Is There A Need For Guest Riders?

[steve roberts]

As someone who hasn't been to a speedway meeting for over a decade I would be interested to know the views of present day fans whether they feel that the Guest Rider Facility (apparently first adopted in 1955) has run its' course and whether it's time to scrap it?

 

Does it undermine the credibility of the sport or is it a necessary evil?

 

My personal views, based on thirty years following the sport, was that it was a facility which served a purpose, in principle, but which over subsequent years has been abused and manipulated to suit as the rules governing it have been constantly changed.

Edited May 18, 2017 by steve roberts

[moxey63]

The Peter Oakes' column in last week's Star highlighted this.

 

The guest rider system nowadays seems to have mixed in with the doubling-up and doubling-down system and has made it worst. It further dilutes what should be a team sport, that nowadays seems more and more to be pasttime which is kept going from March through October. It is more akin to grasstrack. Guests seem worst when riders are already hopping between different sides in different leagues because of this doubling up and down. What has happened to having a set side from the start of the season and not seeing a rider that races for one team and supplemented by another - for a complete season?

 

What has gone wrong, when someone is a fully-fledged rider for two teams (in separate leagues) in the same country? The guest rider system and doubling rider system are a patch on a piece of clothing that gets you by for another day.It is an outlook I don't like (another short term fix)... but what damage is being caused when trying to sell it?

 

A sport that was once primarily a team game has been positioned to a place of just a bunch of individuals getting a pay day.

 

They'll be those that scoff at my views.... I don't go anymore, I didn't pay to get in when I went.... but surely those two statements prove the point. I don't go... and I stopped going even when I didn't have to pay! I, after over 30 years was disillusioned. It was shifting from a team sport, which I fell for, in to a playground for individual riders.

Edited May 18, 2017 by moxey63

[waytogo28]

I agree completely with what moxey63 said when he wrote " after over 30 years I was disillusioned. It was shifting from a team sport, which I fell for, in to a playground for individual riders"

 

I too am disillusioned except that it is after 60 years in my case. A man and boy job it was.

 

I still love the GPs on TV - and Warsaw gave us terrific racing - and am still roused by a great race on video highlights but am unlikely to attend an in-stadium live match again, because of several issues including the doubling up which has become endemic and unrealistic for team racing. There is no need for so many guest riders ( except perhaps for your No1 when they were injured ).

[MattK]

Guests should be retained, but there should be an emphasis on better scheduling of fixtures to avoid clashes and in the medium terms the leagues should move to separate fixed race nights.

[moxey63]

Guests should be retained, but there should be an emphasis on better scheduling of fixtures to avoid clashes and in the medium terms the leagues should move to separate fixed race nights.

 

I suppose you'll always need guests in some shape... so how about being unable to use them from the same league? In Britain at least, the two main leagues are growing closer together in strength (or weakness) than ever before.

[frigbo]

Steve Roberts and moxey63 sum up my view nicely and encapsulates one of the main reasons I too stopped going after 30+ years.

 

It, along with a small doubling-up for squad riders, was always a necessary evil in certain circumstances but the whole sport in the UK has become transfixed with what the riders want to the exclusion of anything else.

Edited May 18, 2017 by frigbo

[foamfence]

There is no need for guest riders and missing riders should have to be replaced by up and coming NL riders. Nothing wrong with re-declarations though.

[moxey63]

Maybe it is just me, but speedway 2017 has become more like those X-Stream sports - an individual rush that the participants seem to get more of a kick out of it than anyone else.

 

I had one of the foreign league matches on the other day and just happened to glance up, spotted Chris Holder in the pits in his riding gear of one of the Swedish League sides (I think it was).

 

That is something else I'd kick in the long grass. Then I hear.... "But they need it, there aren't enough fixtures in the UK."

 

Maybe right.

 

But maybe there isn't enough fixtures in the UK, just perhaps, because there isn't sufficient dates available... because of riders riding here, there and blinking every blinking where.

 

Sort it blinking out.

Edited May 18, 2017 by moxey63

[Star Lady]

There is no need for guest riders and missing riders should have to be replaced by up and coming NL riders. Nothing wrong with re-declarations though.

 

Or as I've long advocated each top league club has a tie up with a second division club who in turn has a tie up with a NL club. i.e. Belle Vue, Sheffield and Buxton are one grouping. If numbers allow 2 middle tier clubs in each group fine. Missing riders can only be replaced by riders from within those three clubs up to whatever the maximum points allowance is. So a top league reserve can if points allow ride for NL or middle tier. Yes there might be a few under-strength teams now and again but IMO no more than there is now. At least there will be a degree of consistency in riders turning out for "your" team.

[moxey63]

The feeling of "we're in this together" has long gone. Days when you used to shift down the motorways in support of your club, your boys.

 

People use the football analogy too much... and speedway fans ridicule that sport when comparing the two. But at least you know supporting a football club really means that you are supporting that club, that team. At Man City we are saying goodbye to a legend right now, a bit of a sad time after nine years.

 

But in speedway we have lost that. We have forgotten what it is like to form a bond with a rider we genuinely feel sick in the gut when they depart.

 

And that is what is wrong. If that feeling has gone, then all of us being united in supporting a team must have gone too. A team is there for us to support. Now. seeing the same team every week is like seeing the same GP at my surgery. I can't begin to think who's the longest-serving team man at one club right now. At Belle Vue Craig Cook has put in a shift - but is he a club legend. Is he a PC or Mort, or Wilkie. No... because he rides for another team and merely swells his income and days off by riding for the Aces. And this isn't a dig at Craig... it is a dig that it is allowed to happen.

 

That can't be right.

Edited May 18, 2017 by moxey63

[NeilWatson]

2017 is particularly bad due to the late finalisation of the league compositions. DU can work, Danny King was ever-present for both his Clubs last year.

 

Many valid points above though.

 

Would 6 man teams with no DU be appealing?

[mikebv]

Guest riders are a 'necessary evil' only because we are brain washed into thinking so...

 

It is the easy, lazy option, rather than working the team strength system into being fit for purpose.

 

No Guests in Sweden and Poland? Not all Superstars either. So why?

 

Because they race on the same night the vast proportion of the time so riders cannot be in two places at once..

 

Too easy over here as riders always available to step in...

 

Denmark run five man teams using mainly Danish riders as enough of the required level riders are not available without paying foreigners to go over...

 

Danish crowds are most similar I would say to Britain of the 'big four' League countries. So maybe this should be a template to be adapted..

 

One thing is for sure. Scott Nicholls helping Wolves into the play offs last year when they beat Poole and then his own team getting gubbed by Wolves six weeks later in the Final or Troy Batchelor starring for Poole a few years ago, before watching his Swindon team get hammered in the final by the Pirates, can never, ever, be seen as credible in anyway shape or form....

 

And if a professional team sports competition isn't credible then simply, why pay money to go and watch it?

Edited May 18, 2017 by mikebv

[StevePark]

There is no need for guest riders and missing riders should have to be replaced by up and coming NL riders. Nothing wrong with re-declarations though.

 

So, if a team is missing their number 1 (let's say Craig Cook), he has to be replaced with a 2.00 NL rider? You reckon fans would turn up for that?

 

What would happen if a team is missing, say, 4 riders (it has has been known)? Would you expect fans to turn up to watch a team full of NL riders against much stronger opposition?

 

The whole idea of guests is to keep it fairly equal between two teams. The only time I would advocate a 2.00 NL rider guesting, is when the rider missing is riding in a Polish Lge fixture (for instance).

 

Guest, are, in my opinion, a necessary evil.

[moxey63]

 

So, if a team is missing their number 1 (let's say Craig Cook), he has to be replaced with a 2.00 NL rider? You reckon fans would turn up for that?

 

 

 

 

The whole idea of guests is to keep it fairly equal between two teams. The only time I would advocate a 2.00 NL rider guesting, is when the rider missing is riding in a Polish Lge fixture (for instance).

 

 

 

Guest, are, in my opinion, a necessary evil.

Missing four riders, I would say... that is no longer a viable team and therefore the match should be called off. Isn't it because we have accepted instances like this that the sport is in its current state? A few called-off matches and I bet lazy promoters would do something about finding replacements.

Why isn't the club fined for sending out a side missing four riders? There is no punishment, just a sense of accepting it that way.

My views on guests are this: In 1989 Belle Vue were missing Kelly Moran for a lengthy period. A few times we had Kelvin tatum guesting for him in some important matches at Belle Vue. I didn't particular take to Kelve back then (I do now) and felt sort of strange wishing him on but not really wanting that in real life speedway. It was false. Like being nice to someone but calling them behind their backs.

Edited May 18, 2017 by moxey63

[SCB]

Why can't unattached riders guest? Less farcical that your local rivals number 1 riding for you one week and against you the next!

[mikebv]

So, if a team is missing their number 1 (let's say Craig Cook), he has to be replaced with a 2.00 NL rider? You reckon fans would turn up for that?

 

What would happen if a team is missing, say, 4 riders (it has has been known)? Would you expect fans to turn up to watch a team full of NL riders against much stronger opposition?

 

The whole idea of guests is to keep it fairly equal between two teams. The only time I would advocate a 2.00 NL rider guesting, is when the rider missing is riding in a Polish Lge fixture (for instance).

 

Guest, are, in my opinion, a necessary evil.

No need to replace Craig Cook with a guest in this example..

 

Just let every other member of the BV team take a maximum of two of his rides...

 

All riders to be able to take a maximum of seven...

 

Fricke taking two, and Bjerre taking two wouldnt lessen the team strength too much, if at all

 

Same for riders further down the line. The riders above and below can take two each, (if the manager sees it fit tactically to do so). The only stipulation would be if a number seven is missing he must have two (or more if again manager sees fit) of his races replaced by a No 8, who must be a two point man from the NL not contracted to any team in that division...

 

Reduce the number of riders in teams from its current seven and you would also have replacements available for short term loan deals to replace riders..

 

This year after the winter team building changes has already seen a surplus of riders coming in as replacements. It's crackers though that the 'unattached' riders cannot step in for riders missing on a one match basis if so needed, rather than 'guests' used from the same League's teams..

[StevePark]

No need to replace Craig Cook with a guest in this example..

 

Just let every other member of the BV team take a maximum of two of his rides...

 

All riders to be able to take a maximum of seven...

 

Fricke taking two, and Bjerre taking two wouldnt lessen the team strength too much, if at all

 

Same for riders further down the line. The riders above and below can take two each, (if the manager sees it fit tactically to do so). The only stipulation would be if a number seven is missing he must have two (or more if again manager sees fit) of his races replaced by a No 8, who must be a two point man from the NL not contracted to any team in that division...

 

Reduce the number of riders in teams from its current seven and you would also have replacements available for short term loan deals to replace riders..

 

This year after the winter team building changes has already seen a surplus of riders coming in as replacements. It's crackers though that the 'unattached' riders cannot step in for riders missing on a one match basis if so needed, rather than 'guests' used from the same League's teams..

 

I was thinking more Workington, than Belle Vue (sorry, I should have said that in my original post), regarding Craig Cook. Replacing a 9.50 - 10.00 rider with a 2.00 NL rider is, in my opinion, bound to effect the attendance and, in all likelyhood, the outcome of the match.

[foamfence]

 

So, if a team is missing their number 1 (let's say Craig Cook), he has to be replaced with a 2.00 NL rider? You reckon fans would turn up for that?

 

What would happen if a team is missing, say, 4 riders (it has has been known)? Would you expect fans to turn up to watch a team full of NL riders against much stronger opposition?

 

The whole idea of guests is to keep it fairly equal between two teams. The only time I would advocate a 2.00 NL rider guesting, is when the rider missing is riding in a Polish Lge fixture (for instance).

 

Guest, are, in my opinion, a necessary evil.

There is R/R and and fans don't 'turn up' anyway. I did advocate re-declaring if necessary. It doesn't bother some people but the sport lacks credibility to a whole lot more.

[mikebv]

I was thinking more Workington, than Belle Vue (sorry, I should have said that in my original post), regarding Craig Cook. Replacing a 9.50 - 10.00 rider with a 2.00 NL rider is, in my opinion, bound to effect the attendance and, in all likelyhood, the outcome of the match.

Same system applies for me Steve, let riders two and three take all his rides...

 

However, to be honest the ultimate issue with your scenario is that Cook is too good for Div 2 so really shouldn't be riding there..

 

The disparity between the best and worse riders in all teams, (to try and slavishly keep seven man sides), is one of the main reasons guests end up being used.

 

Missing an out and out No1 like Cook at Div 2 level takes out probably 25% - 33% of their points hence when he isn't there he needs replacing with a similar standard rider..

 

For me, less riders per team but a reduced ability gap between the best and worst is the key to make 'no guests' work...

Edited May 18, 2017 by mikebv

[tigerowl]

A sport that was once primarily a team game has been positioned to a place of just a bunch of individuals getting a pay day.

 

That comment from Mike BV sums it up for me.

 

I posted about credibility in the rising crowds thread and when fans of 40 years+ are deserting the already deserted terraces, then you know the sport is in trouble.

 

The sport is being run so that a bunch of pretty mediocre riders can ride every night of the week and not be bothered who's colours they are riding in while less and less people turn up to watch and newcomers quickly think 'what the hell is going on here, Joe Bloggs, our number one rider, has just helped our rivals destroy our league position'.

 

The lack of riders argument is a self fulfilling prophecy. Stop giving chances to youngsters and they will pack it in.