Jump to content
British Speedway Forum

Peterborough Panthers 2021


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Lefty said:

I'm thinking Oxford in the late sixties with Genz, Goody, McCauliffe, Reeves, Bishop seemed old. Rick Timmo looked young. Who am I missing? Is it Pete Jarman?

Jimmy Gooch?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Lefty said:

I'm thinking Oxford in the late sixties with Genz, Goody, McCauliffe, Reeves, Bishop seemed old. Rick Timmo looked young. Who am I missing? Is it Pete Jarman?

The Oxford team at the start of the 1968 season had an average age of 29 years 9 months. Arne Pander 36, Eddie Reeves 22, Ronnie Genz 38, Colin Gooddy 35, Leo McAuliffe 34, Rick Timmo 20, John Bishop 23.

In 1969 33 year old Jarman replaced Pander and the average age was 30 years 2 months.

Edited by BL65
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Lefty said:

I'm thinking Oxford in the late sixties with Genz, Goody, McCauliffe, Reeves, Bishop seemed old. Rick Timmo looked young. Who am I missing? Is it Pete Jarman?

Arne Pander in 1968 and R/R for him a fair bit of the time, Danny tried Gotfried Andersson but I believe finished up running Johnny Poyser, Pete Seaton, Mick Bell and Ted Spittles over many meetings.

Edited by Whisperer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Lefty said:

I'm thinking Oxford in the late sixties with Genz, Goody, McCauliffe, Reeves, Bishop seemed old. Rick Timmo looked young. Who am I missing? Is it Pete Jarman?

When i first went to Hackney in 1970, they had Biggs, Gooch and McGillivray. Riders who seemed to belong in a different era.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s an old team I don’t think anyone can dispute that, as to whether that will affect its ability to do well remains to be seen.

Things will become clearer in May but as long as the track is set up to suit our team of racers I don’t see too much of a problem and look forward to a return of the racing.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Lionspride said:

 

Joking aside despite having a team with a combined age of over 250 I think they will be solid throughout.

Thats a bit unfair on Scott at least, he looks fit and lean for a guy of his age.:rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Age is just a number. The top 5 have years of experience and track knowledge to get around any circuit well. 

Fans will laugh at the side but in a watered down SGB Premiership this team could easily roll back the years riding against bang average riders who will never reach the heights some of the Panthers have in their career.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, KingoftheTrack said:

Age is just a number. The top 5 have years of experience and track knowledge to get around any circuit well. 

Fans will laugh at the side but in a watered down SGB Premiership this team could easily roll back the years riding against bang average riders who will never reach the heights some of the Panthers have in their career.

I know that  we are arguably  in an unavoidable position, but  the Standard of Speedway this year is  likely to be the lowest in living memory. I am hopeful that those that allowed the promoter to hang on to last seasons season ticket money will not be disappointed by what is decided on that issue. I also hope that decency will prevail over the BB parking issue (a situation entirely of managements making)  especially as the management troll is now in a less exalted situation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally think this is quite a nice looking team, despite the ages of some.

If decency does prevail over the BB parking, then my wife and I will be in attendance whenever her health allows, but if decency doesn't prevail, then with great sorrow, we'll never visit the venue again.   It's a sad situation for her, but one we can do nothing about, so her only speedway in 2021 will be Mildenhall. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Mimmo said:

I personally think this is quite a nice looking team, despite the ages of some.

If decency does prevail over the BB parking, then my wife and I will be in attendance whenever her health allows, but if decency doesn't prevail, then with great sorrow, we'll never visit the venue again.   It's a sad situation for her, but one we can do nothing about, so her only speedway in 2021 will be Mildenhall. 

It's a joke if the parking hasn't been sorted @ the Showground by now. This reflects very badly on all involved surprised that a discriminations group have not come on board.  This must be a relatively easy task to sort out & create some positive news for a change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ghosty said:

It's a joke if the parking hasn't been sorted @ the Showground by now. This reflects very badly on all involved surprised that a discriminations group have not come on board.  This must be a relatively easy task to sort out & create some positive news for a change.

To be fair, I don't see the discrimination. Also, the East of England Showground website no longer itself advertise disabled parking within the venue. 

"There are numerous designated disabled parking bays at key locations points within the parking areas." 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Daniel Smith said:

To be fair, I don't see the discrimination. Also, the East of England Showground website no longer itself advertise disabled parking within the venue. 

"There are numerous designated disabled parking bays at key locations points within the parking areas." 

 

Lets be very clear about this. This has nothing to do with EOES but all to do with Peterborough Speedway and probably to do with one man in particular. As most events are staged at the Arena arguably the EOES designated BB parking areas may suffice, they definitely are not sufficient or fair for events within the Stadium where the distance required to walk for BB holders even  the old arrangements are more than those required to qualify for a BB. Whilst disgracefully the management tried originally tried to blame the Showground management  , which ploy was firmly rejected by the Showground, and then even more disgracefully they tried to link it to the tragic death of Colin North. |They have never told us the true reasons but I suspect it may be no more than for management convenience

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5% of all car parking spaces should be set aside for disabled customers, however their location (distance from building etc), isnt ever specified.. 

However.. 

The owner of the car park has a duty of  care to respond to any complaints about the locations and their suitability, and have to then assess whether 'reasonable adjustments' can be made to accommodate what is being requested..

I presume in the Showgrounds case, the bays that have been 'removed' are no longer 'official bays'? If so, could they be asked to reinstate? 

Of course, if they were never 'official bays' but just an area set aside which was convenient to be used as such, then there wont be any obligation to put them in officially.. 

And unfortunately (if that is the right phrase), even if they were 'official', any possible wider Health and Safety contravention eg fire risk close to a building, fire exit blocking etc, etc) by reintroducing disabled bays, would take precedent and render any request pretty much worthless..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, mikebv said:

5% of all car parking spaces should be set aside for disabled customers, however their location (distance from building etc), isnt ever specified.. 

However.. 

The owner of the car park has a duty of  care to respond to any complaints about the locations and their suitability, and have to then assess whether 'reasonable adjustments' can be made to accommodate what is being requested..

I presume in the Showgrounds case, the bays that have been 'removed' are no longer 'official bays'? If so, could they be asked to reinstate? 

Of course, if they were never 'official bays' but just an area set aside which was convenient to be used as such, then there wont be any obligation to put them in officially.. 

And unfortunately (if that is the right phrase), even if they were 'official', any possible wider Health and Safety contravention eg fire risk close to a building, fire exit blocking etc, etc) by reintroducing disabled bays, would take precedent and render any request pretty much worthless..

I think you are not aware at all of the situation  re BB Parking at EOES.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy