There is no other track in the world that needs another licence because they do not have the media and lots of do gooders who want the meeting banned.
I want to race at the TT for a few more years and anything that helps to keep the meeting running is OK by me. As I've said before the main problem with the TT licence as far as I'm concerned is that it is not tight enough. There are still people riding around there that should't be.
Anyway I agree with Don about one thing, this is not what this thread is about.
Well before Don hijacks any more of the thread, I think that appearance cash should be given, but based on past results. Prove it or loose it is my point I think.
When people say one thing and mean another its called politics, when organisers say one thing and mean another its called a mistake, when the ACU say one thing and mean another its called information.
I'm sure there must be a rule of thumb in working things like this out?
1) As DCLUCIE says, past results. £X,XXX,XXX.00 based on say 1st to 3rd last year with a sliding scale down to the same positions up to 5yrs previously. The same formula taking into consideration the next 3 positions and so on?
2) The same formula based on positions in a World Championship.
3) Again based on a National Championship
4) Centre Championship
And so on. The greater the status of the championship, the higher the appearance award.
If it was transparent then there could be no arguments.
Ex gratia payments to riders would not be neseccary as they would have proved themselves worthy at one of the above levels!
There may be issues if say, David Knight fancied a go, but it should be a Road Racing championship to count!
pat slinn Wrote:With all this talk about appearence money and licencess makes me think about Mike Hailwoods comeback in 1979. Mike actually told me that he did not have racing licence, or had not filled in, or signed anything.!!.
I can't believe the ACU would ever ever let that happen??????