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

[Wolfsbane]

Dorset is about the most perfect place to live in the UK. We are very, very lucky to live here.

 

There is football if you call it that at Bournemouth, and Southampton is only 30 mins away. Hampshire play cricket, again 30 mins away.

 

Dorset has a spectacular coastline, the second largest natural habour in the world, a warm micro cimate, shops, cafe's, bars, millionaire footballers and pop stars and a very cool social scene (of which I am now too old to enjoy as I did)

 

And no motorways bringing the throngs from the north. Add in beautiful country lanes, it's just perfect. Oh and it has two speedway clubs. What more would anyone really want?

 

Sorry its gone so far off topic.

 

And the Blandford Fly. Vicious little bleeders

[Aces51]

Typical BSPA, thankyou Rick Frost for saving Peterborough, paying off all the Horton debts, Making the place look much better, Having a good Team and paying them, Losing reputidly £140k last year.

Oh and by the way you are not in our Old Boys Club so you CANT vote on what we say you will be doing next year.

P--- O-- , Take it thats when Rick said see you boys!

No-one knows for sure if he was allowed a vote or not. The only evidence is apparently from Ronnie Russell to the effect that Peterborough did cast at least one vote. I have seen no evidence to support the contrary view.

[Pirates Of Poole]

It amazes me that a meeting took place on the 20th and the next one isn't planned until January. This is a serious matter that could of been resolved this week. I have a business and have to go back to work today. The clubs are suffering I haven't seen any season ticket for Poole next year.

[Vincent Blachshadow]

No-one knows for sure if he was allowed a vote or not. The only evidence is apparently from Ronnie Russell to the effect that Peterborough did cast at least one vote. I have seen no evidence to support the contrary view.

 

Where's this 'evidence' then because as I posted it certainly isn't on Swindon's web-site where it was stated as being.

[sussex bulldog]

It amazes me that a meeting took place on the 20th and the next one isn't planned until January. This is a serious matter that could of been resolved this week. I have a business and have to go back to work today. The clubs are suffering I haven't seen any season ticket for Poole next year.

 

That could be the legal notice required for an EGM. It is often 21 days.

[Pirates Of Poole]

In these circumstances I think that should wavered. The sooner this is resolved the better.

[no-brakes-uk]

In these circumstances I think that should wavered. The sooner this is resolved the better.

 

You know what lawyers are like. Time is money!

[Pirates Of Poole]

Yeah that's the problem!

[Aces51]

Where's this 'evidence' then because as I posted it certainly isn't on Swindon's web-site where it was stated as being.

 

My post was of course in reply to a claim that Peterborough had been denied a vote.

 

What I said was "No-one knows for sure. The only evidence is APPARENTLY from Ronnie Russell" not that it was definite.

 

However, since then I have found this article http://www.wiltsglosstandard.co.uk/sport/latestsport/8709774.SPEEDWAY__Scott_Nicholls_signs_for_Robins/

which may be what people are alluding to.

 

There is also this article which does not specifically mention Peterborough but confirms that 4 clubs voted for a 45 point limit. http://www.worldspeedway.com/artman/publish/printer_14543.shtml

Edited December 29, 2010 by Aces51

[ladyluck]

That could be the legal notice required for an EGM. It is often 21 days.

 

 

In these circumstances I think that should wavered. The sooner this is resolved the better.

 

If it is legally required, waiving it would surely open the door for still further legal action.

Indeed, are Coventry and Peterborough still members of the BSPA and entitled to attend an EGM? Certainly it appears that Avtar Sandhu is not and never has been a member of the BSPA and that is something that really needs to change, since it appears that he did not attend the AGM and was not part of the "walk out", unless his representatives sought his counsel during the course of the AGM and he ordered them to "walk out". If he did not then surely his subsequent actions are based solely on hearing "one side" of the story. Even if they did seek his counsel, his subsequent actions are still based solely on hearing "one side" of the story.

Too often in the past Coventry's representatives at the BSPA have entered into conflict with the organisation and Avtar Sandhu has finally entered the arena himself to settle matters. It would surely be better if he just took it upon himself to become a member of the BSPA himself.

[alan_boon]

Don't shoot the messenger, Vince. Ronnie Russell said those things and it's taken by some (who don't bother to use apparently in their posts) as an accurate record, "spitting dummies" and all. Sad but true.

[alan_boon]

If it is legally required, waiving it would surely open the door for still further legal action.

Indeed, are Coventry and Peterborough still members of the BSPA and entitled to attend an EGM? Certainly it appears that Avtar Sandhu is not and never has been a member of the BSPA and that is something that really needs to change, since it appears that he did not attend the AGM and was not part of the "walk out", unless his representatives sought his counsel during the course of the AGM and he ordered them to "walk out". If he did not then surely his subsequent actions are based solely on hearing "one side" of the story. Even if they did seek his counsel, his subsequent actions are still based solely on hearing "one side" of the story.

Too often in the past Coventry's representatives at the BSPA have entered into conflict with the organisation and Avtar Sandhu has finally entered the arena himself to settle matters. It would surely be better if he just took it upon himself to become a member of the BSPA himself.

I believe he was, until 2007, when the BSPA (them again) upset him so much he sold the promoting rights to Allen Trump.

[Vincent Blachshadow]

My post was of course in reply to a claim that Peterborough had been denied a vote.

 

What I said was "No-one knows for sure. The only evidence is APPARENTLY from Ronnie Russell" not that it was definite.

 

However, since then I have found this article http://www.wiltsglosstandard.co.uk/sport/latestsport/8709774.SPEEDWAY__Scott_Nicholls_signs_for_Robins/

which may be what people are alluding to.

 

As I posted, where's the evidence that Peterborough voted? Absolutely none, just that Peterborough, along with a couple of other clubs, 'wanted' 45 - completely different.

 

No-one knows for sure if he was allowed a vote or not. The only evidence is apparently from Ronnie Russell to the effect that Peterborough did cast at least one vote. I have seen no evidence to support the contrary view.

 

 

What 'evidence', apparent or otherwise do you expect to see to support the contrary view? The BSPA aren't going to say they gave permission for a vote in the pre-agm but rescinded it at the actual agm even if that happened. And Peterborough won't say anything because of the impending legal action.

[pitgate]

<trolling removed>. If coventry and peterborough really did THEY would not have walked out of the AGM and therefore the league. At my tenpin club if you walk out/miss the AGM then you are out for a year and then have to re apply and you start in the botton league. Thats whats in the rules and no amount of legal advise would change this as it would not stand up in court. So my advise is <mod advice is to re read the rules you signed up to and stop trolling and making personal attacks>. Feedup of hearing the rules are against us the rules are the same for everyone.

[ladyluck]

I believe he was, until 2007, when the BSPA (them again) upset him so much he sold the promoting rights to Allen Trump.

 

I believe you will find that was not the case. In the first instance Sandhu merely leased the rights to promote Coventry to Trump for a season and in the second instance he still stood aloof from the BSPA prior to that - Oakes and Pratt were the co-promoters, with Sandhu as club owner. Sandhu, to the best of my knowledge has never held the role of promoter.

[The White Knight]

Dorset is about the most perfect place to live in the UK. We are very, very lucky to live here.

 

There is football if you call it that at Bournemouth, and Southampton is only 30 mins away. Hampshire play cricket, again 30 mins away.

 

Dorset has a spectacular coastline, the second largest natural habour in the world, a warm micro cimate, shops, cafe's, bars, millionaire footballers and pop stars and a very cool social scene (of which I am now too old to enjoy as I did)

 

And no motorways bringing the throngs from the north. Add in beautiful country lanes, it's just perfect. Oh and it has two speedway clubs. What more would anyone really want?

 

Sorry its gone so far off topic.

 

 

I try NEVER to attack the Poster - and - I couldn't care less about your daughter's education PRIVATE or otherwise - BUT -

 

 

YOU SIR - ARE A SNOB!!!

 

I too was privately educated (and come from the North - and am proud of the fact) - but - until today I did not feel the need to register the fact on a Speedway Forum.

 

Dorset MAY be a beautiful place to live - but - it needs to teach some of it's citizens about how to be a GENTLEMAN.

[Aces51]

As I posted, where's the evidence that Peterborough voted? Absolutely none, just that Peterborough, along with a couple of other clubs, 'wanted' 45 - completely different.

 

 

 

 

What 'evidence', apparent or otherwise do you expect to see to support the contrary view? The BSPA aren't going to say they gave permission for a vote in the pre-agm but rescinded it at the actual agm even if that happened. And Peterborough won't say anything because of the impending legal action.

I still didn't say that the Swindon article was evidence, I said it may be what people are alluding to. However, if you look at the article I later added to that post and take the comments from Ronnie Russell (4 clubs, including Peterborough wanted a 45 point limt) and Matt Ford ( 4 clubs voted for a higher limit)together, then it can now be argued that there is at the very least circumstantial evidence from which the inference can properly be drawn that Peterborough voted on the 45 point issue. Whether it is convincing evidence is another matter.

 

In so far as there not being any evidence to the contrary view, that they did not have a vote, that is so far as I can ascertain a true statement. As we do not know the issues involved in the supposed legal action I do not know if that particular issue is sub judice and neither do you.

Edited December 29, 2010 by Aces51

[The~SAINT]

Dorset is about the most perfect place to live in the UK. We are very, very lucky to live here.

 

There is football if you call it that at Bournemouth, and Southampton is only 30 mins away. Hampshire play cricket, again 30 mins away.

 

Dorset has a spectacular coastline, the second largest natural habour in the world, a warm micro cimate, shops, cafe's, bars, millionaire footballers and pop stars and a very cool social scene (of which I am now too old to enjoy as I did)

 

And no motorways bringing the throngs from the north. Add in beautiful country lanes, it's just perfect. Oh and it has two speedway clubs. What more would anyone really want?

 

Sorry its gone so far off topic.

wouldn't swap you for all the tea in china mate

[alan_boon]

I still didn't say that the Swindon article was evidence, I said it may be what people are alluding to. However, if you look at the article I later added to that post and take the comments from Ronnie Russell (4 clubs, including Peterborough wanted a 45 point limt) and Matt Ford ( 4 clubs voted for a higher limit)together, then it can now be argued that there is at the very least circumstantial evidence from which the inference can properly be drawn that Peterborough voted on the 45 point issue. Whether it is convincing evidence is another matter.

 

In so far as there not being any evidence to the contrary view, that they did not have a vote, that is so far as I can ascertain a true statement. As we do not know the issues involved in the supposed legal action I do not know if that particular issue is sub judice and neither do you.

The version of events I was told was that, initially, 6 (SIX!) clubs were in favour of the 45-point limit, but when it came to the vote it suddenly became 3. Again, just what I've been told, although I have no reason to doubt it.

[ladyluck]

The version of events I was told was that, initially, 6 (SIX!) clubs were in favour of the 45-point limit, but when it came to the vote it suddenly became 3. Again, just what I've been told, although I have no reason to doubt it.

 

No doubt reality kicked in between the initial discussion and the all-important vote. The six clubs could have pushed it through, but they'd be a six-club league and that - apparently - does not meet the minimum requirement for Sky.