Cycle News is a weekly magazine that covers all aspects of motorcycling including Supercross, Motocross and MotoGP as well as new motorcycles
Issue link: https://magazine.cyclenews.com/i/128229
By Lell STEVE COX s s was made clear in this space last week, many of the riders on the AMA National Motocross and Supercross tour feel as if they may as well be mute. Whatever they say, it seems, falls on deaf ears. Well, the question is, what can be done about that? It would seem that the answer is pretty simple if you follow the model set by the other stakeholders in the sport. The AMA National track owners have an organization where they speak as one - it's called the National Promoters Group (NPG). The AMA's board members speak as one as well, under the AMA umbrella. If the riders are to be heard among these two immense voices, it would appear that they need a strong, united voice of their own. "Racing in Europe, we had like a riders' union," Grant Langston said at Washougal as his left arm sat immersed in ice. "People would nominate three or four guys who would do like a track inspection, and with comments they would go to the organizers. I remember a few times when things weren't as we liked, we all stuck together and refused to race unless they fixed it - and they did! Because if there's no riders, there's no show. "But the problem here is, there doesn't seem to be that organization, and I wish sometimes there was because not only could they make things better, they can improve safety. I walk around the track and see wooden stakes sticking out of the ground, or there'd be a big drain sitting on the side of the track with big stakes sticking out of it. There's so many things just off the track that, in our opinion, should never be there because if you go flying off the track, you can run into one of those fences with the iron poles. leaning toward the A track. And that could go through someone's chest, you know? C'mon, you have to have some sort of safety." But if a riders' union is going to work in America, there are a few things that would need to be kept in in mind. First, the tracks in Europe have already been used to working with the riders' organization, so they're more likely to be close to acceptable, according to the riders, the day the riders arrive. Many of the tracks in America - such as Unadilla, as was pointed out in last week's column - could need a heck of a lot of work to be con,sidered good again by the riders. Safety is of the utmost importance, of course, but negotiating for it will require diplomacy, planning and patience, not overbearing pressure that is placed upon a promoter during a Saturday night inspection before a Sunday race. Perhaps an even bigger obstacle is the one thing that has killed off talk of riders' unions in the past: The powers that be have always seen it as a threat to their wallets because the riders always seem to want to go after the purses first. That's a bad move, and it shouldn't be anywhere near the top of the agenda. If there were another, better series to go race with bigger purses, the best riders would already be there, but there isn't. And it's safe to say that the majority of riders who could benefit most from this hypothetical union - the privateers - don't usually have a very good understanding of the amount of money put into marketing, maintenance and everything else at a National, so how could they know how much money to "demand," except to say, "What we do is worth more"? Schoolteachers should make more than $35,000 a year, too, but then again, they knew the pay when they signed up for the job. So, at least until the safety issues are fully addressed, purses should be at the bottom of the list, if at all. Larry Ward confirmed the money issue as being a stumbling block to a meaningful riders' organization. "That's why the riders' unions have been shot down in the past, because the first issue is always money, money, money - because that's a big issue," said Ward. "Everybody has their price, though. We'll ride on rocks if you pay us more money , in reality that's true, but it's definitely not right." Larry Brooks, a longtime AMA racer and current Red Bull KTM team manager, agreed. "It seems like every time a 'riders' association' is brought up, the promoters and the sanction, ing bodies panic, because they see money coming out of their pockets, but it would only help the riders," he says. "The riders are the ones that are putting their necks on the line. The riders are the ones at risk on the track, and the promoters are putting money in their pocket. People don't come to watch the promoter, they In an upt:tHIIlng ISsue III Cycle flews come to watch Grant Langston and Ryan Hughes. We need to protect our riders. That's our investment. "The quad incident [at Mount Morris], the rocks [at Unadilla] and the flagmen [at Washougal] - those are all things that we can do something about, and I think the promoters - not necessarily the sanctioning bodies, but the promoters - need to take care of that. The AMA is supposed to protect the riders, but it seems like it's the promoters who are putting these guys out here - the flagmen and the quads. So it's a little bit B.S. to put our guys in danger like that. I was a rider, so I really feel for these guys, and I know what they're going through. " Team Solitaire boss and top circuit privateer Ryan Clark has put a lot of thought into the matter as well. "Obviously, I think it [a riders' organization] would be good for the riders I think it'd be good for everyone," he says. "I think people are threatened by a riders' 'union' because they think the riders will just demand lots of ridiculous things - monetarily, mostly, is what I think they're worried about. But I've long felt like some sort of organization amongst the riders would at least give us more of a voice in the future of our own sport and help to eliminate some of the safety concerns and some of the insurance concerns. But for the short term, to be able to gather the ideas and thoughts and go to the promoters and the sanctioning body with ideas about how to make their job even easier. A little bit of work now is going to save them a lot of headaches down the line. I think that something like that would help everybody in the long run if people could see the forest for the trees. "It's going to take somebody putting themselves on the line to get it going. Just somebody that everybody knows has street-cred and isn't just blowing smoke. But it's going to be a long, arduous process, because nothing can change overnight, and even that is going to be a multistep process." Sure, the promoters might not like it too much, but at least they would have fair warning if they did choose to do nothing for another year. The riders aren't stupid, and they take notice of the track operators who put effort into improving their facilities. Binghamton AU MX sedalia AMA DT Gennan Wortd MX "I think Binghamton is a lot better now than it was the first time that I went there," says Ricky Carmichael. "Also, Red Bud is 10 times better since the first time I went there. I like it when the promoters are making changes, but then when you have some tracks and you tell them what you want and then they don't do anything about it, then it's just like, 'Why should I even say anything?'" That's the exact attitude by which the riders and the sport should not have to suffer. Motocross is a potentially dangerous sport even if everything is prepared perfectly at any track, but when the riders' safety issues are ignored, the danger is multiplied. With how long the riders have been complaining, and how long they've been ignored, a riders' union ~ould be the only way they will have a hand in shaping the future of their own sport - keeping in mind that we're not talking about giving the proverbial monkeys the keys to the zoo here. If an association were to get started, here's one suggestion: Gather a set amount of money from every single rider - whether they race one or 30 races a year - and use said money to hire a responsible, respectable, level-headed professional liaison to fly to all of the races, check and sign off on whatever issues need attention, and not create or address issues that are of no concern to the riders, such as rule changes, etc. Then the rest of the riders should keep their mouths shut if they find something wrong later on. This would guarantee good press for the tracks, and it would eliminate the "whiner" label that riders who actually speak out seem to earn sometimes. However, although it may be a good idea, it may never happen. "We've tried a hundred times in the past to get like a riders' union, but it's impossible because we are subcontracted by the factories, and the factories have contracts for us to be at the races," says Larry Ward. "If we're not there, under their circumstances, we don't get paid, so ... And as athletes, we have a lot of pride, and we just say, 'It's tough conditions, but it's the same for everybody, so I'll do the best I can ...' Change is rarely easy, but when the long-term benefits outweigh the short-term costs, it just makes sense. eN