(Issue 23 Winter 2006)
In
an ideal world following the 2007 BSPA annual conference there would be an
announcement in the Speedway Star that the promoters had decided to completely
rewrite the rulebook in plain English and all rules had been checked and none
contradicted each other and for ease of use an index had been provided.
Of course we don’t live in an ideal world but in the real world and so the
announcement in the Star following the conference will be as usual that the
promoters have changed the rules to iron out problems from the previous season,
make the racing closer and of course save them money. Well if any promoters
read The Voice here are some rules I would like introduced or just enforced in
2007.
15 Metre mark
If
we must keep the silly rules that riders who touch the
tapes do not have to be excluded but placed on a 15 metre handicap along with
tactical substitutes in the funny hats please can the rulebook say that this 15
metre mark must be permanently marked on the fence. This would of course mean
that at least one Premier League track would no longer have a mark for the home
riders and another one further away from the start line for the away riders and
guest start marshals would not get verbal abuse from the home promoter well he
put an away rider on the ‘home’ 15 metre mark.
Two minute rule
In
2005 the SCB/BSPA in their wisdom decided to amend the rule to match, that
which applies in the Grand Prix. No longer would riders who were on the track
but not at the start at the end of the two minute time allowance be allowed to
race but now they had to be in the words of the new rule “ ready to race or
deemed under the jurisdiction of the Start Marshall” This is alright as far as
it goes but what the “brains” at the SCB/BSPA forgot was that in the GP there
is a clock counting down the time allowance so that riders and fans can see how
long is left of the time allowance. If there is no clock at the start line counting
down the time, how are fans and more importantly riders to know how much time
is left. If there was a clock at the start on the very rare occasions that is
rider is excluded for say turning back at the start to clear this steamed
goggles there would be no arguments and fans and riders would know every one
was being treated the rather than what happen at the tail end of the 2006 when
a Conference League rider was excluded following him turning round at the start
and no warning that the allowance was nearly up was given. The referee may
claim that those are the rules but if 99 times out of a 100 the rules are not
applied what are riders and fans to think other than the ref is a jobs worth or
there is some history between the ref and the rider concerned. If the expense
of the clock is too much for the promoters why not use some of the Sky TV money
or get the riders to do a free meeting at the start of the year as per the Airtek meetings?
Planning Conditions
Getting
planning permission for a new speedway track is becoming increasingly difficult
especially with NIMBY neighbours therefore it seems strange that certain tracks
are prepared to flout the conditions attached to their planning permission on
an almost weekly basis even stranger is the fact that the BSPA award a track
with a 9.30 curfew an event with a minimum of 24 heats and only move the start
time by 30 minutes when the track rarely manages to stage 15 heats inside 2
hours. Was this the actions of a governing body of a so-called professional
sport or do the BSPA believe the law does not apply to them.
Planning conditions are a fact of life and the BSPA should ensure that any
conditions imposed by the Local Authority are strictly adhered to not just for
the good of the track concerned but also for the good of all tracks. Therefore
shouldn’t the BSPA demand to see copies of all planning approvals, and all
attached conditions such as curfews, if air horns/music allowed/numbers of
meetings allowed per season etc. Meeting referees to be made aware of any
conditions and ensure that all are complied with even if this means that the
full 15 heats can’t be completed or the second half curtained (remember what a
second half is Slider) Another advantage would be that we couldn’t have another
situation as described in Ian Thomas’s book “Wheels and Deals” where Workington
speedway ran in the 1970’s and 1980’s without any form of planning permission.
At
certain tracks we can have a parade and the riders come to the tapes for heat 1
but are sent back to the pits by the ref because it’s not yet the official
start time and yet at other tracks you are lucky if the first race is at 7.45
when the official start is 7.30 according to the programme, teletext
and the Speedway Star.
So
can referees be reminded that rule 15.1 states “The first race at each meeting
shall be started at the published time, expect that the referee may, at his
sole discretion, postpone the start of a meeting on account of weather
conditions or other “force majeure” for a reasonable period ” and can referees please enforced it
after all speedway is a professional sport and meetings should be run in a
professional manner.
Re-admission Policy
For
nearly 6o years the wording of the rule regarding readmission policy in the
rulebook has remained basically the same, one of the few rules that the powers
that be had messed about with. In 2006 the rule, 14.7.1, said “ If a meeting is abandoned before the 6th heat,
re-admission tickets are available to all who have paid for admission, which
should be available for the restaging of that meeting or any meeting (excluding
a BSPA shared event) at that track with one month of the date of issue”
In
1999 the then Operations Coordinator of the SCB, the chaps at the SCB do love
their job titles, told me that “ the original
intention of the regulation was to encourage visiting supporters to attend the
restaging of a abandoned meeting without the prospect of having a further
admission charge. Similarly home supporters can use the admission ticket for a
similar meeting”
So
the rule appears very sensible and very simple, although as we shall see being
speedway it is so straight forward, and just 2 questions spring to mind.
Firstly what is classed as a BSPA shared event and secondly what is defined as
a month is it a calendar month or 4 weeks.
In
2001 the then General Secretary of the SCB, another year another job title,
told me that shared events were “ Test Matches, FIM Events in UK, British
Final, 4 Team Tournament Finals, Elite /Premier League riders championships” I
assume now that you can add EL/PL/CL best pairs finals, CL 4TT final and
testimonials. I have no problems with this list but as we shall see some
promoters do.
At
the same time the General Secretary told me that he considered that a month “is
a period of four weeks, should a calendar month have been the requirement, this
description would have been included in the regulation”. Being a fan I believe
that the period that a readmission ticket should be valid for should work in
favour of the supporters rather than the promoters and if the rule does mean 4
weeks then it should say so but as we shall see some promoters take a different
view from either the General Secretary and myself on how long readmission
tickets are valid for.
The
2006 the various alternatives for readmission were:
Next
3 meetings,
Next
3 meetings plus restaging,
Next
3 meetings plus restaging excluding BSPA/Shared events,
Next
3 League or trophy meetings,
Restaging
only,
next
month plus restaging excluding Testimonials, international Test matches, cup
finals and other special events,
Restaging
plus any meeting
In
fact one for every day of the week
The
above seems strange especially when in 1999 the Operations Co-ordinator told me“ I am at the moment discussing with the BSPA the way that
this rule is being applied so that it may be modified if necessary when we
review the regulations at the end of the year. I would expect a consistent
approach in the future… In the meantime, I would hope that the BSPA will see
that their members apply the current regulation within the spirit of the
original intention”
The
future is now and the promise of a more consistent approach and keeping within
the spirit of the regulation now seem like another broken problem by the
speedway authorities and would it to too much to ask the promoters to sing from
the same hymn sheet and abide by the published rule and then speedway fans will
then know where they stand and not have to check their programmes to see which
version of rule 14.7.1 the home promoter is using.
MCN