The continuing decline of Speedway

[orion]

14 minutes ago, steve roberts said:

Many systems have been tried. During 1979(?) no guests or R/R were allowed in the Knock-Out Cup competition if I recall.

My personal option would be a guest for a missing number one or second heat leader (second averaged rider). Rider replacement for the  third, fourth and fifth (with differing replacement criteria depended on the average within the team in question) and juniors and/or loanees (as in the old days) at reserve.

Not worked out all of the implications as I'm sure there would be problems...and no doubt someone will highlight same!

That is nearly the same as the rules now

[chunky]

1 hour ago, steve roberts said:

My personal option would be a guest for a missing number one or second heat leader (second averaged rider). Rider replacement for the  third, fourth and fifth (with differing replacement criteria depended on the average within the team in question) and juniors and/or loanees (as in the old days) at reserve.

I am totally okay with something like that!

I believe that guests are a necessary evil, but that doesn't mean you should be replacing a bunch of lower average riders with guests.

For those who continue to compare speedway and football, look at this; when Leicester City won the PL, they relied heavily on Mahrez and Vardy. Not heavily enough though, that should one (or both) be missing from the line-up, they get beaten out of sight. Take a speedway team like Coventry a few years back, who relied heavily on Hancock and Hamill. Take one or both out, and they were screwed.

When I said this same thing previously on the BSF, I was told, "That's why teams should have a solid 1-7, with no stars!" Really? Okay, isn't the league watered down enough already? So, just get rid of the crowd-pullers, and worse still, just force them out of the league because they are too good...

Steve

Edited August 10, 2018 by chunky

[Barney Rabbit]

1 hour ago, orion said:

Yet again we had years of people saying this but not one person has come up with a better or workable idea ..look at you replace no1 's with juniors etc ..

You don't. The missing #1 is replaced by the second highest average rider, the junior comes in at #7. Don't go now so don't know who rides in which heat but will the junior (at #7) even ride against the opposing #1 in a programmed ride?

Edited August 10, 2018 by Barney Rabbit

[frigbo]

34 minutes ago, Barney Rabbit said:

You don't. The missing #1 is replaced by the second highest average rider, the junior comes in at #7. Don't go now so don't know who rides in which heat but will the junior (at #7) even ride against the opposing #1 in a programmed ride?

Still, in effect, replacing your number 1 with a junior irrespective of where in the team they ride.

Maybe there's an option to only permit a number one guest for away meetings and teams utilise r/r at home and only if the absence is through injury?

A mid-level big league should, in threory, mean less top-end absences for anything other than injury anyway.

 

 

Edited August 10, 2018 by frigbo

[Humphrey Appleby]

1 hour ago, chunky said:

I believe that guests are a necessary evil, but that doesn't mean you should be replacing a bunch of lower average riders with guests.

I'd rather see guests for heat leaders replaced with some sort of handicap system to balance up the disadvantage. 

[Spl77]

2 hours ago, orion said:

Yet again we had years of people saying this but not one person has come up with a better or workable idea ..look at you replace no1 's with juniors etc ..

That worked in the old NL of the late 80s and that league was doing well until it got broken up to save the 9 team top flight. The argument that no guest for a missing number one will reduce the attendance doesn't really stack up when you're almost down to one man and his dog anyway. The doubling up amd guest situation  has forced thousands away over the years I'm one of them! 

[Daniel Smith]

Still awaiting the fix for guests and doubling up. 

How many tracks should we close down so doubling up isn't required?

How many rider's shall we put in squad systems who don't earn a penny all season?

What do we do when teams pick up 3 - 4 injuries or rider's quit part way through the season?

British Speedway needs guests and doubling up to make the sport viable, until a reasonable option becomes available to change it. 

Nobody has come up with a valid, reasonable or acceptable alternative option. Until then, we have what we have.

[frigbo]

3 minutes ago, Daniel Smith said:

Still awaiting the fix for guests and doubling up. 

How many tracks should we close down so doubling up isn't required?

How many rider's shall we put in squad systems who don't earn a penny all season?

What do we do when teams pick up 3 - 4 injuries or rider's quit part way through the season?

British Speedway needs guests and doubling up to make the sport viable, until a reasonable option becomes available to change it. 

Nobody has come up with a valid, reasonable or acceptable alternative option. Until then, we have what we have.

Viable for who??

Some weaker tracks may have to be sacrificed to make something new work.

Fudging everything to enable a couple of teams to exist in front of 150 people isn't helping.

[Thornaby48]

Tonight Redcar will be using 2 guests for the missing Anderson brothers, and I am not going. Had they used r/r and a guest then yes I would be there . I do not like guest riders but unfortunately in speed way they are a necessary evil but it has to be controlled. Use a guest for an injured no.1 only and limit the appearances to say 6 or 8meeting only and withdraw the facility three quarters of the way into the season so guests cannot influence  end of season play off positions.No guests for reserves, use the no8.

I am very much in favour of the r/r system , you are at least watching your own riders. Wouldn't it be cheaper using r/r than paying for a guest?  However the system falls down because you are not replacing like for like, you are replacing a missing rider with riders of inferior average in many cases ,why not allow riders up to 2 r/r rides  to even it up.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[mikebv]

Having a fit for purpose RR system would reduce Guests if not even eradicate..

Top rider missing? Then EVERY rider in the team can take his rides up to seven rides max per rider, meaning (if the Team Manager elected to do so) the 2nd and 3rd highest riders can take two of his rides each and appear also appear in Ht 15. ..

If the 2nd rider is missing then, as now, the No1 can take a ride and all riders below the 2nd rider can take the rest, again up to seven rides per man.. (eg 3rd in the averages could take three of his rides but would have to miss Ht 15, or take two and ride Ht 15)..

Work that down the order till you get to the No6 rider missing where the rider fifth in the averages could take one ride and the reserves the rest (with one reserve taking all the other three rides if the Team Manager selects to do so up to a max of seven rides)..

Any No7's missing means the other reserve takes two rides and a No8 (NL rider not DU 'ing) comes in and takes two rides...

The closer the level of rider from One to Seven in a team will also mean much less impact to the team by any of the riders missing...

And let's be honest, many of the Guests needed are more down to poor planning in fixtures rather than injuries. So getting that right alone will reduce Guestfests..

 

[waytogo28]

It is alleged that some promoters read parts of the BSF ( perhaps about their own club ) let's hope that some also read the many positive ideas put forward by fans. Foolish if they don't read this thread.

[moxey63]

There are so many differing opinions on here and I guess promoters can never win.. 

Edited August 10, 2018 by moxey63

[topaz325]

See the Workington v Sheffield topic to see what a mess the system is in.

[Thornaby48]

21 minutes ago, moxey63 said:

What about having a block scoring system for a missing rider? Just an idea, maybe a bad one, but based on points per match the missing rider averages, his team can either use rider replacement for him or the block scoring system in which the team is given the missing rider's points either before or after the match.  So, one of the top boys would get about 13 points a match from 5 starts, his side would already secure those missing points in his absence. It has its flaws, but just a way to clamp down on guests and rely on your own resources. At the end of the day, speedway fans are mainly interested who's going to stand-in for an absentee. Sometimes guests can be a lottery. At least this method would guarantee the missing man's usual score.  

I can see your point but a rider cannot guarantee to ride to his average. How often do we see a heat leader score badly and a reserve get a very high score?

[screm]

1 hour ago, topaz325 said:

See the Workington v Sheffield topic to see what a mess the system is in.

Sums it up perfectly though I don`t think that is a good thing.

[orion]

4 hours ago, Spl77 said:

That worked in the old NL of the late 80s and that league was doing well until it got broken up to save the 9 team top flight. The argument that no guest for a missing number one will reduce the attendance doesn't really stack up when you're almost down to one man and his dog anyway. The doubling up amd guest situation  has forced thousands away over the years I'm one of them! 

Not really. A team that has say a Doyle or a Lambert and  you  then replaced them with a junior the crowd is going to go down by 150 to 300  and that  will cripple clubs .it's same the old story people putting up ideas but with no thinking about the money side .it's the same with take away the play offs and why don't we a play off cup !. Yet again your plan is thinking that the fans don't care who they watch .people have left because the standard of rider has dropped 

[Hawk127]

22 minutes ago, orion said:

Not really. A team that has say a Doyle or a Lambert and  you  then replaced them with a junior the crowd is going to go down by 150 to 300  and that  will cripple clubs .it's same the old story people putting up ideas but with no thinking about the money side .it's the same with take away the play offs and why don't we a play off cup !. Yet again your plan is thinking that the fans don't care who they watch .people have left because the standard of rider has dropped 

I don’t think it is just a case that the standard of rider that has dropped.  You do not have to have  Gregg, Tai and others to make a good race, but you do want to see riders with track craft, throttle control and the ability to adapt to the track as presented and put on a show. Fans are fed up with seeing those that work at it to hone their skills versus those who ride in so many leagues and countries that Speedway U.K. is just pin money. The paying public deserve better. Aim for a level playing field and that does not mean clubs wasting money they do not have on the top stars because the UK version of speedway cannot afford them any longer. Speedway is a spent sport that will struggle for years to come so it is time to wise up and run at a level that can be reasonably funded out of the very little revenue that each team can generate. Those that cannot make ends meet should close. It needs to be a part time income for those riding over here not the sole source of pay for the participants. Why supporters want to watch six riders plus R/R every other week really makes no sense. Being weekly is probably more a case of if you are lucky (more like,ly every three to four weeks) and with no real allegiance to the team because of guests and double ups supporters no longer recognise or have a local team. You have a bunch of riders who are mercenaries and take what they can get from any source. They are not interested in the punter just the pound in their pocket from the nights racing be this a fixed fee and/or points money.

[Spl77]

43 minutes ago, orion said:

Not really. A team that has say a Doyle or a Lambert and  you  then replaced them with a junior the crowd is going to go down by 150 to 300  and that  will cripple clubs .it's same the old story people putting up ideas but with no thinking about the money side .it's the same with take away the play offs and why don't we a play off cup !. Yet again your plan is thinking that the fans don't care who they watch .people have left because the standard of rider has dropped 

Disagree with the fall in standard causing the mass loss of support. Sure some have walked away because of the fall in standard but far more myself including myself have walked away because of micky mouse rules and shambolic way the sport is run. The old British League Was on its knees and down to 9 clubs in 1990 and all the top guys were still riding in the UK. The formation of one big league in 1995 again because of the top flight failing still saw the vast majority of top guys still here. Its probably only in the last 15 years that the majority of big names haven't competed here. At that point the crowds were far less than the late eighties. The decline has been in progress since the mid eighties long before the big boys left. 

[Spl77]

6 minutes ago, Hawk127 said:

I don’t think it is just a case that the standard of rider that has dropped.  You do not have to have  Gregg, Tai and others to make a good race, but you do want to see riders with track craft, throttle control and the ability to adapt to the track as presented and put on a show. Fans are fed up with seeing those that work at it to hone their skills versus those who ride in so many leagues and countries that Speedway U.K. is just pin money. The paying public deserve better. Aim for a level playing field and that does not mean clubs wasting money they do not have on the top stars because the UK version of speedway cannot afford them any longer. Speedway is a spent sport that will struggle for years to come so it is time to wise up and run at a level that can be reasonably funded out of the very little revenue that each team can generate. Those that cannot make ends meet should close. It needs to be a part time income for those riding over here not the sole source of pay for the participants. Why supporters want to watch six riders plus R/R every other week really makes no sense. Being weekly is probably more a case of if you are lucky (more like,ly every three to four weeks) and with no real allegiance to the team because of guests and double ups supporters no longer recognise or have a local team. You have a bunch of riders who are mercenaries and take what they can get from any source. They are not interested in the punter just the pound in their pocket from the nights racing be this a fixed fee and/or points money.

Totally agree. 

[steve roberts]

11 minutes ago, Spl77 said:

Disagree with the fall in standard causing the mass loss of support. Sure some have walked away because of the fall in standard but far more myself including myself have walked away because of micky mouse rules and shambolic way the sport is run. The old British League Was on its knees and down to 9 clubs in 1990 and all the top guys were still riding in the UK. The formation of one big league in 1995 again because of the top flight failing still saw the vast majority of top guys still here. Its probably only in the last 15 years that the majority of big names haven't competed here. At that point the crowds were far less than the late eighties. The decline has been in progress since the mid eighties long before the big boys left. 

Agree as an earlier post of mine also indicated.