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

[Khabiboulin]

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

 

 

Produce your own talent if you don't want to pay for others'.

[Authorised]

When outnumbered 8 to 1 it leaves Coventry in a very difficult position.

 

You have said 8 to 1 at least 4 times.....where is the evidence?

 

Pawlicki goes back to 4.00, keep the points limit for the season at the ridiculous low, PL coversion back to 50%. Total organisational review including rule book, finances and media contracts. Ideal Compromise for all.

Edited December 18, 2010 by Authorised

[Steve0]

 

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.

I have to strongly disagree with you on this .... This mess IS Coventry's making - they walked out of the AGM and by doing so caused a string of events that we could all have done without. There are ways and means of dealing with situations and quite frankly walking out leaves you without a leg to stand on!!

[doc61]

just a little thought. none of us know what rules have actually been agreed on officially. general leaks from clubs are usually a good indication though. none of us know what reason coventry had for walking out , or panthers for that matter.

 

some posters on here are saying bspa cant give in to coventry as teams have already started building their teams to the limit set at the agm, this is in itself a valid point. my thought however is , could the 2 team walkout be because they had already started building their teams using rules that were proposed at the pre agm meeting and were subsequently changed at the agm.

 

coventry and peterboroughs team building could have already started before the agm vote because this may be what was agreed at the pre agm meeting.

 

on the pawlicki issue coventry didnt break any rules, maybe bent them to almost breaking point so shouldnt be punished, however to show some sort of consistancy he should have been treated the same as jesper b jensen [ now monberg] who was given a higher average than he should have.

 

the inconsistancy of speedway rules is a massive issue that needs to be addressed otherwise we will have the same problem at the start of each season

[eastern wolf]

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.

 

Make assessed riders 6.00. It wasn't voted for and we have no evidence that that's what Coventry wanted either.

 

Coventry and Peterborough are the only teams to have walked away.

 

Coventry have subsidised Eastbourne. Over the years Wolves have had to loan out world class riders like Sam, PK and Ronnie Correy in the interests of equalisation. No complaints.

 

Poole threatened to go NL. If I remember right they didn't get what they wanted and they didn't go NL.

 

And yes we'll whinge when the rules don't go our way. But we won't expect our clubs to pull out of the league.

[MrB]

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

Well if you're going to cherry pick the riders we have trained up and nurchered and throw money and gifts at them its hardly our fault is it!

[eastern wolf]

You have said 8 to 1 at least 4 times.....where is the evidence?

 

Pawlicki goes back to 4.00, keep the points limit for the season at the ridiculous low, PL coversion back to 50%. Total organisational review including rule book, finances and media contracts. Ideal Compromise for all.

 

The fact that 8 teams have accepted the new rules. Those 8 teams may not all have agreed on all of the rules but were able to compromise for the good of the league. So however you may like to spin it otherwise it's 8 to 1 (there I said it again).

[7oakseagle]

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

 

I hadn't realised that you had bought Lewis.

Did we get a decent price?

[Dave67]

Perhaps compromise will mean that Cov will race, we'll have a 40 limit, the rules regarding the 8.00 will stand, however Pawlicki will keep his 4.00 average, this rule will be effective from 2011 & not retrospectively . PBoro get to race in the PL & finally we will get a full review looking into the possibility of an independent body to run Brit Speedway.

 

Seem's like a sensible compromise to me.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Authorised]

The fact that 8 teams have accepted the new rules. Those 8 teams may not all have agreed on all of the rules but were able to compromise for the good of the league. So however you may like to spin it otherwise it's 8 to 1 (there I said it again).

 

These new rules? What are they again? The vote was 5-4 if you believe Ronnie Russell, so do not try and spin it into 8-1. That is like saying 100% of UK are behind a Conservative-Lib Dem coalition, even though 0% voted for that particular outcome.

[DarrenCook]

Perhaps compromise will mean that Cov will race, we'll have a 40 limit, the rules regarding the 8.00 will stand, however Pawlicki will keep his 4.00 average

 

 

 

And CVS will get Kerr on 3.24

[The White Knight]

I just wish this situation could be settled amicably. It has done the cause of Speedway a great deal of damage.

 

We say we want greater exposure for our Sport in the media - I don't know why when things like this go on. I think that the lack of media interest is a bit of a positive at the moment. Not only are we lumbered with quite a few stupid Rules - we have self interested Promoters (on BOTH sides) trying to prove themselves right and Speedway is the main thing that suffers.

 

For those with the best interests of the Sport at heart - let's just hope that a workable agreement can be sorted out and that Coventry can ride in the Elite League.

 

Might it also not be a good idea, in the interests of harmony, to allow Peterborough into the Premier League. If it can be done at this late stage - then - it SHOULD be done. The door to the Premier League was slammed on them far too quickly, and, it seems to outside observers like me, with nothing other than vindictive intent. Revenge is never a good thing.

[superguest]

Perhaps compromise will mean that Cov will race, we'll have a 40 limit, the rules regarding the 8.00 will stand, however Pawlicki will keep his 4.00 average, this rule will be effective from 2011 & not retrospectively . PBoro get to race in the PL & finally we will get a full review looking into the possibility of an independent body to run Brit Speedway.

 

Seem's like a sensible compromise to me.

 

 

I would assume that will be the conditions, for which coventry come back to the drawing board. However, I think all other riders will be given 11 meeting averages in 2011. (Lasse Bjerre, Chris Kerr and William Lawson)

Edited December 18, 2010 by superguest

[Dornier]

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.

Some good points there Phil

[philfromcov]

Produce your own talent if you don't want to pay for others'.

Produce some supporters!

[Halifaxtiger]

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.

 

Thtat's very much hitting the nail on the head and something that has been utterly brushed aside by the Sandhu supporters.

 

According to this weeks speedway star, it is stated:

 

'both clubs are committed to reach a point where speedway becomes more transparent, run in an impartial way and members concerns can be raised in a productive forum'

 

It would be very surprising, then, if there is a compromise and it is solely about rules and regulations, because according to that statement at least it was never about that anyway.

[eastern wolf]

These new rules? What are they again? The vote was 5-4 if you believe Ronnie Russell, so do not try and spin it into 8-1. That is like saying 100% of UK are behind a Conservative-Lib Dem coalition, even though 0% voted for that particular outcome.

 

The ConDem coalition certainly don't have 100% of the UK population behind them. But the fact is they have 100% of the government. The only way for the opposition to change the government is to make a good argument for what they believe in and persuade people to change the government at the next election. That's what Sandhu has to do. Put forward his argument and hope that enough people agree with him at the next AGM.

[kingbee]

When Cov come back (as they surely will) it can surely only be under the 2011 BSPA rules. KL and Birmingham joined the league under those rules (and indeed KL have almost finalised their team based on that) and wouldn't they have a right to take action if the rules were changed to suit Coventry? (not that they would).

 

It's hard to imagine that there won't be some sort of review of the workings of the BSPA during the coming year and hopefully that will be compromise enough for Coventry to commit to 2011.

Know body knows what the rules are for 2011 yet they have not been issued no statement from Bspa on running rules for 2011

[arnieg]

PL coversion back to 50%.

 

Wouldn't that mean that Ipswich and Newcastle would be over the PL team building limit?

[Dogstar]

Bit of a pointless argument. King's Lynn and Birmingham DID move up.

No it's not. Coventry and Peterborough rightly stood up against the establishment and the BSPA called their bluff by enticing Birmingham and Kings Lynn to step up. Tony Mole would have helped the BSPA based on certain conditions being guaranteed and I expect that the Chapmans took a little coaxing. Buster is no fool and the deal would have had to be good.

My reckoning is that the BSPA bluff backfired, as 'Poker face Sandhu' called in his cavalry of lawyers and they then realised they were in a fight that they could well lose. Hence the emargo on all Coventry assets and the mediation talks to reach a compromise and have the Bees back in the EL in 2011.

I have a feeling that Peterborough will get a PL place if that's what they want, regardless of what's been printed on the subject so far.

Expect to see a few ammendments to the rules set at the AGM and expect a joint statement from the BSPA and Coventry/Peterborough saying nice things about each other and that all will be rosy in the speedway garden from now on.

The likes of Shovlar, Eastern Wolf, Stevebrum, Tsunami can continue to badmouth the Coventry management, but the real facts of this will never be released and so the hearsay can continue right up to the first meeting of next season.

Many of us are of the opinion that this has spooked the BSPA and will have an effect on how they arrive at decisions in the future. The fact that Coventry and their embargoed riders were always going to be included next season in the EL proves that there were a few squeeky bums on MC.

Just my slant on things of course.