Young Stanley's Topic For Debate

[Genghis]

The abolision of the guest system is long overdue BUT it can only come about if squads are introduced.

You cannot simply abolish guests while teams have have a 1-7 and a No. 8. A few injuries (sadly commonplace in speedway) and a team would be in deep shit.

There are no guests in Sweden, Poland, or indeed, in the Conference League, but all these leagues use squad systems.

All the best
Rob

[Deleted]

OK, as you can only have a guest for
a ) missing no 1
b ) higher (?) averaged rider if more than one rider missing
c ) missing highest average reserve
the guest system is not as abused as it once was and given it is a way of trying to balance team strengths so that there isnt a 'wobbler' replacing a heat leader resulting in mismatched heats and less entertainment for the paying fan I never really understand the hysteria surrounding guests although I do accept they are a fairly unique solution within team sports (probably Kev's version of banning 'intra-league' guests would eliminate most of the outcry and a 'squad' system for the lower ends of teams would do away with (c) above)

As the orginal post implies perhaps its better to create an environment where guests were less important (if you have a 'balanced' team the no1 is less likely to be missed). Squads made up of riders from the league below and allowing higher league guests for the missing top end riders would eliminate 'non attached' guests for all but the top leagues no 1 and if the EL goes with no GP riders next year there will probably be a number of overseas riders of the right standard who would be available on a meeting by meeting basis

I personally hate r/r more than guests mainly because turning up a rider 'short' before a wheel is turned is asking for trouble IMO and very often another injury / underperforming rider turns the meeting into a farce, thats why I would like to see squads and make teams start a meeting with 7 riders

I have been fairly consistent with my views re squads and inter-league co-operation as a method of giving teams more balance without vast amounts of additional outlay so SL wont get much of an arguement to her post from me. If anything I would expand the point and try to actively encourage teams in different divisions working together with the longer term aim to get to a major/minor league baseball type structure with riders moving up and down the divisions by staying with the same 'franchise' (albeit perhaps at different 'clubs'). Much as it may go against the British sporting model it would certainly 'fit' speedway better than those who argue for promotion and relegation!

I like the comments about longer term contracts (a better solution than the discredited asset system, particularly if average reduction incentives were included). As for suspensions / fines etc all well and good but we will need something with a bit more teeth than the BSPA management committee to implement it

Finally top marks to Stuart Douglas for many things he has done this year, seems like a promoter prepared to think the unthinkable although whether he can build a voting block to get any ideas discussed in November is a different matter (does he have to wait 3 years to get a vote - cant remember if its a new team or new promotion?)

[Deleted]

tonym said:

I personally hate r/r more than guests mainly because turning up a rider 'short' before a wheel is turned is asking for trouble IMO and very often another injury / underperforming rider turns the meeting into a farce, thats why I would like to see squads and make teams start a meeting with 7 riders

In days gone by, teams using R/R still had to bring seven riders, as a No.8 was compulsory. Unfortunately, that requirement went by the wayside in recent years.

tonym said:

whether he can build a voting block to get any ideas discussed in November is a different matter (does he have to wait 3 years to get a vote - cant remember if its a new team or new promotion?)

I think it applies to a new promoter, which is why many new promoters take on an existing promoter as a partner.

[Deleted]

tonym said:

whether he can build a voting block to get any ideas discussed in November is a different matter (does he have to wait 3 years to get a vote - cant remember if its a new team or new promotion?).

Wibblemuis said:

I think it applies to a new promoter, which is why many new promoters take on an existing promoter as a partner.

I believe you are correct there Wibblemuis, so in this case, step forward Jon Cook - who, surely by coincidence is 1/3 of the working party set-up to look at the problem in the EL. For the record, the other two are Jonathan Chapman and Matt Ford.

[Deleted]

kevh said:

step forward Jon Cook - who, surely by coincidence is 1/3 of the working party set-up to look at the problem in the EL.

Whilst it's perhaps to be applauded that the BSPA actually see a problem with the current guest system, I'd have thought there were more pressing issues to deal with at present.

[Deleted]

wibblemuis said:

kevh said:

step forward Jon Cook - who, surely by coincidence is 1/3 of the working party set-up to look at the problem in the EL.

Whilst it's perhaps to be applauded that the BSPA actually see a problem with the current guest system, I'd have thought there were more pressing issues to deal with at present.

And indeed that is exactly what the working party has been set up for - to look at, and sort out all the problems that the EL currently has. (Not just guests).

[Deleted]

So looking at these programme notes in a different light are they just an Alistair Campbell style 'briefing' to guage where the British speedway public (whats left of them) are on this issue? With messrs Cook, Chapman and Ford making amendments to their proposals based on the reaction?

Judging by their public statements the other two on the committee couldnt be further apart, Ford's 'nothing is wrong' earlier in the year against Chapman's 'huge changes' statement at half time a couple of weeks ago. I guess Ford was just seeing what support he could muster for the status quo as he would have the most to lose from any changes, dont think Chapman is that sharp politically and whilst he has done some good things in terms of meeting promotion I do worry if he is one of the best three candidates (volunteers?) to sit on a committee to determine the sports future in this country

So it would all seem to come down to the Lakeside third on the committee to come up with something sensible and whilst changing the guest rule is perhaps not the most important issue it does, as Douglas noted, have an influence on team building and team balance which is one of the areas it went wrong this season

[admin]

I'd say the first thing that has to be addressed is the derth of British talent in the sport as a whole. This leads to a reliance on overseas riders that, as is easily seen, is unhealthy for the sport.
But it can't be just a matter of telling clubs to field a set number of British riders, or a set number of British riders under the age of 21, 23 or whatever. There has to be real support for young British riders to encourage them to reach their potential.
Avtar Sandhu showed what can be achieved when he, according to rumour, delved into his admittedly deep pockets and funded decent equipment for Harris early in the 2005 season. That, in my view, has to be part of the way forward.
Instead of coughing over the readies in transfer fees for riders, let's see some of those thousands diverted into the support of young British riders.