Haza Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 This week's BSPA meeting, probably!! yes and the link is ? there is nothing on the BSPA website or on Kings Lynn website . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bomo1 Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 yes and the link is ? there is nothing on the BSPA website or on Kings Lynn website . W hy should there be? Its for the promoters to play by their rules and sort out their issues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trees Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 I don't blame Frost in a way, he has bought these assets after all, he's invested in British speedway, now it's Buster's turn, if they knew that was the rule why didn't they invest in Niels this season instead of Rory? Surely they could have loaned Rory this season? On the other hand I hope that Lynn and Boro will do some sort of deal for Lynn to buy Niels contract over this and next season?? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haza Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 W hy should there be? Its for the promoters to play by their rules and sort out their issues. so the official word is what screamer has posted that's it ? So I can only guess screamer was at the BSPA meeting ??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reliant Robin Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 (edited) so the official word is what screamer has posted that's it ? So I can only guess screamer was at the BSPA meeting ??? Screamers opening line started with "Waiting on official confirmation", so no not really. I do feel that going into a 3rd season loan with the same Club, thought should have been given to purchasing Niels over Rory. Too late to reverse that now I guess? Edited December 20, 2012 by Reliant Robin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Smith Posted December 20, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 (edited) and this information came from ??? now why would I mention that. Poor bird would get reamed if I mention their name She may be winding me up but I don't believe she is. As I said, now waiting for official confirmation Edited December 20, 2012 by screamer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Shovlar Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 Time for Lynn and Swindon to get their hands in their pockets and buy these riders if they want to use them. Simple as that. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orbiter Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 Time for Lynn and Swindon to get their hands in their pockets and buy these riders if they want to use them. Simple as that. For sure Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Blachshadow Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 I believe the Panther’s action involving the current asset system has highlighted everything that is wrong with the system. The rules are tired and ancient and have no consideration of the present situation. The Panther’s seem to think they are more important then the sport, and have the controlling power over riders and to tell them where they ride. My suggestion to this is to tell Frost where to stick all his riders and for each club to look elsewhere. Imagine the situation then: Peterborough would only be allowed to use 2 of their asset riders. 1) They would have many unhappy riders missing out on work. 2) The League would be in uproar because of all the quality riders missing. 3) Peterborough would have all these assets that no-body wants and therefore getting no reward from loan fees. 4) It would show the Asset System up for what it is. Wouldn’t that be wonderful? Probably then, the BSPA would realise just how inept this system really is and do something about it. What a vitriolic post. You start and finish by blaming the current asset system, presumably voted in by a majority of promoters some time ago and still in existence because the majority still believe it to be the way to go. Fair enough, you don't like it but then you have a rant at one particular team because they are insisting on the rule being implemented. Why are Peterborough wrong in doing that, in sticking to the rules? I'll hazard a guess - because your team is having problems because they jumped the gun and offered another club's asset a contract (against the rules) before his parent club had released him. You say he doesn't want to ride for Panthers any more ('you say' because I've heard a slightly different version of him 'not wanting to ride for Panthers' earlier this year) but he did sign a document giving Panthers that prerogative. Quite simply, Chapman wanted Rooboy and Puk in his team but, for whatever reason (maybe the silver's run out) only wants to buy one of them. Seems he opted to buy the rider willing to ride elsewhere and loan Puk because he'd 'only' ride for KL. Maybe he got that wrong! Lynn jumped the gun, Peterborough are playing by the rules. Whether you like it or not and regardless of your dislike of the current asset system there's only one team in the wrong here and it's not Panthers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pointsmeanplayoffs Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 (edited) I wonder why none of the top Peterborough assets appear to want to ride for their parent club? Perhaps Peterborough need to start looking internally to address this issue. Regarding the 'rule' which states that a rider must be bought by a club after spending 2 on loan if they intend to stay for a 3rd?! Is that actually a 'rule'? Had the Chapman's been aware of this rule, I'm sure they would not have pursued NKI in the way they have. Who knows, had they have known of this 'rule' then maybe they'd have signed NKI outright and loaned in Schlein as someone suggested. Also, does a rider have a choice in whether they become an assest of a club? Edited December 20, 2012 by pointsmeanplayoffs 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Blachshadow Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 (edited) I wonder why none of the top Peterborough assets appear to want to ride for their parent club? Perhaps Peterborough need to start looking internally to address this issue. Regarding the 'rule' which states that a rider must be bought by a club after spending 2 on loan if they intend to stay for a 3rd?! Is that actually a 'rule'? Had the Chapman's been aware of this rule, I'm sure they would not have pursued NKI in the way they have. Who knows, had they have known of this 'rule' then maybe they'd have signed NKI outright and loaned in Schlein as someone suggested. Also, do rider have a choice in whether they become an assest of a club? And maybe he bought Rooboy because others had enquired about him on loan but Puk has stated last season that he'd be happy at KL. Of course riders have a choice - they sign the paperwork. Edited December 20, 2012 by Vincent Blackshadow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5 FURROW Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 now why would I mention that. Poor bird would get reamed if I mention their name She may be winding me up but I don't believe she is. As I said, now waiting for official confirmation Quote she may be winding me up aint MJJ racing cos it's full of Bullsh*t every time its mouth moves you have to wonder if its a lie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pointsmeanplayoffs Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 It's no surprise that the majority of the current group of promoters are in favour of the asset system as this 'majority' have spent years building up their asset base?!? Only the riders can change this situation, by from now on refusing to become an asset of any club. Instead they could remain free agents who can travel the world riding for who they want, over whatever length of contract they want. Within 5-10 years, without clubs being able to attain new assets, the current system would be defunct and riders would be free for whoever. Perhaps high profile cases like those at Peterborough will help to highlight this issue. In my opinion it would be bad for the sport if the asset system would be challenged in the courts as already cash strapped clubs (like Peterborough) would struggle to pay legal fees especially from their paltry attendances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedy17 Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 Nicki Pedersen to do half a season. By which time we get the funds to buy Iversen. Or if we can't get Pedersen or Iversen. I'd go for Zagar if he's willing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G the Bee Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 (edited) I think what many on here are forgetting is it is not in Kings Lynn's interests to have the asset system challenged either. They have assets too, albeit few at the level of top EL riders due to the amount of time they spent in the PL. Over time they have been and will continue to be receiving loan fees and benefits from rider sales like any other clubs. I wonder if posters like GRW123 were anti the asset system a few years ago when Poole shelled out a fortune to buy Darcy Ward from Kings Lynn? Of course, under his suggestion, Poole could have loaned Darcy from Lynn for the 2010 and 2011 seasons and he would have been able to have been released from his Kings Lynn contract, and join Poole for free at the beginning of the 2012 season. The problem is, people are only thinking about the current situation with Iversen etc and not previous occasions where their clubs have benefited from the asset system. Edited December 20, 2012 by G the Bee 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrss Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 where do lynn get the funds to buy iversen in half a season while they are paying pedersen or zagar its a stupid thing to write Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orion Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 So lets assume that KL don't buy PUK. Does that mean that Peterborough will pay him next year - as he is one of their assets who had a job offer elsewhere (which he accepted) but was prevented from doing so by Peterborough. When you are impacting on someone earning a living - that is where the asset system is very wrong. If he has a contract with them and they are stopping him earning elsewhere then surely they should pay him the equivalent what KL offered to sit the year out - seems fair to me! HIS job offer that was against the rules ..no one is stopping Puk earning a living all he has do is find a club who can find a place in there side under the rules . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g13webb Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 I don't blame Frost in a way, he has bought these assets after all, he's invested in British speedway, now it's Buster's turn, if they knew that was the rule why didn't they invest in Niels this season instead of Rory? Surely they could have loaned Rory this season? On the other hand I hope that Lynn and Boro will do some sort of deal for Lynn to buy Niels contract over this and next season?? Exactly!!! I don't suppose the Chapmans knew of the rule, or anyone else did for that matter. Surely had they been aware of a rule like this, don't you think they would have purchased Niels instead of Rory..Cos they would... Peterborou didn't go to the MC because of Lynn breaking his 'So-called rule' they went because Lynn spoke to Niels first without talking to Panthers. Quite simply, Chapman wanted Rooboy and Puk in his team but, for whatever reason (maybe the silver's run out) only wants to buy one of them. Seems he opted to buy the rider willing to ride elsewhere and loan Puk because he'd 'only' ride for KL. Maybe he got that wrong! Lynn jumped the gun, Peterborough are playing by the rules. Whether you like it or not and regardless of your dislike of the current asset system there's only one team in the wrong here and it's not Panthers. Who knows who voted for what. The sport is all about secret 'goings-on' and if the face fits. We hear about riders assets but we never see laid down rules and guidlines so each of us supporters or/and riders knows whats happening. and may be you got it wrong. the Chapmans have, in the last 20 years devoted all their time and money into this sport. Unlike a lot of promoters they have done it from the bottom, buying premises and building the whole package. They own the stadium, and fund the presentation from the grass roots upwards, They're not like the majority of promoters who rent their race track on race night only. they're in it for the duration. Any spare cash going has to be juggled between track or riders . I am in no doubt, whatever Buster did he did for the sport and not for personal rewards..... Time for Lynn and Swindon to get their hands in their pockets and buy these riders if they want to use them. Simple as that. Just like you did last year with Meidzinski. (I imagined you would come out with crap like that) Shame really, how this Micky Mouse sport just has to keep shooting itself in the foot. When looking on the world stage, we are regarded as the 4 th best country in the speedway world . In each of the top three, Poland, Sweden and Denmark , they have depensed with an asset system and replaced it with one of contracts. Why cant we do the same.???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve0 Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 Because the few clubs with many assets like to control things! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griff Posted December 20, 2012 Report Share Posted December 20, 2012 HIS job offer that was against the rules ..no one is stopping Puk earning a living all he has do is find a club who can find a place in there side under the rules . If Kings Lynn want to name a team early then it's up to them to sign the riders legitimately. If they want a rider on loan they must wait to see if he's available first. It's not rocket surgery. They've chanced their arm and lost. Teams with no assets have to be prepared to accept they are the last in the pecking order. Hence Belle Vue's situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.