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

[Beeone]

That might be the objective but I am not sure that the courts have the power to enforce that as a legal remedy. I would guess the only actual remedy in law would be compensation. Anyway there is no way they will get a trial date before the start of the season ( and quite possibly not before the end of the season either), especially as it appears that no formal court proceedings have even been issued yet so we seem to be in this limbo of negotiation.

Despite all Sandhu's huffing and puffing, if he had an absolutely watertight case they would have got on with it by now, and issued formal court proceedings, instead of this informal stand-off.

 

Or possibly the BSPA realise he does have a case of some sort and between the parties they have decided that some form of negotiation/mediation would actually be better for the long term. Just a possibility, but if you thought that you would lose in court would you not try to negotiate a settlement, I think I would.

 

Regards Martin

[no-brakes-uk]

 

There are NOT enough riders for a 45 point limit,

 

Tell that to the likes of Jason Lyons.

[Sprog1]

Sandhu is the owner, it is his business, as are the burger bars and everything else in the stadium. He owns the rights to Coventry Speedway and owns the stadium.

 

Trump, Pratt and Rosco are employed as promoters.

 

It's no different to the way Tony Mole has done things in the past, club owner but employs a promoter.

 

At the risk a of splitting hairs, are they employed as promoters or are they independant promoters who are contracted to Sandhu ? In other words do they have a contract of employment so that they are Sandu's employees on his payroll, or are they self-employed men who have a contract to run the speedway. Legally there is likely to be a big difference. The fact that Trump can attend the BSPA and Sandhu can't suggests that Trump is not an employee, but an independant contractor which potentially makes a big difference to Sandhu's legal entitlement to sue.

 

 

 

[Sprog1]

Or possibly the BSPA realise he does have a case of some sort and between the parties they have decided that some form of negotiation/mediation would actually be better for the long term. Just a possibility, but if you thought that you would lose in court would you not try to negotiate a settlement, I think I would.

 

Regards Martin

 

I think their are lots of issues here that go beyond the legal case and one of them is getting a league programme together in 2011. many of these things would encourage negotiation irrespective of whether they are directly relevant to the actual legal position. I am just curious as to Sandhu's actual legal status in relation to the BSPA if, as has been said, he is just the stadium owner , not the promoter. i suspect he is just footing the bill while Trump, Pratt and Roscoe are the actual claimants.

 

 

 

[no-brakes-uk]

At the risk a of splitting hairs, are they employed as promoters or are they independant promoters who are contracted to Sandhu ? In other words do they have a contract of employment so that they are Sandu's employees on his payroll, or are they self-employed men who have a contract to run the speedway. Legally there is likely to be a big difference. The fact that Trump can attend the BSPA and Sandhu can't suggests that Trump is not an employee, but an independant contractor which potentially makes a big difference to Sandhu's legal entitlement to sue.

Why are we worrying about this? I dont see how this is relevant.

[Beeone]

I think their are lots of issues here that go beyond the legal case and one of them is getting a league programme together in 2011. many of these things would encourage negotiation irrespective of whether they are directly relevant to the actual legal position. I am just curious as to Sandhu's actual legal status in relation to the BSPA if, as has been said, he is just the stadium owner , not the promoter. i suspect he is just footing the bill while Trump, Pratt and Roscoe are the actual claimants.

 

Ok so re-read my post substituting "Coventry do" for "he does" and you will get the simpler point I was making.

 

Regards, Martin

[Aces51]

Tell that to the likes of Jason Lyons.

I appreciate that you are probably just being flippant and as a fantastic servant to BV I have tremendous sympathy for Jason but in my opinion there are a number of issues here.

 

Firstly, sufficient riders willing to ride here do not exist to make up 8 EL teams to a 45 limit, if you take the present number, 9 teams if you take the original number with B'ham replacing Ipswich or 10 if you add Cov and P'borough to the present 8.

 

Secondly, even if the riders did exist probably a minimum of between 2 and 4 of those teams could not afford to pay them and the EL would no longer be tenable. Any business that consistently pays out more than it gets in will eventually fail because even those with a wealthy benefactor cannot rely on that support always being there.

 

Thirdly, the most realistic option the sport has at the moment is to bring the EL and PL closer together so that more teams will be prepared to move up and create an EL consisting of a more viable number of teams.

 

Over time and if the recession ends and the increased variety of teams increases crowd levels then a gradual move back to having a higher limit and attracting back some of the top riders can be afforded.

[SCB]

You think so, then join the PL then mate. The product is diluted enough as it is. But then again, its not going to concern you!!!

Ah, "I'm alright jack". My team Coventry could build a team to 45, in fact, they're one of the teams wanting 45, I don't agree with it (bit of a shock that concept to some Poole fans, a fan who doesnt agree with his clubs promotion!). In fact, Coventry coud probably build to 50. However, it's no good Coventry building to 50 is half the teams can only build to 30!

 

 

As to the earlier suggestions that 38 weakenes the league, balls, if it means more teams but the same rider spread out more, it's stronger. People harp back to the 1970s when teams all had a 9+ rider and things were beter with more teams, the way to do that is one or two seasons with a low points limit but with 3 or 4 new teams added each season. We'll then have more teams, more number 1's, more riders and everyone gets their wish but oh no, some people will moan that the points limit has been lowered that season to make it work!

 

 

Tell that to the likes of Jason Lyons.

Yeah, let BV have him at number 1! There are a shortage of heatleader standard riders because you can't magic them from nowhere. Where as at PL level, you can magic a few by suddently allowing EL riders to double up. The EL can't do that as there is no league above.

 

At the risk a of splitting hairs, are they employed as promoters or are they independant promoters who are contracted to Sandhu ? In other words do they have a contract of employment so that they are Sandu's employees on his payroll, or are they self-employed men who have a contract to run the speedway. Legally there is likely to be a big difference. The fact that Trump can attend the BSPA and Sandhu can't suggests that Trump is not an employee, but an independant contractor which potentially makes a big difference to Sandhu's legal entitlement to sue.

I would assume as they're running Sandhus business that he is employing them but I'll admit to not knowing. As Sandhu is involved in the running of the club, I can only assume the team is his and he employs them though.

 

The only time this has not been the case was in 2008 when Trump leased the club from Sandhu.

[Sandie]

You think so, then join the PL then mate. The product is diluted enough as it is. But then again, its not going to concern you!!!

So despite your comments that you want Coventry in the league you obviously will be quite happy if they aren't. A happy smilie at the thought of a Coventry fan not being able to support his team.

[ladyluck]

That's an old sig from last year, the "sorting" was changing the team line-up I believe, I'm sure Colin will correct me if I'm wrong

Regards, Martin

 

No, it was from this year - it started out with a problem at Brandon that only Rosco and Sandhu could sort and mutated into them having sorted it. However, the point remains the same: the problem had to be Trump and Pratt otherwise they'd be involved in "sorting it".

 

 

Tell that to the likes of Jason Lyons.

 

That seems to be the only example you are able to come up with. While it is unfortunate for Lyons, it has happened before and will, no doubt, happen again. The careers of Paul Thorp and Les Collins seemed to end when there was no room for them. Anyway, come the first set of GSAs someone will have manipulated their averages enough to accommodate Lyons, or an unfortunate injury will open avenues for him.

 

 

People harp back to the 1970s when teams all had a 9+ rider and things were beter with more teams, the way to do that is one or two seasons with a low points limit but with 3 or 4 new teams added each season. We'll then have more teams, more number 1's, more riders and everyone gets their wish but oh no, some people will moan that the points limit has been lowered that season to make it work!

 

Of course in the '70s bonus points were included in averages. Moreover, the Poles and their leagues were locked behind the "Iron Curtain", while the Swedish league was a domestic affair. The only "cosmopolitan" league was the "British League" and all the top riders were to be found. The top riders only really faced each other once per meeting and thus inflated their averages at the expense of lower order riders.

 

 

I would assume as they're running Sandhus business that he is employing them but I'll admit to not knowing. As Sandhu is involved in the running of the club, I can only assume the team is his and he employs them though.

 

The only time this has not been the case was in 2008 when Trump leased the club from Sandhu.

 

That would be my guess, although perhaps Trump has some equity holding in the club. He is, I gather, a wealthy enough fellow so it would be strange if he were to occupy a position as just a paid employee.

[BigFatDave]

Only four pages this morning, eh? At first I thought it was running out of puff but after checking other threads I see the chief whingers have taken up residence on the Poole Thread.

[foreverblue]

So despite your comments that you want Coventry in the league you obviously will be quite happy if they aren't. A happy smilie at the thought of a Coventry fan not being able to support his team.

Lets not get too sensitive about a flippant remark,just a bit of fun,obviously you don't see it that way but we all want speedway at Brandon but we also like a bit of a fun at someone else's expense.

Edited December 29, 2010 by foreverblue

[no-brakes-uk]

Only four pages this morning, eh? At first I thought it was running out of puff but after checking other threads I see the chief whingers have taken up residence on the Poole Thread.

 

Good to see they've gone back

[BigFatDave]

Good to see they've gone back

I seem to recall you on the Poole Thread discussing Coventry and Peterboro, or was that just a No-Braker - oooooooops, sorry - a No-Brainer?

[Beeone]

No, it was from this year - it started out with a problem at Brandon that only Rosco and Sandhu could sort and mutated into them having sorted it. However, the point remains the same: the problem had to be Trump and Pratt otherwise they'd be involved in "sorting it".

 

I should have put "last season" instead of last year, you make a good point but if it was Trump and Pratt who were the perceived problem then the sig would surely not have changed during last season (and it did) as those two gentlemen were still on the roster of promoters come the recent AGM. Indeed Colin Pratt was on hand I am told at the recent "show of support" at Brandon along with Sandhu. Still the possibility of Trump being the issue CC was referring to in his sig, but it changed way too early for that, as we all know he was still there.

 

Regards, Martin

 

P.S. I'm sure Colin Cooke will put us right

Edited December 29, 2010 by Beeone

[Bryn]

As to the earlier suggestions that 38 weakenes the league, balls, if it means more teams but the same rider spread out more, it's stronger. People harp back to the 1970s when teams all had a 9+ rider and things were beter with more teams, the way to do that is one or two seasons with a low points limit but with 3 or 4 new teams added each season. We'll then have more teams, more number 1's, more riders and everyone gets their wish but oh no, some people will moan that the points limit has been lowered that season to make it work!

 

Blimey SCB, you're beginning to make sense to me in your old age!

 

HAPPY NEW YEAR!

Edited December 29, 2010 by Bryn

[BongoBrian]

I'm glad I am Scottish and that University Education is still a priority in my country

 

Here we go, there are 90 points to be won in each meeting (15 heats x 6 points). The 6 points for each meeting are a cumulation of 3 for a win, 2 for a 2nd place and 1 for 3rd place... for those that need the explanation

 

Therefore, there are 2 teams who can earn those 90 points... ie. 90/2 = 45 Points per team

 

Following this so far?

 

Ok, so if you simply ignore Bonus points / Tactical rides etc, it can be seen that the simplest way of determining the averages is from a nice clean base line calculation, which uses the ACTUAL points earned in each race and meeting.

 

...You cannot have 'inflated' averages, false averages... or anything un-toward for that matter. Simple Arithmetic does not allow it.

 

...saying all that, the folk with varying 'degrees' of influence in the BSPA have not proved themseles to be over endowed in the area of mathematical genius!

Edited December 29, 2010 by BongoBrian

[alan_boon]

As to the earlier suggestions that 38 weakenes the league, balls, if it means more teams but the same rider spread out more, it's stronger. People harp back to the 1970s when teams all had a 9+ rider and things were beter with more teams, the way to do that is one or two seasons with a low points limit but with 3 or 4 new teams added each season. We'll then have more teams, more number 1's, more riders and everyone gets their wish but oh no, some people will moan that the points limit has been lowered that season to make it work!

It doesn't weaken the competitive nature of the league but it certainly weakens the league. I'm sure the Zamaretto Central is competitive, but it's not as strong as the Premier League. If you are charging Elite League money, you should provide Elite League riders.

[alan_boon]

Therefore, there are 2 teams who can earn those 90 points... ie. 90/2 = 45 Points per team

For average purposes, riders have 4 rides per meeting. With 7-man teams, if every man took 4 rides, you only get 14 heats, so it's 84 points to play for.

 

You cannot have 'inflated' averages, false averages... or anything un-toward for that matter. Simple Arithmetic does not allow it.

If the total average of all the teams at the start of the season is 8 x 40 = 320, and the natural consequence of 84 points per meeting shared between the teams is 8 x 42 over the season, then the total average of all the teams should come to somewhere around 336 - those 16 points on riders' averages are the "inflation".

Edited December 29, 2010 by alan_boon

[Bryn]

It doesn't weaken the competitive nature of the league but it certainly weakens the league. I'm sure the Zamaretto Central is competitive, but it's not as strong as the Premier League. If you are charging Elite League money, you should provide Elite League riders.

 

My geography's not too good nowadays as I left school 'some' years ago Mr. Boon, so can you please enlighten me and tell me where exactly Zamaretto Central is?

I certainly haven't seen any form of our great sport there (wasn't even aware that it was even staged there - are they F.I.M. affiliated?) and most certainly might wish to do so before I kick the bucket!

Edited December 29, 2010 by Bryn