Steve0 Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 No, they couldn't justify losses with the current rules. Thats not cannot afford. I cannot justify buying a Kia Picanto because they're rubbish. I can afford a Kia Picanto. If some rules has changed (due to a compramise) maybe Rick Frost can now justify the losses. If you expect someone to lose 150k, you have to give them some glimmer of hope, you're not going to lose 150k to be whipping boys and have no fun, you'll find a new way to have fun spending 150k (and I'm sure nobody needs telling how much fun it could be to spend 150k in a year!) A play on words- the fact is that Rick Frost has said that Peterborough will not be riding in the EL next season. FACT. Having said that, the BSPA have also said that the EL will not include Coventry or Peterborough but I think they will make an announcement that, following a democratic vote, the other promoters have allowed late entry to Coventry! What makes you think the 8 EL promoters will change any rules which were agreed at the AGM? Why should they? They have all been building teams to these (as yet unpublished) rules!! Coventry and Peterborough decided to leave the AGM without declaring their intent to run - FACT. If they want back in - it will be on the other promoters terms and not two people who frankly acted like spoiled brats! Time will tell and personally, I would like to see them both back (Peterborough without Bjerre and PUK) but on the terms of the BSPA! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
essaitch Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 A play on words- the fact is that Rick Frost has said that Peterborough will not be riding in the EL next season. FACT. Your Wrong, you keep having the facts pointed out to you. Suggest you wait and see. What makes you think the 8 EL promoters will change any rules which were agreed at the AGM? Why should they? They have all been building teams to these (as yet unpublished) rules!! Coventry and Peterborough decided to leave the AGM without declaring their intent to run - FACT. Show me the rule that says they have to. FACT If they want back in - it will be on the other promoters terms and not two people who frankly acted like spoiled brats! Time will tell and personally, I would like to see them both back (Peterborough without Bjerre and PUK) but on the terms of the BSPA! BSPA have been acting illegally, it won't be exactly on their terms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rigsby Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 What makes you think the 8 EL promoters will change any rules which were agreed at the AGM? Why should they? They have all been building teams to these (as yet unpublished) rules!! Coventry and Peterborough decided to leave the AGM without declaring their intent to run - FACT. If they want back in - it will be on the other promoters terms and not two people who frankly acted like spoiled brats! Essaitch was right, there is a hymn sheet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
essaitch Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 All Sandu's fault Coventry can rot. How is the BSPA breaking the law Sandhu's fault? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
no-brakes-uk Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 All Sandu's fault Coventry can rot. Again, how? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Smith Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 How is the BSPA breaking the law Sandhu's fault? And how are the BSPA breaking the law?????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
essaitch Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 And how are the BSPA breaking the law?????? You've not been reading this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Leslie Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 And how are the BSPA breaking the law?????? Please don't ask sensible questions. You won't get an answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Smith Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 You've not been reading this? Nope, how are the BSPA breaking the law??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve0 Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 A play on words- the fact is that Rick Frost has said that Peterborough will not be riding in the EL next season. FACT. Your Wrong, you keep having the facts pointed out to you. Suggest you wait and see. BSPA have been acting illegally, it won't be exactly on their terms. Firstly - I am NOT wrong!! Rick Frost did say that Peterborough would not be running in the EL next season - it is in his press release!! Now things may have moved on but that is what he said so I am not wrong! Secondly, I do not believe the BSPA acted illegally and we will just have to agree to differ on that one. If the BSPA have had to backtrack because of threats from these two clubs then I will not be spending any money on speedway next year in protest and I'm sure I won't be alone in that !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ladyluck Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 I wonder if this is the time to say how you'd feel if it were to happen? If Coventry run with changes made to the rules that forced their hand in the first place, I'd be delighted - not only for the Coventry fans but for all fans of speedway in this country. Coventry and Peterborough running would be a bad thing and them running having been appeased by a cowardly BSPA would be a complete and utter disaster. Nothing is resolved in the least and the potential exists for legal action by the remaining promotions, or are they expected to take it like "good 'ol boys" and "speedway people" as opposed to outsiders like Sandhu and Frost? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
essaitch Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 Nope, how are the BSPA breaking the law??? EU employment and competition law I believe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Jasper Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 Yep and the whole mess was caused by Sandu. All Sandu's fault Coventry can rot. An excellent contribution, first of all its Sandhu. Secondly I dont believe he was in attendance. Now I dont know what went on, or why they walked out and whether it was justified or not, however to blame it on Sandhu is imbecilic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
no-brakes-uk Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 Secondly, I do not believe the BSPA acted illegally and we will just have to agree to differ on that one. If the BSPA have had to backtrack because of threats from these two clubs then I will not be spending any money on speedway next year in protest and I'm sure I won't be alone in that !! Even if they are proved right to challenge BSPA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Smith Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 EU employment and competition law I believe Ahhhhh, you believe. So we've cleared that one up that you are guessing. So in fact the BSPA as we all know of at the moment until there are any facts haven't broken any laws. Brilliant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ladyluck Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 (edited) EU employment and competition law I believe Please expand on this from your obvious extensive knowledge of EU Employment and Competition Law, no doubt garnered from many years spent arguing such cases in the courts. Edited December 20, 2010 by ladyluck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
essaitch Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 Please expand on this from your obvious extensive knowledge of EU Employment and Competition Law, no doubt garnered from many years spent arguing such cases in the courts. I know nothing about it myself. But the fact Peterborough and Coventry have employed Specialist council in these areas suggests that's areas suggests thats where the problem is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DizzAssStar Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 You've not been reading this? Some of us don't take much notice of the views of barrack-room lawyers............ (as you would say FACT!!!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ere Bert What 'Arry Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 (edited) You know this for definite, do you? Is this going to be your epitaph? Edited December 20, 2010 by Ere Bert What 'Arry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Leslie Posted December 20, 2010 Report Share Posted December 20, 2010 I know nothing about it myself. That's the first thing you've got right. But the fact Peterborough and Coventry have employed Specialist council in these areas Would that be Peterborough City Council and Coventry City Council then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts