Gemini Posted December 18, 2010 Report Share Posted December 18, 2010 .....Eastern wolf....... Basically most Coventry fans' idea of a compromise is no compromise or very little. Really? I take back what I said the other day you are now as equally annoying with your 'facts' as Stevebrum. By 'most' I presume you mean those on here? Is that about 20 in total who post regularly or have you personally interviewed the other 1,500 or so Coventry fans and know their views? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eastern wolf Posted December 18, 2010 Report Share Posted December 18, 2010 I would argue that the hypothetical compromise I've posted is at least that - a compromise. What you suggest - nothing but an inquiry into how the BSPA is run - is a collapse. Do you know what compromise means??? When you're outnumbered 8 to 1 do YOU know what compromise means? You're not exactly speaking from a position of strength. The Elite League WANTS Coventry but it doesn't NEED them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alan_boon Posted December 18, 2010 Report Share Posted December 18, 2010 do YOU know what compromise means? A settlement of differences in which each side makes concessions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eastern wolf Posted December 18, 2010 Report Share Posted December 18, 2010 Really? I take back what I said the other day you are now as equally annoying with your 'facts' as Stevebrum. By 'most' I presume you mean those on here? Is that about 20 in total who post regularly or have you personally interviewed the other 1,500 or so Coventry fans and know their views? Why keep pursuing this ridiculous line? You know exactly that I mean the Coventry fans who post on here. Just as Wolves and Poole fans are accused of toeing the BSPA line. We know you mean the posters on the forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crikeythatsfast Posted December 18, 2010 Report Share Posted December 18, 2010 When you're outnumbered 8 to 1 do YOU know what compromise means? You're not exactly speaking from a position of strength. The Elite League WANTS Coventry but it doesn't NEED them. But if KL and Brum hadn't of moved up they would have needed both the Bees and the Panthers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eastern wolf Posted December 18, 2010 Report Share Posted December 18, 2010 A settlement of differences in which each side makes concessions I see you conveniently blanked out the bit about being outnumbered 8 to 1. It can make a bit of a difference. Anyway we'll see what occurs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eastern wolf Posted December 18, 2010 Report Share Posted December 18, 2010 But if KL and Brum hadn't of moved up they would have needed both the Bees and the Panthers Bit of a pointless argument. King's Lynn and Birmingham DID move up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemini Posted December 18, 2010 Report Share Posted December 18, 2010 I did presume you meant the 20 regular Coventry posters as I said, but that still doesn't mean 'most' aren't in favour of a compromise or very little. How do you know? At a guess I would think that less than 10 have given any viewpoint and it just seems like the place is overrun with Bees fans because the same people are making similar posts. Everyone is going round and round in circles when nobody really knows anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve0 Posted December 18, 2010 Report Share Posted December 18, 2010 A settlement of differences in which each side makes concessions Coventry apologises and the BSPA agrees to let them back in -Simples :wink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eastern wolf Posted December 18, 2010 Report Share Posted December 18, 2010 (edited) I did presume you meant the 20 regular Coventry posters as I said, but that still doesn't mean 'most' aren't in favour of a compromise or very little. How do you know? At a guess I would think that less than 10 have given any viewpoint and it just seems like the place is overrun with Bees fans because the same people are making similar posts. Everyone is going round and round in circles when nobody really knows anything. Well I can't argue with any of that! Edited December 18, 2010 by eastern wolf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattK Posted December 18, 2010 Report Share Posted December 18, 2010 *sigh* I think we've pretty much established - in either a "this is disgusting!" or a "yeah, but Coventry deserved it" way - that Coventry were stitched up to push through the rules on average conversion, assessed averages, and the 8.01+ (bwahahahahaha) riders, and that these were the price the other teams paid to ensure the "big" teams aquiescence on the points limit. I would imagine that removing at least two of those rules would be the basis for Coventry's return, and that 6 of the 8 teams currently in the Elite League wouldn't give a flying fig about them going. Given that both Elite and Premier league clubs have already built teams around the existing rules, changes to any of the above simply to appease Coventry would make speedway even more of a laughing stock than it already is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crikeythatsfast Posted December 18, 2010 Report Share Posted December 18, 2010 Bit of a pointless argument. King's Lynn and Birmingham DID move up. It wasn't an argument, you might like to argue but I don't, I was just stating a valid point. If KL and Brum had said no to moving up, then they would have ALL had to compromise and sort it out would they not? When KL went to the AGM they were running PL, afterwards KL suddenly are running EL, come on now, surely you can see what happened Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alan_boon Posted December 18, 2010 Report Share Posted December 18, 2010 Coventry apologises and the BSPA agrees to let them back in -Simples :wink: *sigh* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edward Barrett Posted December 18, 2010 Report Share Posted December 18, 2010 If some sense is returning to the hallowed halls of BSPA headquarters and Coventry Stadium,then that can only be good news. On what terms none of us can know, until such time as an official statement is released. However, if the Bees return to the fold, surely it can only be on the terms of what was decided at the AGM. Anything else would make a mockery of arriving at a "majority decision", and may open the door for another promotion, or promotions, to stage some form of protest. Elite League teams have already embarked on team plans/signings/building for 2011, and should those plans be thrown into disarray due to any possible amendments as a compromise to Mr Sandhus' actions would be wrong, and further damage whatever reputation this (still just) great sport of ours has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Not Blinkered Posted December 18, 2010 Report Share Posted December 18, 2010 If the BSPA have backed downb, even to compromise then it sets a worrying precedence for other promoters to throw their toys out the pram in future AGMs to get what they want. If Sandhu as backed down and accepted the AGM rulings then fill credit to him for seeing sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eastern wolf Posted December 18, 2010 Report Share Posted December 18, 2010 It wasn't an argument, you might like to argue but I don't, I was just stating a valid point. If KL and Brum had said no to moving up, then they would have ALL had to compromise and sort it out would they not? When KL went to the AGM they were running PL, afterwards KL suddenly are running EL, come on now, surely you can see what happened I know what you mean but it's really immaterial now. The EL has the minimum 8 teams it needs (it could have been 10 but hey ho) so as we stand the EL can function in 2011. The BSPA could dig its heels in now and make no compromise of any sort if it wanted. When outnumbered 8 to 1 it leaves Coventry in a very difficult position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Brown Posted December 18, 2010 Report Share Posted December 18, 2010 Never mind all the Coventry haters, speedway without the 'Bees' would be a joke and everyone knows it, that's why they'll back down! *CHAMPIONS* Own stadium, own riders, best fans ur jealous! Clearly you are not a regular poster but for the sake of your fellow Coventry fans and all of the others on this list PLEASE don't start with that kind of attitude There is enough of them on the south coast to last us a lifetime Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philfromcov Posted December 18, 2010 Report Share Posted December 18, 2010 Well we know 8 Clubs didn't agree with it. And just becsue you agree with something doesn't make it right! The easiest way to have stopped all the nonsense was to make assessed riders at six points, no one could have complained, but they didn't why? Look forward to you lot whinging wen the rules are changed and they effect your team I assume you will be happy then. This mess is not os coventrys making, if they just stopped pissing around with the rules every year, we would all now where we stand. We expect the rules to change every year, pretty much someone is demanding something or they will walk away. Look at Eastbourne, every year they want the average lower and lower, every year it seems Coventry have to pay for a rider rather than lone them, effectively Coventry have been subsidising Eastbourne Why do Eastbourne always get the rule changes they want and demand? They are always threatening to close down. Poole last year threatened to go NL I'd they didn't get what they wanted. It's just the same old winter arguments, but this time they have bitten off to much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alan_boon Posted December 18, 2010 Report Share Posted December 18, 2010 And while we're at it, we don't know it was 8 to 1. At that point, Ipswich were still voting in the EL, and Coventry & Peterborough made up the 9. So the votes - if it even got that far while Coventry & Peterborough were still in the room, could have been 5 to 4. Without them it could have been as low as 4 teams agreeing on the changes. We don't know. Which is why no-one other than eastern wolf ever mentions it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Blachshadow Posted December 18, 2010 Report Share Posted December 18, 2010 Given that both Elite and Premier league clubs have already built teams around the existing rules, changes to any of the above simply to appease Coventry would make speedway even more of a laughing stock than it already is. KL apart - and their team-building does seem to have been done with indecent haste for some reason - all the riders signed so far by the other teams could have been predicted by most posters on here once last season ended and would have been signed regardless of the limit. The agreed-upon EL limit has been lifted before after most, if not all but one, teams had been signed, sealed and delivered. Why is this occasion any different? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts