NO WORD FROM THE BSPA

[waytogo28]

2 hours ago, PHILIPRISING said:

MANY years ago the then Chairman of the SCB told me that it was easy to impose discipline on promoters because most of them were leaving meetings with shed loads of money in their car boots and the thought of losing their licence ensured they toed the line.

Now, any threats are likely to be met with "we will close." 

It might be better is some did close down, sooner rather than later. because if they all "hang on" it is going to drag out the dying of UK speedway even longer and more painfully. Lets end up with 12 - 14 or however few that intend to make a serious go of one league. Close down or drop to CL level.

[moxey63]

On 7/31/2018 at 8:19 AM, PHILIPRISING said:

MANY years ago the then Chairman of the SCB told me that it was easy to impose discipline on promoters because most of them were leaving meetings with shed loads of money in their car boots and the thought of losing their licence ensured they toed the line.

Now, any threats are likely to be met with "we will close." 

1

Not a proper sport, when a club can say "we will close" if they are disciplined. When promoters wield more power than the SCB, how's this happened? Clubs with long-standing traditions have disappeared just by the powering up of a bulldozer and yet these over-grown businessmen want to withdraw because they can't have one over everyone else. The last thing needed is for petulant promoters to start bellyaching when they don't agree with something and threatening to withdraw. Crying wolf is not good. In the end, fans just won't give a damn. You support a team with loyalty and want it to be there as far as you can see, otherwise why bother. Perhaps fans' passions will get directed elsewhere if they're forever hearing their promoters say the speedway team may have to close... again. I know about that, I think it got me in the end at Belle Vue. Perhaps that's one of the reasons I'm more engrossed in the history side now - because I know that has happened. No one can take it away. The future is uncertain.  

Edited August 1, 2018 by moxey63

[Eric Parsons]

You know after the winter of discontent 2010,2011 and such a pity during that time the sport did not end up in the law courts ,a big shake up was needed and for me that was a opportunity missed. Since that time interesting enough the sport has simply been going downhill. Are top league down to seven teams, however a turning point could happen next season with one promoter possibly saleing up ,and for me if that club closes the door others I feel will have more of a say . Has to be one big league however and unfortunately that has to be at championship level, top riders are costly and we don’t need them to provide entertaining racing ,let them race elsewhere. I hope common since is the answer over the winter . Give the sport time to recover at a lower level for now. Please 

[Mike.Butler]

If its one big league then I see rider control as imperative....but given the conflict of interest promoters have I don't see how that will happen.

its not as though riders can complain as they have demonstated they will ride anywhere over recent seasons.. The ridiculous level of team changes in the top 2 leagues is frankly a joke...how can fans relate to a team that changes riders every month...

[KevH]

One big league has be tried before and turned out to be an abject failure, so why should it be different this time?

[Fromafar]

4 minutes ago, KevH said:

One big league has be tried before and turned out to be an abject failure, so why should it be different this time?

Like people are pointing out it has to come down a level to give the sport a chance to recover.That is my opinion too.

[Tsunami]

6 minutes ago, Fromafar said:

Like people are pointing out it has to come down a level to give the sport a chance to recover.That is my opinion too.

There was some big players who called out the shots by not releasing top riders to the lesser teams to allow them to compete fairly. That situation has gradually changed with a more urgent need to work together, or go under. That wasn't a choice in them in the  90's.

[KevH]

4 minutes ago, Tsunami said:

There was some big players who called out the shots by not releasing top riders to the lesser teams to allow them to compete fairly. That situation has gradually changed with a more urgent need to work together, or go under. That wasn't a choice in them in the  90's.

Some would argue that the 'lesser teams' couldn't afford the 'top riders' even if they were released.

[Tsunami]

Just now, KevH said:

Some would argue that the 'lesser teams' couldn't afford the 'top riders' even if they were released.

But that was the agreement to the decision, and those who missed out, Middlesbrough for one, felt that they could not compete with only a second string as their no 1 ride.. 

[KevH]

3 minutes ago, Tsunami said:

But that was the agreement to the decision, and those who missed out, Middlesbrough for one, felt that they could not compete with only a second string as their no 1 ride.. 

So why would it be any different next season?

There will always be a 'rich end' and a 'poor end' in any league in any sport,  and the fact is that the 'rich end' will win the day.

[Tsunami]

2 minutes ago, KevH said:

So why would it be any different next season?

There will always be a 'rich end' and a 'poor end' in any league in any sport,  and the fact is that the 'rich end' will win the day.

So who is the 'rich' these days. Much more level playing ground now with less 'rich' and a smaller influence on the rest.

[KevH]

5 minutes ago, Tsunami said:

So who is the 'rich' these days. Much more level playing ground now with less 'rich' and a smaller influence on the rest.

I would imagine Terry Russell's Swindon could be considered 'rich' compared to, for example, Erik and Brian Gladders' Redcar.

[dontforgetthefueltapsbruv]

Just now, KevH said:

I would imagine Terry Russell's Swindon could be considered 'rich' compared to, for example, Erik and Brian Gladders' Redcar.

Then perhaps the 'rich' clubs should go it alone.....

no need for a league programme - just straight to the play off final between both of them 

[Tsunami]

36 minutes ago, KevH said:

I would imagine Terry Russell's Swindon could be considered 'rich' compared to, for example, Erik and Brian Gladders' Redcar.

Yes that's one, and the rest are ? You are assuming Swindon will have a track next year ? 

[KevH]

4 minutes ago, Tsunami said:

Yes that's one, and the rest are ? You are assuming Swindon will have a track next year ? 

And I guess you're hoping they don't, so your argument is upheld.

[Grand Central]

1 hour ago, Tsunami said:

So who is the 'rich' these days. Much more level playing ground now with less 'rich' and a smaller influence on the rest.

You sound, from your much more 'knowing' perspective, to be suggesting that an 'one league' option could work better than before.

I am happy to be be guided by you.
I was of the opinion that it would be just as much of a FAIL as when tried in the 90s.

Really surprised that you think it would be different this time.

[INCOGNITO]

ONE LEAGUE CAN WORK AND IS THE ONLY ANSWER

 

At present we have 18 tracks in the Premiership and Championship and with Lakeside closing, hopefully Rye House will be back plus hopefully two tracks can move up from the National League as teams would be built to Championship strength, not as was done in 96 when lower teams were made to get in star riders.

 

With twenty tracks you have 19 home and 19 away plus being at Championship level it means tracks can rave on their chosen race night. It also means the only doubling up would be with NL riders who would be number sevens and protected. 

 

ENOUGH RIDERS - Yes there will as you will have twenty riders moving in from the NL plus you have new riders in from Denmark, Sweden, Germany, America and many more countries to cover for the spaces left by riders that were doubling up. 

 

Fixed race ace nights were only bought in to stop riders that were doubling up missing fixtures in the other league and not to encourage top riders to return to the country that can't afford them. By racing in one league tracks can use their chosen race night and have weekly meetings instead of gaps of weeks waiting for the next home meeting. 

 

IMPORTANT RULES REQUIRED

PREMIERSHIP AVERAGES - Although teams will be competing at a level that is like the Championship is now, it has to be done using all riders on Premiership averages either set or assessed and done to one decimal, not two. Therefore a rider on 7.18 is actually 7.1 to avoid teams being 0.02 over the limit which is in effect one point in 50 races over. By using Premiership averages you will have riders like Rory Schlein, Craig Cook or Nick Morris on real averages instead of stupid 13.12 assessed averages that are not achievable and riders from the Championship that are on 6.22 in the CL being assessed at 4.7 (4.78) and teams will start with realistic figures. 

 

FOREIGN RIDERS - these are welcome to join or stay unless they decide riding in Europe is more beneficial however many will be happy to have 38 league meetings here and still able to ride abroad when they can. Riders can take priority in their home nation but otherwise commit to British Speedway. HOWEVER all foreign riders coming in or already here must have an assessed average if they are below that average at present. 

 

So so a rider like Erik Riss has an average of say 6.4 but his brother Mark has an average of 4.4. As German riders coming in would have an assessed average of 5.0. Mark Riss would have to use that assessed average until he reaches that standard so he will never drop below that 5.0 and if he was actually averaging 4.2 and misses a meeting, his team can only use a guest upto his real average of 4.2 and low and behold most of these would be British riders thus giving them more meetings. 

 

POINTS LIMIT would be set at 35 working out the common average of riders here and who could possibly come in as NL drafts would mostly be 2.0 riders but as all foreign riders will be at least 4.0 minimum, all reserves would mainly be young British riders and all teams must track at least THREE British riders which is easily obtainable. 

 

 

This his gives you weekly fixtures at home, a varied fixture list with no repeats, more spaces for British riders and all on the race night suited to each track. If you run this and then after a year you can get the top and bigger clubs to add a top level league in 2020 by using their top five riders in the one big league and add any TWO star riders from a choice of three signed to the club.

 

These meetings would be run on a Monday (just as BT matches would be in the one big league in 2019) and if eight teams want to also run these meetings they would have seven home and seven away meetings over the season. Each track would be involved in one home and one away meeting each month meaning they cover 14 set Monday nights which is filmed by BT. However BT can also film a few other Monday's showing the one big league meetings making 20-22 live TV meetings.

 

In the one big league, tracks would be encouraged to get admission prices down to £10 or £12 maximum as wage bills won't be as high as present for many and the tracks then also running the top level meetings can charge £20 as you get the chance to see Wolves with Woffinden, Lindgren (or Pawlicki) with Thorssell compete against Swindon with Doyle, Sayfutdinov (or Musielak)  with Morris. 

 

 

ONE BIG LEAGUE

VARIED FIXTURES

MORE BRITISH RIDERS

REDUCED ADMISSION (£10 hopefully)

YOUR SEVEN RIDERS ARE JUST YOURS

WEEKLY FIXTURES

[INCOGNITO]

RANT OVER !!

[Spl77]

And stop guest riders. 

[Grand Central]

6 hours ago, INCOGNITO said:

RANT OVER !!

You make it sound so easy ... So it must be true.

I would love to watch Championship level Speedway for £10 to £12 in 2019.

But returning to planet Earth ....