Asset System Flawed

[Tsunami]

THAT is quite easily overcome. Sign him on a long-term contract. Then if they cannot include him in their team they can quite legally and justifiably ask for a transfer fee.

 

I haven't seen a complete asset list for some time (don't even know if the BSPA have one) but last time I did it included riders who had long since hung up their leathers.

 

We are not talking about property or pieces of furniture but human beings. They have rights. Slavery was abolished long ago.

 

Yes, there are BSPA lists of assets circulated at each AGM, to allow other promotions to know who they have to contact rather than have to guess. It usually does contain riders who have retired but more recent ones are included in case the might wish to return.

It doesn't matter what the commodities are, a contract is a contract, and by anybodies analogy, the slave reference is out of order and morally irrelevant.

[dave69]

The asset system is an archaic nonsense in this day and age and should be abolished. If a rider is not under contract then they should be free to ride for whom ever they like, just as workers in every other industry are able to do.

 

I can see the case for promotions genuinely developing young riders to get some compensation, but this should not apply indefinitely.

I also think if it went to Court it would be deemed illegal as restraint of trade.

[kitten2502]

those clubs who have invested in assets cannot just lose that investment overnight.

 

This is a genuine question - what do clubs actually invest when a rider becomes an asset?

[Humphrey Appleby]

This is a genuine question - what do clubs actually invest when a rider becomes an asset?

 

Nothing in principle.

 

BUT Bosman determined that players out of contract were free to move elsewhere, which is where the analogy with speedway is relevant.

 

The Bosman ruling was specifically about allowing out-of-contract players to move between EU countries, not within EU countries.

[G the Bee]

You say riders not used by their parent club are always available on loan. Have you told Peterborough that.

 

Perhaps I should have said 'through choice' which is what your preceding post was inferring - riders averages not fitting etc.

 

As you can see, I have edited my post.

 

All I know about the Peterborough situation is what I have read on riders twitter posts and the response by the Peterborough promotion in the press, I think the Panthers promotion raise a number of good points. Namely:

 

Hans Andersen was offered terms twice but turned them down. Another club (Coventry) was prepared to purchase him and he turned them down too. Is it surprising they want a transfer fee for him? Swindon seem prepared to buy him and I suspect arbitration will be involved.

 

Troy Batchelor is alleged to have made public statements about his desire not to return to Peterborough. Again, are the Panthers promotion being unfair asking for a transfer fee for a rider who, it would seem, does not want to ride for them?

 

NKI has said he will ride for Kings Lynn or no one. Is it surprising they want a transfer fee for him? To be honest, I find the BSPA decision to allow Kings Lynn to loan him baffling and inconsistent as Iversen has also stated his desire not to ride for his parent club.

 

In Bjerre, Andersen, NKI and Batchelor (don't forget they also have Ryan Sullivan) Panthers have a number of top-level assets, most of which I suspect they have purchased themselves at some point. If they do want to sell the ones that clearly wish to ride elsewhere, I can't say I blame them.

[Humphrey Appleby]

O'm not saying it's perfect. And certainly I feel that when a rider signs a contract it should be for a set period rather than indefinately.

 

It already is - usually eight months from March until October. The asset system has nothing to do with whether a rider is contracted or not, but in theory prevents an out-of-contract rider from signing for who they like.

 

Would anyone in any other industry tolerate such an arrangement? Sorry, we're not employing you this year but any other employer you might find has to pay us for the privilege of you working for them...

[Hunty]

This is a genuine question - what do clubs actually invest when a rider becomes an asset?

 

First Dibs, Loan Fees and Potential Transfer Fees...Another rule thats perplexed me! So Brummies have signed Covatti (not saying he will) who could become a next superstar, so they sign him for nothing but next year they could get a healthly transfer fee if they sold him if he turned out to a brilliant rider! So by just finding a rider and him becoming an asset they could make money easily!

[G the Bee]

Nothing in principle.

 

A little simplistic an answer. Sure some overseas riders become assets through default.

 

However, tell that to Poole. They paid over £28,000 to sign Darcy Ward. How much money have Bees spent on Schlein, Kennett, Harris, Nicholls? A little more than nothing!

[Hunty]

Perhaps I should have said 'through choice' which is what your preceding post was inferring - riders averages not fitting etc.

 

As you can see, I have edited my post.

 

All I know about the Peterborough situation is what I have read on riders twitter posts and the response by the Peterborough promotion in the press, I think the Panthers promotion raise a number of good points. Namely:

 

Hans Andersen was offered terms twice but turned them down. Another club (Coventry) was prepared to purchase him and he turned them down too. Is it surprising they want a transfer fee for him? Swindon seem prepared to buy him and I suspect arbitration will be involved.

 

Troy Batchelor is alleged to have made public statements about his desire not to return to Peterborough. Again, are the Panthers promotion being unfair asking for a transfer fee for a rider who, it would seem, does not want to ride for them?

 

NKI has said he will ride for Kings Lynn or no one. Is it surprising they want a transfer fee for him? To be honest, I find the BSPA decision to allow Kings Lynn to loan him baffling and inconsistent as Iversen has also stated his desire not to ride for his parent club.

 

In Bjerre, Andersen, NKI and Batchelor (don't forget they also have Ryan Sullivan) Panthers have a number of top-level assets, most of which I suspect they have purchased themselves at some point. If they do want to sell the ones that clearly wish to ride elsewhere, I can't say I blame them.

 

If they had contracts with length of time in then they could leave free of will when they expiered! These riders are stuck, they dont want to ride for the Parent clubs no more and other clubs cannot afford the transfer fees that they have stated!

[Humphrey Appleby]

Again, are the Panthers promotion being unfair asking for a transfer fee for a rider who, it would seem, does not want to ride for them?

 

Yes it is unfair, although I can understand why Peterborough want to try to make some money out of the daft system. However, Peterborough have had several years of use out of him and allegedly didn't pay on occasions in the past, so unless he's under contract, why shouldn't be able to sign for who he pleases?

[G the Bee]

Yes it is unfair, although I can understand why Peterborough want to try to make some money out of the daft system. However, Peterborough have had several years of use out of him and allegedly didn't pay on occasions in the past, so unless he's under contract, why shouldn't be able to sign for who he pleases?

 

If Darren Bent wanted to leave Aston Villa this January, would Villa be unfair asking for a transfer fee?

[Humphrey Appleby]

A little simplistic an answer. Sure some overseas riders become assets through default.

However, tell that to Poole. They paid over £28,000 to sign Darcy Ward. How much money have Bees spent on Schlein, Kennett, Harris, Nicholls? A little more than nothing!

 

Yes, but they wouldn't have had to pay anything if there wasn't a transfer system in place.

 

I actually do support the notion of compensation for promotions who genuinely develop and nuture riders. However, I certainly don't think promotions who sign overseas riders should expect anything (with the possible exception of riders on 'apprentice'-type schemes), and neither do I think promotions should expect transfer/loan fees for riders who've been doing the rounds for years.

 

If Darren Bent wanted to leave Aston Villa this January, would Villa be unfair asking for a transfer fee?

 

If Darren Bent is still under contract this January, then it's not unreasonable to ask for compensation. If he's a free agent, then unlike speedway he can freely go where he likes, which is why football clubs tend to sell players before they're out-of-contract.

[G the Bee]

So all speedway promotions need do now is sign riders up on long term contracts instead.

 

I have posted elsewhere that that would be a better idea. Unfortunately, too many clubs have invested significantly in the current system.

 

I can't get around thinking though that the current system is more than workable providing it is managed consistently and respected by all parties.

 

There are more than enough riders to go round. Sure some less asset-rich clubs may be at a disadvantage in terms of team building, but the simple answer to that is to build up your asset base over time. And if you can't afford to purchase 'X' rider then you have to look elsewhere and wait until riders become available.

 

I absolutely think there is merit in the suggestion that a phased change in the way rider registrations/contracts (call them what you will) are handled in speedway should be implemented. However, in the mean time, I think promotions should respect the system as it stands at the moment and the BSPA should administer the system consistently.

Edited January 6, 2013 by G the Bee

[Humphrey Appleby]

So all speedway promotions need do now is sign riders up on long term contracts instead.

 

Where's the money going to come from to do that? I'd doubt that riders would want to sign to long-term contracts without any financial guarantees.

 

Sure some less asset-rich clubs may be at a disadvantage in terms of team building, but the simple answer to that is to build up your asset base over time.

 

That's the problem though, isn't it? How many promotions develop juniors or bring in raw riders to polish their talents? They just try to find some ready-made foreign rider to sign on a conveniently low assessed average, and then claim rights over them for time immemorial.

 

I wouldn't disagree that the current implementation of the asset system doesn't really prevent riders from going where they want in practice, but it's become a largely pointless exercise in an era when so few promotions are actually willing to pay transfer fees. Loan and transfer fees are just an unnecessary additional expense.

[SCB]

Of course not ... it is not the same thing at all.

How is it not? I can race for a club in Sweden, Poland, Denmark, Germany, Cz Republic and the UK. So 6 teams, so why can't I ride for 6 teams in the UK? It's restraint I tell you.

 

Actually, it's not restraint, in the same way anyone earning a living in a foreign league is not being prevented from earning a living because they are owned by a club who are asking for a transfer fee.

[PHILIPRISING]

How is it not? I can race for a club in Sweden, Poland, Denmark, Germany, Cz Republic and the UK. So 6 teams, so why can't I ride for 6 teams in the UK? It's restraint I tell you.

 

Actually, it's not restraint, in the same way anyone earning a living in a foreign league is not being prevented from earning a living because they are owned by a club who are asking for a transfer fee.

 

But they are not owned ... that is the point.

[theblueboy]

If Darren Bent wanted to leave Aston Villa this January, would Villa be unfair asking for a transfer fee?

 

Yes...coz he isn't very good.

 

that's because Darren Bent is an employee of Aston Villa. Batchelor and Andersen are self employed and hire themselves out to the highest(or best offer).

[Vincent Blachshadow]

But they are not owned ... that is the point.

 

Isn't it the rider's registration/license/permit to ride speedway in this country that's actually held by his parent club rather than the rider himself?

 

So no, the rider isn't 'owned' by anyone. He's perfectly entitled to get a job in Aldi if he so wishes.

[BuckTaylor64]

A rider not under contract to a said team is perfectly entitled to move to whatever team that wishes to employ him.

 

Anyone trying to stop him would get buried in the courts.

 

 

[TrueBee]

While we're at it can we abolish the points limit and let every rider double up. Also everyone should be allowed an r/r wherever it is used in the team as they are denying extra points money! I could go on.

 

Most sports have rules and regulations which appear to be illegal if they were to be challenged but it's accepted that these are adhered to by the said organisations.