PHILIPRISING

HAVE heard that new silencers are being tested in both Denmark and Sweden and that they could end up being approved for use quite soon.

NEVER saw Freddie ride but spoke to and interviewed him many times and was always charming and courteous. Nice man...

THOUGHT it (negative) was your specialist subject...

MY own view (and it is nothing more than that) is that the situation is different for individual riders and the actual tracks. They sign up to be members of an association (the BSPA) and to abide by its rules.

HAVE been banging the drum about 'out of contract' riders in and out of print, including Speedway Star, for many years. Your comment about Ryan Sullivan and restraint of trade is not the same thing at all. You cannot force a club to employ a rider they don't want. No more than a journalist could force Speedway Star to employ them if we didn't want to. But, conversely, Speedway Star couldn't prevent a journalist with whom we didn't have a contract for writing for anyone of his choice.

BUT would you try and sell or rent a home that you actually didn't own?

IF you devised the world's best lift no doubt you would charge anyone who wanted to copy it...

THAT was a qualifying round ... this is the actual GP Challenge from where the top three will progess to the 2014 SGP series.

I'M on my way!

CAN only concur with what has already been suggested but it can be a but hit and miss...

I HEAR that he is still not fit enough to race competitively

INTERESTING article on the future of greyhound tracks - many of which are or were associated with speedway, here ... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-20968535

STILL doesn't take into account the fact that if they don't have a current and valid contract with Andersen they have no right to stop him signing for whomever he pleases.

NOT as up to speed on soccer's situation regarding freedom of movement as I would like to be, but believe football has a perfectly workable system to protect clubs who develop young players. As you say, this could actually benefit British speedway.

READ comments under the Asset System Flawed thread on Speedway News and Discussions and you might get it... why should anyone purchase something from someone who doesn't have the right to sell?

With regard to Miedzinski... in truth they should not have been able to sell someone who wasn't theirs to sell. Or even receive a loan fee. NOT if the whole concept of riders being regarded as assets was deemed illegal.

THAT'S an even more laughable sideshow isn't it. Presumably Ipswich should get some credit for Gollob winning a year earlier.

AT the risk of repeating myself ad infinitum ... Hancock isn't 'owned' by anyone in the UK. Nor, for that matter, are any riders who do not have a current, valid contract with a British club. Does anyone believe that their current employer actually "owns" them? And that even if you went and worked overseas for a number of years they would still "own" you? You cannot, surely, just transfer ownership of someone without their knowledge or, indeed, agreement.

NOT sure that registration as such comes into it. Riders are licensed by the SCB as an affiliate of the ACU and have a contract with the club they ride for which has an expiry date, usually October 31 ... which is the crux of the matter. NO, cannot speak for KL.

But they are not owned ... that is the point.

DON'T think it is like that. They only have one job... a speedway rider. In most if not all cases they are probably registered as a business. Joe Bloggs Racing ... who sell their product (themselves) where they can ... GB, Poland, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, etc. Preventing Joe Bloggs Racing from doing business in the UK, for example, could be construed as a restraint of trade.

You say riders not used by their parent club are always available on loan. Have you told Peterborough that.

THAT is quite easily overcome. Sign him on a long-term contract. Then if they cannot include him in their team they can quite legally and justifiably ask for a transfer fee. I haven't seen a complete asset list for some time (don't even know if the BSPA have one) but last time I did it included riders who had long since hung up their leathers. We are not talking about property or pieces of furniture but human beings. They have rights. Slavery was abolished long ago.

BUT Bosman determined that players out of contract were free to move elsewhere, which is where the analogy with speedway is relevant. Of course not ... it is not the same thing at all.

ALSO posted this on the Swindon (Elite League) section ... IT'S not a restriction on earning, it's a restriction of trade. The fact that they ride elsewhere is (in my opinion) irrelevant. As a self-employed tradesman any restriction on a rider "trading his wares" so to speak is surely illegal? I was quite heavily involved in soccer journalism at the time of the Bosman ruling and have always thought that British speedway would have to toe the line one day. I still do. SS has asked the question of many promoters over the years but they generally close ranks and say that it would be the ruination of British speedway. Presumably they include "rider assets" on their balance sheets. Scrapping the asset system might result in some short term pain but could prove hugely beneficial in the longer term and might actually become a more practical and workable form of rider distribution than some of the artificial and contrived methods currently in use.