brewer Posted March 30, 2013 Report Share Posted March 30, 2013 (edited) It's not a rule. There are no rules about how riders are paid, and bonus points haven't been used to calculate averages for years. Whether they're paid for them or not is immaterial when it comes to the calculation of scores. If there's that much concern about what riders are & aren't getting paid for, how about when a rider is on a points guarantee but fails to score to that level? He's then getting paid for point he didn't score! A selection of multi coloured pens is surely the only way forward. That way the BSPA will have progressed the sport, making the mundane completion of a programme in monochrome a thing of the past. yes there are rules in pl this year a cap off £55 pp and no bp if in 3rd unless on tac, wether clubs get around it is up to them , but theses rules were brought in for 2013 and if clubs are found out to be breaking the rules they will be fined. Edited March 30, 2013 by brewer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulco Posted March 30, 2013 Report Share Posted March 30, 2013 Surely it's up to each promoter how he pays his riders. Per point, per bonus point, per pass, for turning up, per big mac.... Ipswich want to pay riders a bonus for scoring a bonus point. An employer and employee can put any term (that doesn't break statutory law) into a contract. It's not a rule. There are no rules about how riders are paid, and bonus points haven't been used to calculate averages for years. Whether they're paid for them or not is immaterial when it comes to the calculation of scores. If there's that much concern about what riders are & aren't getting paid for, how about when a rider is on a points guarantee but fails to score to that level? He's then getting paid for point he didn't score! A selection of multi coloured pens is surely the only way forward. That way the BSPA will have progressed the sport, making the mundane completion of a programme in monochrome a thing of the past. yes there are rules in pl this year a cap off £55 pp and no bp if in 3rd unless on tac, wether clubs get around it is up to them , but theses rules were brought in for 2013 and if clubs are found out to be breaking the rules they will be fined. got to love it when the know-alls are proved wrong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben91 Posted March 30, 2013 Report Share Posted March 30, 2013 Garbage rule, regardless of all the bickering about whether it's legal or not. Is not paying a few bonus points for third placed finishes going to really be that effective as a cost cutting measure? Doubt it highly. What it is going to do is promote team mates racing against each other, leading to more strung out races as team riding is disregarded and riders taking unnecessary risks trying to beat their partner into second place. Complete own goal IMO, can't see the rule surviving long. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tyretrax Posted March 31, 2013 Report Share Posted March 31, 2013 Want to cut costs? Ban the use of titanium! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
montie Posted March 31, 2013 Report Share Posted March 31, 2013 Want to cut costs? Ban the use of titanium! Will may of the PL chaps be using Titanium? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fromafar Posted March 31, 2013 Report Share Posted March 31, 2013 Will may of the PL chaps be using Titanium? It might surprise you ,everyone want to think they have the edge and best equipment is part of these thoughts . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoggy Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 they are breaking the rules, sheffield promotions idea, it was voted on at the agm as i understand, but ipswich, rye and somerset i am led to believe were the only votes against it, rediculous i feel a 3-3 can win / draw a match and the guy in 3rd passes his teammate to ensure being paid more, then his teammate gets passed by the guy in 4th 3-3 turns into 4-2 against match lost,or worse crashes into his teammate while trying to pass him, promoters fault not riders. I'm very happy to invite you to withdraw your comment relative to Sheffield as it is inaccurate and untrue, alternatively you may substantiate it by contacting our associate sponsors Wosskow Brown Solicitors who will be delighted to verify the authenticity of your comment. We'll pick up the tab, a simple "sorry I got that wrong will be fine" kind regards ..............David Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dontforgetthefueltapsbruv Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 I'm very happy to invite you to withdraw your comment relative to Sheffield as it is inaccurate and untrue, alternatively you may substantiate it by contacting our associate sponsors Wosskow Brown Solicitors who will be delighted to verify the authenticity of your comment. We'll pick up the tab, a simple "sorry I got that wrong will be fine" kind regards ..............David So it wasnt Sheffields idea - hardly requires the implied threat of legal proceedings! Perhaps you you would like to clear it up for us all to avoid further confusion. Proposer ??? Seconded ??? How did everyone vote??? What was the agreed consequence of non compliance? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brewer Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 ok if i got that wrong i will apologise, a clear announcement rather than threat of legal action would of done , you could of pm me. but come on this rule (and it is a rule) is wrong and contradicts speedway as a team sport, and while you are there perhaps as dfg has said please clear it up, and perhaps you could get on with my other question in ind/shared events about the british semi's thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsunami Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 So it wasnt Sheffields idea - hardly requires the implied threat of legal proceedings! Perhaps you you would like to clear it up for us all to avoid further confusion. Proposer ??? Seconded ??? How did everyone vote??? What was the agreed consequence of non compliance? Why should anybody within BSPA have to break confidence of the organisation, to tell everyone how a decision was arrived at. It is a business and should not have explain the ins and out of each business decision. Similarly it in not correct for posters on here to claim to be privvy to business and post it on here. It could be of course that brewer knows bugger all about it, but heard something from the bloke next door, who's friendly with a bloke at the pub, who's daughter once had a relationship with a rider a few years ago. ok if i got that wrong i will apologise, a clear announcement rather than threat of legal action would of done , you could of pm me. but come on this rule (and it is a rule) is wrong and contradicts speedway as a team sport, and while you are there perhaps as dfg has said please clear it up, and perhaps you could get on with my other question in ind/shared events about the british semi's thank you. Think before you post then. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoggy Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 ok if i got that wrong i will apologise, a clear announcement rather than threat of legal action would of done , you could of pm me. but come on this rule (and it is a rule) is wrong and contradicts speedway as a team sport, and while you are there perhaps as dfg has said please clear it up, and perhaps you could get on with my other question in ind/shared events about the british semi's thank you. Thank you for the apology ...........David Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dontforgetthefueltapsbruv Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 Why should anybody within BSPA have to break confidence of the organisation, to tell everyone how a decision was arrived at. It is a business and should not have explain the ins and out of each business decision. Similarly it in not correct for posters on here to claim to be privvy to business and post it on here. It could be of course that brewer knows bugger all about it, but heard something from the bloke next door, who's friendly with a bloke at the pub, who's daughter once had a relationship with a rider a few years ago. I tend to agree in the main that it is not needed for the BSPA to explain their business decisions on this forum or elsewhere. However Brewers post was in no way critical of Sheffield but simply stated he thought they proposed the idea. Even if it was wrong it hardly caused Sheffield offence/embarrassment and therefore didnt warrant the imolied legal threat. A simple it wasnt Sheffields idea would have been enough to correct him if a correction was felt needed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikebv Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 as money obviously needed to be saved through cost cutting measures.. why didn't the pl teams just work out the average amount of bonus points attained for a '3-3' per meeting over say the past three years, (and the average cost per meeting) and then just remove this amount from their payroll budget for the seven riders at the start of the year? the promoters save the cash and all seven riders have had the impact rather than the odd individual who runs the third place behind his partner (and you prevent all the negative impact to the team spirit that this rule can bring)) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ciderman Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 Yes only been a fan for for 43 yrs and I now don't understand the Bonus Point situation in terms of fillng in the programme, average implications etc. As to payments for the 'Bonus Point' I would supppose if a club sponsor or supporters club wanted to provide funds to pay bonus points there would be nothing the BSPA could do as the payment would not be being paid by the promoter. Please can someone clear this up once and for all - Hoggy your the man in the know! Are all 'bonus points' being included in results or just a 2nd when on a 5-1 ???? Talk about confusing the fans!!! Even more confusing-- taken from the BSPA RULE BOOK 2013- or does each league have it's own rule book. Bonus Point Aditional point given to aRiderin a team event when finishing immediately behind his team - mate when in 2nd or 3rd position BSPA British Speedway Promoters' Association 15.9.3 In a Team Competition, a Rider shall be awarded a BonusPoint if s /he finishes in 2nd or 3rd place immediately behind his /her partner, this shall not count towards the Meeting score. Nothing in the rule book about riders not being paid for 'bonus points'! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulco Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 Yes only been a fan for for 43 yrs and I now don't understand the Bonus Point situation in terms of fillng in the programme, average implications etc. As to payments for the 'Bonus Point' I would supppose if a club sponsor or supporters club wanted to provide funds to pay bonus points there would be nothing the BSPA could do as the payment would not be being paid by the promoter. Please can someone clear this up once and for all - Hoggy your the man in the know! Are all 'bonus points' being included in results or just a 2nd when on a 5-1 ???? Talk about confusing the fans!!! Even more confusing-- taken from the BSPA RULE BOOK 2013- or does each league have it's own rule book. Bonus Point Aditional point given to aRiderin a team event when finishing immediately behind his team - mate when in 2nd or 3rd position BSPA British Speedway Promoters' Association 15.9.3 In a Team Competition, a Rider shall be awarded a BonusPoint if s /he finishes in 2nd or 3rd place immediately behind his /her partner, this shall not count towards the Meeting score. Nothing in the rule book about riders not being paid for 'bonus points'! It's just a new rule for this year , and only for the PL , and it only affects riders finishing third behind a team mate unless they are on a t/r Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arson fire Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 Speedway is nothing without the fans, yet fans are treat as mushrooms. Maybe the sport wouldn't be lost on so many if it wasnt a closed shop or they didn't keep meddling with it. Constant tampering isn't the way forward, agree a long term plan and work towards it, apply it, deal with it!! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
montie Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 (edited) So it wasnt Sheffields idea - hardly requires the implied threat of legal proceedings! Perhaps you you would like to clear it up for us all to avoid further confusion. Proposer ??? Seconded ??? How did everyone vote??? What was the agreed consequence of non compliance? Doesn't really matter,as to have got it passed there must have been a majority, and during an AGM surely that must be respected by all the members even if you don't agree with it, Edited April 1, 2013 by montie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dontforgetthefueltapsbruv Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 Doesn't really matter,as to have got it passed there must have been a majority, and during an AGM surely that must be respected by all the members even if you don't agree with it, If it doesnt matter why the need for a threat of legal action? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fromafar Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 (edited) Doesn't really matter,as to have got it passed there must have been a majority, and during an AGM surely that must be respected by all the members even if you don't agree with it, Waste of time even proposing this as a rule ,there is no way the it can be policed and adhered too if certain promotion dont want to bide by it.If thats the best they could come up with it makes you wonder where the future of the sport is going.Ipswich have clearly stated they are not implementing for their riders. Edited April 1, 2013 by Fromafar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulco Posted April 1, 2013 Report Share Posted April 1, 2013 Waste of time even proposing this as a rule ,there is no way the it can be policed and adhered too if certain promotion dont want to bide by it.If thats the best they could come up with it makes you wonder where the future of the sport is going.Ipswich have clearly stated they are not implementing for their riders. And their stance is too be applauded . Any new ruling should be for the benefit of the sport , this clearly is not . 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.