noggin Posted November 24, 2017 Report Share Posted November 24, 2017 Thats the BSPA for you Drink first talk afterwards Probably slurring their words, was going to vote on only rider whose a mate, but came out as 8. Surprised the pissed up buffoons came up with a decent points limit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starman2006 Posted November 24, 2017 Report Share Posted November 24, 2017 Probably slurring their words, was going to vote on only rider whose a mate, but came out as 8. Surprised the pissed up buffoons came up with a decent points limit. 42. whatever hardly a decent team building average. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noggin Posted November 24, 2017 Report Share Posted November 24, 2017 42. whatever hardly a decent team building average. It is for them, you know how they want to dilute the product, I was expecting 40 at best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtommo Posted November 26, 2017 Report Share Posted November 26, 2017 See the AGM has worked once again let's bring back to riders in the gps that's the world champion gone then they have no idea but still charge same price to get in and they wonder why less and less people watching ever year Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveLyric2 Posted November 26, 2017 Report Share Posted November 26, 2017 Doyley hasn't said he's gone (unless I've missed something?) just that he's not riding for Swindon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Star Lady Posted November 26, 2017 Report Share Posted November 26, 2017 Doyley hasn't said he's gone (unless I've missed something?) just that he's not riding for Swindon. and given the small differences in average between him and Morris it's probably finances that decided it, but that doesn't fit with the anti BSPA/Buster agenda does it 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waytogo28 Posted November 26, 2017 Report Share Posted November 26, 2017 Should have been 42 - whichever way you want to make it add up accurately. With safeguards to stop later rule manipulators adding to their resources when some riders fail to "do the business". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Al Posted November 26, 2017 Report Share Posted November 26, 2017 We know where the real power resides now. It's the Championship clubs. No wonder that Ipswich & co didn't want to shift leagues, stay with strength in numbers and make the higher level league dance to their tune. No surprise to hear the AGM sessions went on for so long in that case. The Premier League is now well and truly on its own, so can it survive or will they eventually fully concede and chuck in their lot with the Championship? Unless they can conjure up some TV money and league sponsorship, it's looking a bit dodgy. So we also have the 1 over 8 shoot-in-the-foot fiasco. Not content with being screwed over by the PL, why not inflict some self-harm as well? Already the World Champ looks like being lost to the UK. Nice start, guys. I wonder how many riders out there with 7-8 averages not currently riding UK will actually materialise? I bet they will be upping their financial demands because they can pretty much hold the UK top league to ransom now. And the tac sub? Heat 14 allowed?? Can they be serious? Imagine a guy coming out in all 3 of heats 13, 14 and 15. Gee, won't that really speed up the match being completed. How about a rule banning tac sub riders from having 2 rides on the trot? As my old mate Geoffrey Boycott would say, there's more brains in a Pork Pie. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavan Posted November 26, 2017 Report Share Posted November 26, 2017 Doyley hasn't said he's gone (unless I've missed something?) just that he's not riding for Swindon. Correct and given the small differences in average between him and Morris it's probably finances that decided it, but that doesn't fit with the anti BSPA/Buster agenda does it spot on. Swindon have decided to go with Morris and it could purely be that finances decided it. To many people trying again to condemn Chapman. The 1 over the 8 rule will work fine 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A ORLOV Posted November 26, 2017 Report Share Posted November 26, 2017 Correct spot on. Swindon have decided to go with Morris and it could purely be that finances decided it. To many people trying again to condemn Chapman. The 1 over the 8 rule will work fine Wait to see if a lot of average manipulation takes place, then fans will moan about that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waytogo28 Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 Is there a complete list of which promoters attended the AGM in person? Is it true that Rosco did not attend? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC2 Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 .... Swindon have decided to go with Morris and it could purely be that finances decided it. To many people trying again to condemn Chapman. The 1 over the 8 rule will work fine Yes, it could be finances for Swindon which led them to choose Morris over Doyle, but it was the AGM decision which forced them to make a choice. So why was the rule made? It hasn’t been explained. And if promoters wish to promote the sport and keep fans on board they need to give explanations. Was it to allow all clubs to have an 8 point rider because they all want one? Was it to allow cost-cutting, because top riders demand more pay? Was it because some clubs want to sign seven 6 pointers and were worried they’d get 5-1s against them in heats 13 and 15, forgetting their advantage in heats 2 and 8? Was it thought sensible to force riders to ride for clubs that they don’t want to? Was it thought acceptable to destroy the brand loyalty that continuity gives so that Swindon and Wolves have to lose a club asset who has helped to bring back fans year after year? Was it because a club wanted someone else, anyone, rather than “whinging” Chris Holder? Was it due to envy of Swindon, Wolves and Belle Vue? Was it really well thought through? That’s what we need to know, so please tell us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A ORLOV Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 Yes, it could be finances for Swindon which led them to choose Morris over Doyle, but it was the AGM decision which forced them to make a choice. So why was the rule made? It hasn’t been explained. And if promoters wish to promote the sport and keep fans on board they need to give explanations. Was it to allow all clubs to have an 8 point rider because they all want one? Was it to allow cost-cutting, because top riders demand more pay? Was it because some clubs want to sign seven 6 pointers and were worried they’d get 5-1s against them in heats 13 and 15, forgetting their advantage in heats 2 and 8? Was it thought sensible to force riders to ride for clubs that they don’t want to? Was it thought acceptable to destroy the brand loyalty that continuity gives so that Swindon and Wolves have to lose a club asset who has helped to bring back fans year after year? Was it because a club wanted someone else, anyone, rather than “whinging” Chris Holder? Was it due to envy of Swindon, Wolves and Belle Vue? Was it really well thought through? That’s what we need to know, so please tell us. If as commented that there will be no tv money in 2018, that must have been a major factor in looking at reducing finances next year. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waytogo28 Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 Yes, it could be finances for Swindon which led them to choose Morris over Doyle, but it was the AGM decision which forced them to make a choice. So why was the rule made? It hasn’t been explained. And if promoters wish to promote the sport and keep fans on board they need to give explanations. Was it to allow all clubs to have an 8 point rider because they all want one? Was it to allow cost-cutting, because top riders demand more pay? Was it because some clubs want to sign seven 6 pointers and were worried they’d get 5-1s against them in heats 13 and 15, forgetting their advantage in heats 2 and 8? Was it thought sensible to force riders to ride for clubs that they don’t want to? Was it thought acceptable to destroy the brand loyalty that continuity gives so that Swindon and Wolves have to lose a club asset who has helped to bring back fans year after year? Was it because a club wanted someone else, anyone, rather than “whinging” Chris Holder? Was it due to envy of Swindon, Wolves and Belle Vue? Was it really well thought through? That’s what we need to know, so please tell us. Yes, answers please from the new "transparent BSPA" on these and on the whole TV situation. More and more people just won't bother to " turn up as usual" next March - believe me those that can bothered to, are dwindling because of the closely guarded nature of how UK speedway is run. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz01 Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 How much money did each club receive for the last year of the Sky deal? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A ORLOV Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 How much money did each club receive for the last year of the Sky deal? I seem to recall the money was only paid to the clubs who had their meeting televised rather than a block payment to the bspa which in the past has been shared out to the clubs, but have no idea how much it was per meeting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz01 Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 I seem to recall the money was only paid to the clubs who had their meeting televised rather than a block payment to the bspa which in the past has been shared out to the clubs, but have no idea how much it was per meeting. So just basically compensation for having admission prices reduced and/or potential lower crowds? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waytogo28 Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 (edited) I understood it was £1.5 million per season ( lees Mr Russell's commission ) shared between the top tier clubs. Was also told that it mostly went to the top riders wages ( to hold onto them for UK racing ) . Not much seems to have been invested. Edited November 27, 2017 by waytogo28 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A ORLOV Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 I understood it was £1.5 million per season ( lees Mr Russell's commission ) shared between the top tier clubs. Was also told that it mostly went to the top riders wages ( to hold onto them for UK racing ) . Not much seems to have been invested. I think that was the original type deal but later changed to just paying the clubs who were shown on tv. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILIPRISING Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 I think that was the original type deal but later changed to just paying the clubs who were shown on tv. THE meeting fee was in addition to the lump sum. Sky paid off their contract earlier this year (rumoured to be £600,000) and that money was distributed amongst the PL tracks. 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.