Jump to content
British Speedway Forum

Coventry 99 % Certain To Be In Elite Next Season Acording To Sandu


Recommended Posts

If Frost was not allowed to vote it would have been because he is not a member of the BSPA. Only members would be allowed to vote in any organisation, and would he would not be able to challenge that in a court of law if the BSPA rules state members only.

 

I presume that - before the AGM Frost was accepted as being at the AGM because the BSPA member of Peterborough was unable to attend. Why else would he turn up?

 

Probably Frost's opinion didn't fit in with the opinions that th BSPA members wanted/expected him to have...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I understand there's a three year qualification period before a promoter can vote. That being the case, and bearing in mind Peter Oakes' situation, the case suggested by Doc61 might - just might - be a possibility for action. Why not answer him rather than comment that Mr Frost might not even be a member of the BSPA.

 

I was putting forward a reason why Frost MIGHT NOT have been allowed to vote. Nothing more and we know the reason why Peter Oakes was absent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Frost was not allowed to vote it would have been because he is not a member of the BSPA. Only members would be allowed to vote in any organisation, and would he would not be able to challenge that in a court of law if the BSPA rules state members only.

 

I believe the BSPA ruling is that someone has to be a Promoter for three years before they can vote, as Debbie Hancock at Somerset.

But she was allowed to attend the AGM as a PROMOTER - she is in the group picture of the BSPA, which was in the Speedway Star.

Edited by Pollyanna
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was putting forward a reason why Frost MIGHT NOT have been allowed to vote. Nothing more and we know the reason why Peter Oakes was absent.

 

Your answer came over as a statement of fact correcting a suggestion made by another poster - it WOULD have been because, not it MIGHT have been because.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

pawlicki could have scored enough for us to win from any position in the team so that argument really does'nt hold water , fact is poole were not good enough to beat coventry whatever the riding order was

 

We have all seen riders score bucket loads of points from reserve only for the points to dry up once moved into the main body of the team. So there is no guarantee of a comparable points haul.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe the BSPA ruling is that someone has to be a Promoter for three years before they can vote, as Debbie Hancock at Somerset.

yes i understand the 3 year rule, but what i heard suggested was that frost as co promoter was to be allowed the peterborough vote due to the circumstances of peter oakes [ the other co promoter]absence. this was then rescinded at the agm.

 

thats the rumour i heard not stating it is right.

 

if panthers had known before that frost would not have been allowed a vote maybe peter oakes would have been there.

 

i would like to think that the bspa would have been a bit more respectful than basically forcing him to be there

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Depends who you believe. Sandhu said the BSPA offered a way out and he said it was ridiculous.

 

 

Taken from the Coventry website, Stevebrum:-

 

OFFICIAL STATEMENT - FRIDAY DECEMBER 10

 

 

Friday 10 December 2010

WE had hoped to bring news to Bees & Panthers fans on the current situation regarding the respective clubs dispute with the BSPA; however we have encountered delays.

 

We have engaged a specialist competition law barrister to represent us as, in our view, we have been given no option by the BSPA but to do so. Efforts to seek resolution remain ongoing and mediation has been offered to the BSPA to which we await a response from the BSPA legal team.

If we are unable to achieve resolution by way of mediation, we assure our fans that we shall do all that is possible to seek legal redress as advised by our respective legal team and specialist counsel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still classed as the play off's, whats the bloody difference. And you call me pathetic!!

 

 

****sigh****

 

NO Starman - it is NOT the Play Offs - I said a different Competition A LEAGUE CUP (containing the Teams that would have been in the Play Offs had there been any).

 

My idea was to stop all of this hostility by having TWO Competitions. The League Championship (Won by the Team collecting most Points over a Season) and The League Cup which would be competed for by the top six or eight Clubs.

 

Two Trophies = a possibility of TWO seperate Winners. Now, at present, there can only be one Winner - and - that is what is causing all the trouble here - as far as I can see.

 

I am only trying to get a positive argument aceross to stop people feeling robbed of their rightful place as League Champions. I am offering a way that the top Teams can play each other for a Trophy SEPERATE to the League Championship.

 

This way it would stop CVS, Mr. Ford, Mr. Sandhu and Mr. Trump or anyone else for that matter cribbing because they lost the Play Offs.

 

I give up. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have all seen riders score bucket loads of points from reserve only for the points to dry up once moved into the main body of the team. So there is no guarantee of a comparable points haul.

we beat poole by 22 points over both legs , so if pawlicki had rode at another position he would.nt have scored 4 points over 2 legs and we would'nt have won , to be honest i wish we had'nt then this whole situation would'nt have arisen ,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

we beat poole by 22 points over both legs , so if pawlicki had rode at another position he would.nt have scored 4 points over 2 legs and we would'nt have won , to be honest i wish we had'nt then this whole situation would'nt have arisen ,

Its not quite that simple.

If Pawlicki had scored 11 points less that would result in a 22 point swing so the play offs would have been tied if that were the case. If he had scored 12 points less that would result in a two point win for Poole. (Failure to score one point results in a two point swing to the opposition.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its not quite that simple.

If Pawlicki had scored 11 points less that would result in a 22 point swing so the play offs would have been tied if that were the case. If he had scored 12 points less that would result in a two point win for Poole. (Failure to score one point results in a two point swing to the opposition.)

Yes they were robbed . I can see now why they are so bitter about our hollow victory .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes they were robbed . I can see now why they are so bitter about our hollow victory .

 

I am not saying that they were robbed.

Just pointing out the flaws in your logic.

It makes a big difference having a rider like Pawlicki at reserve which is why Cov are desperate to keep him on the 4.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

......The White Knight......

 

PLEASE BSPA drop the Play Offs and let's get back to some sanity.

I have put a lot of thought in to this - and - I am sure it is the right way to go.

 

How can it be the right way to go? Poole would have won the league in July so the rest of the season for all the other teams would have been of no consequence. With the play-offs there was still the fight to get into the top four and the excitement of the semi's and play off final. Surely no-one could deny what drama it was? I showed my son and his wife heat 6 at Poole and they were both so impressed they watched the whole of the meeting even though he's previously said he can't understand what I see in Speedway because first out of the gate wins. :lol:

 

.....Stevebrum......

Amazingly you have just picked my posts and name checked me out of accident then. :rolleyes:

 

I can't be bothered to check but from memory I've replied to posts from ladyluck, alan_boon, starman2006, Eastern Wolf, The White Night and just one of yours over the past couple of days. In fact one of your quotes was actually a reply to Eastern Wolf and wasn't to you at all. Try not to get so paranoid because unfortunately you're not lucky enough to have a stalker.

Edited by Gemini
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Taken from the Coventry website, Stevebrum:-

 

OFFICIAL STATEMENT - FRIDAY DECEMBER 10

 

 

Friday 10 December 2010

WE had hoped to bring news to Bees & Panthers fans on the current situation regarding the respective clubs dispute with the BSPA; however we have encountered delays.

 

We have engaged a specialist competition law barrister to represent us as, in our view, we have been given no option by the BSPA but to do so. Efforts to seek resolution remain ongoing and mediation has been offered to the BSPA to which we await a response from the BSPA legal team.

If we are unable to achieve resolution by way of mediation, we assure our fans that we shall do all that is possible to seek legal redress as advised by our respective legal team and specialist counsel.

 

What about the comment he made to fans at the support day when he told them what was offered was `silly`.

No mention of that tho.

Edited by stevebrum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes they were robbed . I can see now why they are so bitter about our hollow victory .

 

Well, I'm not bitter about your victory in the play-offs, speedibee.

The best team won - and that was Coventry. No doubt about that.

 

Now can we move on to next season, please?

Edited by Pollyanna
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I'm not bitter about your victory in the play-offs, speedibee.

The best team won - and that was Coventry. No doubt about that.

 

Now can we move on to next season, please?

hopefully tommorrow will bring the news that most speedway supporters want to hear and we can move on ,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy