BluPanther Posted January 29, 2013 Report Share Posted January 29, 2013 Oh right - so you don't want to apply that rule because it doesn't suit you You have interpreted that rule incorrectly in this case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trubruv Posted January 29, 2013 Report Share Posted January 29, 2013 You have interpreted that rule incorrectly in this case. To be honest it doesn't matter what anybody thinks on here! riders will ride where they get the best deal, and are happiest, and it fits in with their schedule! If troy doesn't return to Swindon where does he go? Belle Vue! or not not even ride in the uk! Which would mean everyone loses including Peterborough with no transfer fee or loan fee! The problem is the so called governing body's who have totally brought the sport into disrepute once again ! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve0 Posted January 29, 2013 Report Share Posted January 29, 2013 And, taking this a step further, why have KL paid out for Rooboy when all they had to do is wait until March and get him on loan, since, as they say, money is short? To stop others signing him? In Batch's case, only Swindon and BV can accommodate now and I'd be surprised if he wants to go to BV. If Peterborough want a transfer and no one has taken this up by March 1st then he can go on loan. Otherwise you have a rider who wants to ride but is being prevented from doing so - the courts would love that! Just because someone wants to sell doesn't mean anyone has to buy - especially if there is no money to buy him - simples! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BluPanther Posted January 29, 2013 Report Share Posted January 29, 2013 Any idea who would fund this court action, bearing in mind he is not a european. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve0 Posted January 29, 2013 Report Share Posted January 29, 2013 (edited) Any idea who would fund this court action, bearing in mind he is not a european. That would be Rick Frost when the courts rule in favour of Batch and against Peterborough for preventing him from earning a living! Having said that though - Patch may make an offer to buy him for the £6k he put on the table for Hans! Edited January 29, 2013 by Steve0 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hans fan Posted January 29, 2013 Report Share Posted January 29, 2013 That would be Rick Frost when the courts rule in favour of Batch and against Peterborough for preventing him from earning a living! your talking rubbish the bspa make the final decision,it will be the bspa he'll be sueing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve0 Posted January 29, 2013 Report Share Posted January 29, 2013 your talking rubbish the bspa make the final decision,it will be the bspa he'll be sueing Only because of the intransigence of Rick Frost Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hans fan Posted January 29, 2013 Report Share Posted January 29, 2013 Only because of the intransigence of Rick Frost so he won't be sueing mr frost then 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BluPanther Posted January 29, 2013 Report Share Posted January 29, 2013 That would be Rick Frost when the courts rule in favour of Batch and against Peterborough for preventing him from earning a living! Having said that though - Patch may make an offer to buy him for the £6k he put on the table for Hans! But the court action would be against the BSPA, not Frostie, they have passed the ruling. I expect Swindon will buy him, with a fee decided by tribunal. No one wants any rider to miss out, despite all the opinions on this subject. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barney Rabbit Posted January 29, 2013 Report Share Posted January 29, 2013 To stop others signing him? In Batch's case, only Swindon and BV can accommodate now and I'd be surprised if he wants to go to BV. If Peterborough want a transfer and no one has taken this up by March 1st then he can go on loan. Otherwise you have a rider who wants to ride but is being prevented from doing so - the courts would love that! Just because someone wants to sell doesn't mean anyone has to buy - especially if there is no money to buy him - simples! Other riders have ridden where they'd rather not so riding for BV is an option. What court case would that be? It would have to be put before a court and, tbh, I can't see either the club or the rider doing so - what if they lose, and I believe they would for reasons given on many previous threads. I'm inclined to agree with an earlier posting, that you've misinterpreted the rule. Also, why haven't you answered VB's post and given examples of previous uses of the rule? Only because of the intransigence of Rick Frost Why is it Mr Frost's intransigence and not Patch's for failing to comply with a BSPA directive? 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Blachshadow Posted January 29, 2013 Report Share Posted January 29, 2013 (edited) Batch can go on loan if not signed before - according to the BSPA rules! You've obviously seen this rule since you keep on about it so maybe you can point us all in the right direction and show us where to find it then we'll all know what it really says. Edited January 29, 2013 by Vincent Blackshadow 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveLyric2 Posted January 29, 2013 Report Share Posted January 29, 2013 I believe there has been an 'understanding' between promotions that any rider not signed up by March 1st (March 1st being the start date for all/most rider contracts for the ensuing season) then those riders become available for 'loan'. However in the case of Batchelor, I understand that the BSPA MC have overruled that - as they are entitled to do -and are insisting Batch be purchased, as indeed Peterboro had to purchase him previously. Maybe the BSPA MC have taken into account the illegal initial approach to Batch by Swindon in their decision??!! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YerRopes Posted January 29, 2013 Report Share Posted January 29, 2013 I believe there has been an 'understanding' between promotions that any rider not signed up by March 1st (March 1st being the start date for all/most rider contracts for the ensuing season) then those riders become available for 'loan'. However in the case of Batchelor, I understand that the BSPA MC have overruled that - as they are entitled to do -and are insisting Batch be purchased, as indeed Peterboro had to purchase him previously. Maybe the BSPA MC have taken into account the illegal initial approach to Batch by Swindon in their decision??!! Honest question - why are they entitled to do so ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stratton Posted January 29, 2013 Report Share Posted January 29, 2013 (edited) you really should think before you reply sometimes.... Why? its my opinion, Peterborough have had problems with Iversen,Batchelor,Andersen,Bach,Lawson all i am saying could some of these issues been dealt with differently.? Edited January 29, 2013 by sidney Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve0 Posted January 29, 2013 Report Share Posted January 29, 2013 Interesting read http://speedwaygp.com/news/article/2227/hans-panthers-messed-me-about Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BluPanther Posted January 29, 2013 Report Share Posted January 29, 2013 Why? its my opinion, Peterborough have had problems with Iversen,Batchelor,Andersen,Bach,Lawson all i am saying could some of these issues been dealt with differently.? What problems with Bach, please tell us ? ? Lawson was never offered or promised a team place because they are not going with any d/up riders. Thats not a problem, thats team selection. Absolute nonsense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irk Deflector Posted January 29, 2013 Report Share Posted January 29, 2013 Interesting read http://speedwaygp.co...messed-me-about Hans comments seem to be fair and balanced. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crump99 Posted January 29, 2013 Report Share Posted January 29, 2013 (edited) Interesting read http://speedwaygp.co...messed-me-about Not really, you get used to it with Andersen but if you could make this bit happen then that'd be really helpful: "Swindon co-owner Gary Patchett has hinted he would still consider making Andersen a permanent Robins asset" although if 6k is all he can find then we could be stuck with him! Edited January 29, 2013 by Crump99 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveLyric2 Posted January 29, 2013 Report Share Posted January 29, 2013 (edited) Honest question - why are they entitled to do so ? Its in their rules! Honest!! Edited January 29, 2013 by Skidder1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crump99 Posted January 29, 2013 Report Share Posted January 29, 2013 (edited) Batch can go on loan if not signed before - according to the BSPA rules! If that was the case then we wouldn't be reading this would we: "Swindon have been ordered to sign the Aussie on a full transfer by the BSPA" It doesn't say that that order becomes null and void on March1 despite saying so in SteveO's rulebook! But we are talking about incompetent administration so nothing surprises! Edited January 29, 2013 by Crump99 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.