500cc Posted March 8, 2013 Report Share Posted March 8, 2013 I have little doubt that Batchelor will be in the 1-7. Whether Swindon will be happy about the resolution of the related issues is another matter. The rules pretty much allow any rider to ride where he likes. But then the rules allow the BSPA to impose sanctions/compensation as they choose. We are not privvy to what has gone on this winter, but there is enough published information from all parties to give us a good idea. In a nutshell, the BSPA have dictated that Swindon must purchase Batchelor, Swindon disagree and have made use of a potential loophole. The ball is now in the BSPA's court. They can either let this lie or take action against Swindon. Swindon are totally dependant on whether the BSPA will back down. Procedures will be in place for Swindon to protest any decision. However, simply ignoring a decision of the ruling body and looking for a loophole is a different matter. The BSPA can hit them hard. Swindon badly weakened their position by announcing publicly how they intended to get around the ruling and by dragging the agreed deal with Glasgow into this. In many other sports Swindon could face some major sanctions. The current weakness of speedway as a sport may actually be Swindon's biggest saviour here as I'm not sure the BSPA are in a position to fully use the powers available to them. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trubruv Posted March 8, 2013 Report Share Posted March 8, 2013 Hopefully everything works out for all concerned in the end! http://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/sport/10275551.Batch_unconcerned_by_loan_fiasco/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveLyric2 Posted March 8, 2013 Report Share Posted March 8, 2013 Hopefully everything works out for all concerned in the end! http://www.swindonad...by_loan_fiasco/ Batch is not the one to be worried!! Its the promotion that will be potentially 'punished'!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trubruv Posted March 8, 2013 Report Share Posted March 8, 2013 Batch is not the one to be worried!! Its the promotion that will be potentially 'punished'!! With a bit of luck all the shannigans that have gone on in the past few seasons will result in an independent body to run the sport, if not i despair of the future speedway has in this country! Stick with watching grass track I think! at least you get value for money! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevebrum Posted March 8, 2013 Report Share Posted March 8, 2013 Hopefully everything works out for all concerned in the end! http://www.swindonad...by_loan_fiasco/ Someone should have a word with the journalist - according to some (who claim they know more than others) the March 1st rule doesn't exist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hans fan Posted March 8, 2013 Report Share Posted March 8, 2013 Someone should have a word with the journalist - according to some (who claim they know more than others) the March 1st rule doesn't exist. have you a link then where the rule is published ??? even patchettt has stated it's not in the rulebook Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevebrum Posted March 8, 2013 Report Share Posted March 8, 2013 have you a link then where the rule is published ??? even patchettt has stated it's not in the rulebook No idea. But so many keep mentioning it. But lets face when has a rule been written in stone and stuck to by the BSPA! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hans fan Posted March 8, 2013 Report Share Posted March 8, 2013 But so many keep mentioning it. But lets face when has a rule been written in stone and stuck to by the BSPA! just because people mention it it doesn't make it a rulei'll agree with your 2nd point,but I CAN'T see the BSPA M.C letting swindon getting away with taking batch on loan without reprecussions e.g fines or something, mind you I COULD be a 100% wrong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve0 Posted March 8, 2013 Report Share Posted March 8, 2013 I have little doubt that Batchelor will be in the 1-7. Whether Swindon will be happy about the resolution of the related issues is another matter. The rules pretty much allow any rider to ride where he likes. But then the rules allow the BSPA to impose sanctions/compensation as they choose. We are not privvy to what has gone on this winter, but there is enough published information from all parties to give us a good idea. In a nutshell, the BSPA have dictated that Swindon must purchase Batchelor, Swindon disagree and have made use of a potential loophole. The ball is now in the BSPA's court. They can either let this lie or take action against Swindon. Swindon are totally dependant on whether the BSPA will back down. Procedures will be in place for Swindon to protest any decision. However, simply ignoring a decision of the ruling body and looking for a loophole is a different matter. The BSPA can hit them hard. Swindon badly weakened their position by announcing publicly how they intended to get around the ruling and by dragging the agreed deal with Glasgow into this. In many other sports Swindon could face some major sanctions. The current weakness of speedway as a sport may actually be Swindon's biggest saviour here as I'm not sure the BSPA are in a position to fully use the powers available to them. Utter tosh - again!! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
65Sarge Posted March 8, 2013 Report Share Posted March 8, 2013 (edited) I think the 1 March rule is allegedly a Gentleman's verbal agreement made between all the promoters?? It's about as written down as the alleged ruling that Swindon must buy Batchelor seems to be (I am not doubting the ruling exists, but the detail has only been hinted at). I think that there are a lot of people on here who assume what they've heard from their respective promotions and press is correct and think it will fall in their favour! Me I don't wear Rose tinted spectacles and we all know what happens if you ass u me!!! I think I'll just wait and see, but I hope for the sake of the sport it is resolved quickly and a proper public statement issued so there is no doubt what was agreed at Committee! Edited March 8, 2013 by 65Sarge 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Blachshadow Posted March 8, 2013 Report Share Posted March 8, 2013 (edited) I think the 1 March rule is allegedly a Gentleman's verbal agreement made between all the promoters?? It's about as written down as the alleged ruling that Swindon must buy Batchelor seems to be (I am not doubting the ruling exists, but the detail has only been hinted at). I tend to agree with your view about the March 1st agreement. I'd suggest it's for when a team is still short of a rider after one they wanted pulls out, gets injured in Oz or something like that. They can then have a look at unused assets and get one on loan. I certainly don't think it's there to allow a club circumvent an MC ruling by ignoring the ruling for a few months until March 1st comes along. I'd also put forward that Batchelor is hardly an 'unsigned' rider - he was probably one of the first 'signed' for this year! Also, if this rule is written down anywhere I'm surprised Matt Ford didn't utilise it last year when signing AM. All he had to do was get his go-betweens to tell AM to inform Swindon he had no wish to ride over here in 2012 and change his mind after March 1st. As a 'free agent' he could then sign for anyone. As for Swindon having to buy Batchelor I suppose the MC could be using the 'for the good of speedway' bit in the rules. Edited March 8, 2013 by Vincent Blackshadow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigcatdiary Posted March 8, 2013 Report Share Posted March 8, 2013 I think the 1 March rule is allegedly a Gentleman's verbal agreement made between all the promoters?? It's about as written down as the alleged ruling that Swindon must buy Batchelor seems to be (I am not doubting the ruling exists, but the detail has only been hinted at). I think that there are a lot of people on here who assume what they've heard from their respective promotions and press is correct and think it will fall in their favour! Me I don't wear Rose tinted spectacles and we all know what happens if you ass u me!!! I think I'll just wait and see, but I hope for the sake of the sport it is resolved quickly and a proper public statement issued so there is no doubt what was agreed at Committee! Trouble is their is no Gentlemen in the BSPA and the only verbal they have is diarrhoea, they couldn't agree on anything if the sport depended on it, more,s the pity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve0 Posted March 8, 2013 Report Share Posted March 8, 2013 I tend to agree with your view about the March 1st agreement. I'd suggest it's for when a team is still short of a rider after one they wanted pulls out, gets injured in Oz or something like that. They can then have a look at unused assets and get one on loan. I certainly don't think it's there to allow a club circumvent an MC ruling by ignoring the ruling for a few months until March 1st comes along. I'd also put forward that Batchelor is hardly an 'unsigned' rider - he was probably one of the first 'signed' for this year! Also, if this rule is written down anywhere I'm surprised Matt Ford didn't utilise it last year when signing AM. All he had to do was get his go-betweens to tell AM to inform Swindon he had no wish to ride over here in 2012 and change his mind after March 1st. As a 'free agent' he could then sign for anyone. As for Swindon having to buy Batchelor I suppose the MC could be using the 'for the good of speedway' bit in the rules. You can put forward whatever drivel you want but the fact is that Batch signed on 1st March ! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Blachshadow Posted March 8, 2013 Report Share Posted March 8, 2013 You can put forward whatever drivel you want but the fact is that Batch signed on 1st March ! Yeah, right. We all believe that. The paperwork might have been forwarded to Rugby on March 1st. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveLyric2 Posted March 8, 2013 Report Share Posted March 8, 2013 You can put forward whatever drivel you want but the fact is that Batch signed on 1st March ! Actually Steve0 if you read the 'announcement' it was stated that 'terms have been agreed with Batch'!! We all knew that from a couple of months ago. (please see deleted tweet - oh wait we can't, its been deleted!). If the BSPA stick to their MC decision and Swindon attempt to go against it, then there is bound to be a punishment of some sort?! It probably won't be a fine, cos Swindon will argue that they can't afford to pay it, so maybe a points deduction or something.............?? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve0 Posted March 8, 2013 Report Share Posted March 8, 2013 Yeah, right. We all believe that. The paperwork might have been forwarded to Rugby on March 1st. You can believe whatever you want but it is a FACT that he signed on 1st March Actually Steve0 if you read the 'announcement' it was stated that 'terms have been agreed with Batch'!! We all knew that from a couple of months ago. (please see deleted tweet - oh wait we can't, its been deleted!). If the BSPA stick to their MC decision and Swindon attempt to go against it, then there is bound to be a punishment of some sort?! It probably won't be a fine, cos Swindon will argue that they can't afford to pay it, so maybe a points deduction or something.............?? So you reference a non existent tweet and an MC decision that hasn't been made public - show me either/both and I bet I will get neither. Punished for what exactly? Signing a rider who wasn't already signed when there was no other team place available for him elsewhere - good luck with that one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irk Deflector Posted March 8, 2013 Report Share Posted March 8, 2013 With a bit of luck all the shannigans that have gone on in the past few seasons will result in an independent body to run the sport, if not i despair of the future speedway has in this country! Without an independent body we'll be lucky to have "professional" speedway in 5 years time. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BluPanther Posted March 8, 2013 Report Share Posted March 8, 2013 Actually Steve0 if you read the 'announcement' it was stated that 'terms have been agreed with Batch'!! We all knew that from a couple of months ago. (please see deleted tweet - oh wait we can't, its been deleted!). If the BSPA stick to their MC decision and Swindon attempt to go against it, then there is bound to be a punishment of some sort?! It probably won't be a fine, cos Swindon will argue that they can't afford to pay it, so maybe a points deduction or something.............?? The way Swindon do business, they will probably want to borrow any points deduction from Boro because Troy is their asset.. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Blachshadow Posted March 8, 2013 Report Share Posted March 8, 2013 You can believe whatever you want but it is a FACT that he signed on 1st March Ok, let's change the wording a little. Let's substitute 'without a team place' for 'unsigned' (since nobody's actually seen this rule and we don't know the actual wording and both terms have been used by people posting about this rule). I reckon this rule is to allow teams to fill unforeseen gaps in their teams by any rider without a team place on March 1st. Batchelor has had a team place since the end of last season so this rule does not cover his and Swindon's position. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barney Rabbit Posted March 8, 2013 Report Share Posted March 8, 2013 So you reference a non existent tweet and an MC decision that hasn't been made public - show me either/both and I bet I will get neither. You may not have seen the tweet but many on here did. What might matter though is whether any other promoter did. The MC decision was made public by one of the promoters concerned. 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.