Birmingham Brummies 2019

[ProudtobeaBrummie]

Not a peep about it on the Brummies forum i think most Brummies fans like been mushrooms . Probably to scared to say anything in case Peter Mason bans them from Perry Barr.

[The Dog]

Whatever happened to 'innocent until proven guilty'?  The only people who know if this is the truth or not are the Masons and the named stadium manager. The Masons worked really hard last year to get a good rapport with the fans and earn a decent reputation for doing the right thing, so why ruin it by lying? I agree it looks suspicious on a lot of levels but the fact is that until someone proves otherwise we have to take Birmingham at their word. If it is fabricated, the consequences could be horrific and non of us want that do we.

[semion]

If it looks like a Duck, swims like a Duck, and quacks like a duck.  Then it probably is a duck

[ProudtobeaBrummie]

1 hour ago, The Dog said:

Whatever happened to 'innocent until proven guilty'?  The only people who know if this is the truth or not are the Masons and the named stadium manager. The Masons worked really hard last year to get a good rapport with the fans and earn a decent reputation for doing the right thing, so why ruin it by lying? I agree it looks suspicious on a lot of levels but the fact is that until someone proves otherwise we have to take Birmingham at their word. If it is fabricated, the consequences could be horrific and non of us want that do we.

Naive to say the least. To think only three people know the truth is boarding on ridiculous. Quack Quack  

[StevePark]

1 hour ago, semion said:

If it looks like a Duck, swims like a Duck, and quacks like a duck.  Then it probably is a duck

Or an Argentinian Racing Pigeon....

[HGould]

The key word in this whole episode is "Trust".

If the Promotion had come out at the weekend and admitted that there would be no Guest facility for Adam as the meeting v Berwick was rained off then they would have had the trust of supporters in being open and honest.

I know for a fact a Guest was booked and then the Management was told he could not ride as Adam had not completed an Official Fixture.

So on Tuesday morning we are fed a cock and bull story. I have no doubt that had the Guest been allowed that there would have been no electrical issues.

This is where "Trust" comes in.

If on Tuesday we had been told "we have applied for a guest but can't have one so have to use a NL rider so have decided to not race" it would have been the truth and trust would not have been lost.

Various claims have been made about "evidence of proof" that there has been an issue.

I can only go on my own evidence, ringing the Office and being told "no comment" and  when I asked if there was a power issue, and asking a Member of Track Staff who I know quite well; who said and I quote "if you sneaked in and tried the power I'm sure it would be OK". I can't and wont name names and therefore I have lost "trust".

It is up to every individual to make their own minds up, it is a free country and a free choice but this has left me both having lost trust and faith, less likely than I was to go to every home meeting and also very fearful for the future of the Brummies under the current regime, and sadly, I don't see any other options in terms of someone coming in on the horizon.

The Club has in the past had excellent PR and excellent Commercial people in place, I would suggest right now that they find a proper PR man and not a paid employee of the media company milking half the teams in the League for nothing more than a bit of cutting and pasting and also a full time Commercial Manager to replace Lee, who did a great job but who obviously now has far bigger things on his hands at Swindon.  

 

 

 

 

Edited May 17, 2019 by HGould
removed predictive text and corrected

[semion]

Well without 12 good men and true we will never have a ‘guilty’ verdict.  However you would think the two Masons would be out there knocking back these rumours.   What can you hear ? ....., Quack Quack ?

[jenga]

4 minutes ago, semion said:

Well without 12 good men and true we will never have a ‘guilty’ verdict.  However you would think the two Masons would be out there knocking back these rumours.   What can you hear ? ....., Quack Quack ?

the sharper the spade , the deeper the hole you can dig !

Edited May 17, 2019 by jenga
changed the b to a d ...

[uk_martin]

15 hours ago, ProudtobeaBrummie said:

Not a peep about it on the Brummies forum i think most Brummies fans like been mushrooms . Probably to scared to say anything in case Peter Mason bans them from Perry Barr.

No Comment 

[uk_martin]

This is what you call audacity!

 

 

And somewhat interesting that this post on Facebook comes 5 days before next Wendesday's fixture, but it didn't feature 5 days before Wednesday just gone. In fact the Brummies Facebook page was remarkably quiet all last week.

 

Edited May 17, 2019 by uk_martin

[brianbuck]

Now that the dust seems to have settled a bit on this business, I'd like to put forward some of my own observations. I'm not trying to blame anyone and nor am I trying to defend anyone - just giving my own thoughts on an unfortunate matter which I agree, has been damaging for speedway as well as for Birmingham. Speedway is not like football in which a club can field a seriously weakened team and still get a draw or even fluke a win by packing their defence and playing in a negative way. Speedway matches have to be competitive and for this to be the case, the competing teams need to be reasonably balanced.

If the meeting had gone ahead last Wednesday, then Birmingham would have been obliged to track a team which had no chance of making a competitive match of it, so to postpone it made economic sense. Those who suggest that the BSPA should take "action" should realise that matches are postponed and re-arranged quite frequently (albeit usually with a bit more notice than this one!) - and that Birmingham and Eastbourne had agreed a re-staging date BEFORE the announcement of the cancellation was made, so no rules were broken in that respect. I agree that to come up with a fictitious reason for the postponement was unwise, and is probably now regretted, but I don't think this was done with the intention of hoodwinking the supporters who are well able to put two and two together - more as a wish to provide the media with a plausible reason.

This situation is not unique - it has been done before and it will be done again. I'm not saying I like it - I don't, but to a point I can understand the reasoning. Last season, Poole postponed one of their home matches in exactly the same circumstances, and made no secret of their reason for doing this. They did it "honestly" as some have suggested, and likewise, they and their opponents had agreed an alternative staging date before the call-off was announced, but this did not prevent or lessen the volley of internet criticism which came their way. 

The rules say that a guest or rider-replacement cannot be used for a missing rider if he has not previously ridden for you. This is fair enough and would have been applied in this instance (although by splitting hairs) it could be argued that Adam Ellis HAS previously ridden for Birmingham, and the question has been asked (but not answered) as to why this rule was not applied to Wolverhampton who have been missing Nick Morris all season and who has never yet ridden in their colours? Birmingham have had a rough time of it so far this season and most will agree that the team has looked fragile, so if there is to be a case of turning a blind eye to the rule to help out a struggling club in a meeting which to all intents and purposes is a dead rubber, then surely this should have been the one?

I don't expect many to agree with me on this, and I really don't mind that - but I thought I'd set down my two-pennorth!

 

 

[screm]

Good luck for Wednesday and no more "electrical" problems.

[cityrebel]

A fair comment. There has been no winners in this sorry situation. Hopefully some lessons will have been learned.

[uk_martin]

1 hour ago, brianbuck said:

...If the meeting had gone ahead last Wednesday, then Birmingham would have been obliged to track a team which had no chance of making a competitive match of it, so to postpone it made economic sense. Those who suggest that the BSPA should take "action" should realise that matches are postponed and re-arranged quite frequently (albeit usually with a bit more notice than this one!) - and that Birmingham and Eastbourne had agreed a re-staging date BEFORE the announcement of the cancellation was made, so no rules were broken in that respect. I agree that to come up with a fictitious reason for the postponement was unwise, and is probably now regretted, ...

 

Thanks Brian. As you say, fans can put two and two together. The fans are also the customer, who in any other business, is "king". Reading the posts above, it's clear that the lesser of the evils would have been to stage the meeting, be honest with the fans and maybe even promote it as has been said before by other people along the lines of "the rules are against us", or "David v Golliath" or "we will never surrender" or any of the other cliche's that invoke a rallying call when the odds are against us.

The problem is that the official, and erroneous, policy was to lie and deceive the people who the club counts on as its paying customers. This is playing with fire on a Gerald Ratner scale. There is no "innocent" means of deceit. 

The fans were lied to, and the very least that is owed now is an official apology, on the microphone, on the centre green, in front of everyone who is left in a position to forgive. And if the person responsible for this shambles has any honour, a resignation should be tendered too.

 

[topsoil]

1 hour ago, uk_martin said:

 

Thanks Brian. As you say, fans can put two and two together. The fans are also the customer, who in any other business, is "king". Reading the posts above, it's clear that the lesser of the evils would have been to stage the meeting, be honest with the fans and maybe even promote it as has been said before by other people along the lines of "the rules are against us", or "David v Golliath" or "we will never surrender" or any of the other cliche's that invoke a rallying call when the odds are against us.

The problem is that the official, and erroneous, policy was to lie and deceive the people who the club counts on as its paying customers. This is playing with fire on a Gerald Ratner scale. There is no "innocent" means of deceit. 

The fans were lied to, and the very least that is owed now is an official apology, on the microphone, on the centre green, in front of everyone who is left in a position to forgive. And if the person responsible for this shambles has any honour, a resignation should be tendered too.

 

With a very weakened team, you could promote a meeting however you want, but fans will not attend, which in turn would be a financial disaster. Just what a club, which looks like it is already struggling, needs.

And if the person responsible was the promoter, would you like to see him resign? Then what?

[uk_martin]

9 hours ago, topsoil said:

With a very weakened team, you could promote a meeting however you want, but fans will not attend, which in turn would be a financial disaster. Just what a club, which looks like it is already struggling, needs.

And if the person responsible was the promoter, would you like to see him resign? Then what?

How many fans would or would not have attended is a matter of speculation. Probably a fewer number but the hardcore that attend would have still been there. The possible lower income would have been offset so some degree by the lower appearance money needed to pay for a 3 point NL rider compared to what would have been paid to a CL #1.  OK a short term financial hit, but one that could be recovered from.  What the long term financial hit will be of losing the trust and confidence of the paying public will be, only time will tell. But when the public lost confidence in Gerald Ratner, Perrier, and others, history tells its own story.

 As for resigning, the Birmingham promotion is made up of The Father, The Son and the Holy Ghost...if one resigns, there are still two left. And it sends a message to other promoters about the consequences of their conduct too. Consider the alternative...the last time a promoter came up with a "no electricity here" excuse, he was elevated to Chairman of the BSPA. Is that really the precedent that you want the sport to follow??

[GiveusaB]

12 hours ago, uk_martin said:

 

Thanks Brian. As you say, fans can put two and two together. The fans are also the customer, who in any other business, is "king". Reading the posts above, it's clear that the lesser of the evils would have been to stage the meeting, be honest with the fans and maybe even promote it as has been said before by other people along the lines of "the rules are against us", or "David v Golliath" or "we will never surrender" or any of the other cliche's that invoke a rallying call when the odds are against us.

The problem is that the official, and erroneous, policy was to lie and deceive the people who the club counts on as its paying customers. This is playing with fire on a Gerald Ratner scale. There is no "innocent" means of deceit. 

The fans were lied to, and the very least that is owed now is an official apology, on the microphone, on the centre green, in front of everyone who is left in a position to forgive. And if the person responsible for this shambles has any honour, a resignation should be tendered too.

 

 

We need to be backing the 'promotion' not persecuting them!

I don't think you realise how much money the Masons would've lost had they run the meeting?

I applaud them for making up an excuse to call it off and not take my hard earned money to see a farce!

Edited May 20, 2019 by GiveusaB

[cityrebel]

1 hour ago, uk_martin said:

How many fans would or would not have attended is a matter of speculation. Probably a fewer number but the hardcore that attend would have still been there. The possible lower income would have been offset so some degree by the lower appearance money needed to pay for a 3 point NL rider compared to what would have been paid to a CL #1.  OK a short term financial hit, but one that could be recovered from.  What the long term financial hit will be of losing the trust and confidence of the paying public will be, only time will tell. But when the public lost confidence in Gerald Ratner, Perrier, and others, history tells its own story.

 As for resigning, the Birmingham promotion is made up of The Father, The Son and the Holy Ghost...if one resigns, there are still two left. And it sends a message to other promoters about the consequences of their conduct too. Consider the alternative...the last time a promoter came up with a "no electricity here" excuse, he was elevated to Chairman of the BSPA. Is that really the precedent that you want the sport to follow??

Sounds like a plan of succession to me!

[GiveusaB]

Peter/David are not local....they could quite easily take their money and invest it in another club if fans aren't happy with how they're running things?

Where would that leave us ?

Strewth.......

 

[HGould]

Thank the Lord for Brian Buck and some honesty and sanity.

May be the Mason should appoint Brian to guide them on PR!

The fact is that IF they had announce "we cannot run this meeting as it would be a financial disaster" they would have been telling the truth and would not have lost faith.

As Brian points out, the opponents (Eastbourne) had agreed to the request and rearrangement, so why not just tell it as it was.

Hopefully David or Peter or Laurence or all of them will deliver the "holy trinity" apology on the Centre Green on Wednesday, a bit of humble pie and humility and then we can move on...