it remaining primarily a speedway venue , What bulldozers can (eventually) build, they can also change. If there is more money in turning it into a football, or rugby, or hockey, or athletics stadium, MCC would be fools not to consider the options. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouch Posted January 2, 2017 Report Share Posted January 2, 2017 Hi bw double, would you mind putting full stops in all the places they should be in your next posts. I was interested in what you were "saying" in the above post but it took me at least 3 reads to get the jist of the post, and of course I still may have guessed wrong. The part I highlighted in RED, I not heard that before. I had heard the contractors laid a membrane upside down. Fitted correctly, this was to allow water to pass through downwards but not allow water to rise. Fitted upside down meant the track was not draining at that place. That was why more then 75% of the track was fine but bends 3-4 had to be dug up and the membrane fitted correctly. The membrane problem was only noticed when the track was being dug up. Can anyone (with sense) confirm what the problem was due to??????? The council requested an investigation and report into the track issues. The comprehensive report was compiled by Arup's. It's filled with very technical jargon but the main problem was the tarmac from the hockey pitch that wasn't removed and the geotextile membrane used was not as specified nor the same as the rest of the circuit. This as you say effected the ability of the track to accommodate moisture in the most unpredictable and frustrating way. In certain environmental conditions all was well in others the surface became soft and boggy. Due to the unique nature of the problem and the fact it has never been encountered before conventional solutions were adopted to solve the problem and these were only to do with the top surface. To frustrate matters further work carried out on the shale seemed to do the trick but in reality it was just favourable environmental conditions lulling us into think all was well. The best illustration of the unpredictable conditions was around the time of the full behind closed doors team practice. This lasted several hours with Aces, Colts and others taking to the track and giving it the thumbs up. A press release with comments from Mark Lemon saying all problems were sorted and the track was good to go followed. Two days later people congregated around turn three near the track maintenance gate to witness water bubbling up from below. The following meeting was then called off and bends three and four fully ripped up and the investigation put in place. There are many photos in the report with one showing an amount of used nappies used to fill the base. This isn't a key issue but illustrates the level of workmanship in this area. I think the contractor was keen to finish and therefore not receive any penalty payment requests due to missed deadlines. The main contractor employed a sub contractor to carry out the track groundworks. The council own the report and have since placed an embargo on its publication. The council and contractor have many multi million pound projects in place in the city. To put it mildly the council were not keen on rocking to boat with their preferred contractor and anyone instigating such action was seen in a very dim light indeed. When the option to sweep them, oops I mean things under the carpet was presented to them by a third party they jumped at the chance. There has been many pages of discussion about the opening night and I don't wish this to restart it all again. If you want to stick with your opinion then great, I won't be debating this matter any further. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LisaColette Posted January 2, 2017 Report Share Posted January 2, 2017 Starman again proving why he is the most ridiculed member of this forum. No wonder matt ford thinks he is a nuisance (come from a couple of poole fans i met at that melbourne gp). Why does he employ him then? Will no one else do it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starman2006 Posted January 2, 2017 Report Share Posted January 2, 2017 Starman again proving why he is the most ridiculed member of this forum. No wonder matt ford thinks he is a nuisance (come from a couple of poole fans i met at that melbourne gp). What a real you are.. There are many photos in the report with one showing an amount of used nappies used to fill the base. This isn't a key issue but illustrates the level of workmanship in this area. I think the contractor was keen to finish and therefore not receive any penalty payment requests due to missed deadlines. The main contractor employed a sub contractor to carry out the track groundworks. The council own the report and have since placed an embargo on its publication. The council and contractor have many multi million pound projects in place in the city. To put it mildly the council were not keen on rocking to boat with their preferred contractor and anyone instigating such action was seen in a very dim light indeed. When the option to sweep them, oops I mean things under the carpet was presented to them by a third party they jumped at the chance. There has been many pages of discussion about the opening night and I don't wish this to restart it all again. If you want to stick with your opinion then great, I won't be debating this matter any further. You think, my guess is its just that, you are guessing.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Thumper Posted January 2, 2017 Report Share Posted January 2, 2017 How will it justify the continuing name of National Speedway Stadium when it is not a national speedway asset and only gets used for speedway for 20-odd domestic speedway meetings a year? It would be ironic if another sport became the dominant user of the stadium at the behest of MCC in whose charge the stadium would be. Not quite sure what other sport would be in a position to take over the Belle Vue Arena and Manchester City Council's business is not running stadia so I am not sure what the future of the arena might be. I don't believe that any business model based predominantly on running domestic speedway meetings at a high cost venue is going to cut the mustard. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starman2006 Posted January 2, 2017 Report Share Posted January 2, 2017 Why does he employ him then? Will no one else do it? Lisa, Matt Ford is very happy with me, and i listen to him and not s on here.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavan Posted January 2, 2017 Report Share Posted January 2, 2017 Lisa, Matt Ford is very happy with me, and i listen to him and not s on here..oops here you are again on another teams thread proving what a clown you are yet again. A ten year old could sell speedway stars hardly worthy of bigging yourself up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starman2006 Posted January 2, 2017 Report Share Posted January 2, 2017 oops here you are again on another teams thread proving what a clown you are yet again. A ten year old could sell speedway stars hardly worthy of bigging yourself up. Oops there you go again making a clown of yourself. No suprise there i suppose.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobnob Smith Posted January 2, 2017 Report Share Posted January 2, 2017 ohh for christs sake you two stop it these clubs need everybodies support in these difficult times not people bickering at each other 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestGorton1884 Posted January 2, 2017 Report Share Posted January 2, 2017 (edited) What bulldozers can (eventually) build, they can also change. If there is more money in turning it into a football, or rugby, or hockey, or athletics stadium, MCC would be fools not to consider the options. Its a speedway stadium , if not, its the biggest white elephant Manchester City Council have ever ploughed money into Edited January 2, 2017 by WestGorton1884 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tellboy Posted January 2, 2017 Report Share Posted January 2, 2017 Lisa, Matt Ford is very happy with me, and i listen to him and not s on here.. If you listen to Ford,and not to people on here,why the hell do you come on here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OveFundinFan Posted January 2, 2017 Report Share Posted January 2, 2017 Its a speedway stadium , if not, its the biggest white elephant Manchester City Council have ever ploughed money into Probably correct, and thats why the BV National Speedway Stadium will be open for business in 2017. Tomorrow, 3rd Jan, is the first working day in the new year, wheels will start turning, meetings arranged for sooner rather then later, and a news statement issued...... we wait patiently. I hope an announcement is sooner because as someone said a few posts ago - riders are wanting to know where they will be next year. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BANANAMAN Posted January 2, 2017 Report Share Posted January 2, 2017 Gavan, on 02 Jan 2017 - 6:37 PM, said:oops here you are again on another teams thread proving what a clown you are yet again. A ten year old could sell speedway stars hardly worthy of bigging yourself up. Don't knock it , selling Speedway Stars ... Better hours than being a lollipop man like some of us . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevH Posted January 2, 2017 Report Share Posted January 2, 2017 The council own the report and have since placed an embargo on its publication. Is this not what 'The Freedom of Information Act' was introduced to prevent? Matt Ford is very happy with me..... and I know that for a fact as every time he sets sight on me, he laughs his bollox off Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arnieg Posted January 2, 2017 Report Share Posted January 2, 2017 Is this not what 'The Freedom of Information Act' was introduced to prevent?: The report will contain commercially sensitive information that will enable the council to resist an FOI request. Whether they are justified in doing that is another matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starman2006 Posted January 2, 2017 Report Share Posted January 2, 2017 If you listen to Ford,and not to people on here,why the hell do you come on here. For the fun of it. 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.