Mr Blobby Posted December 25, 2014 Report Share Posted December 25, 2014 But surely anyone can understand if you get offered more money to do the same job then it only makes sense to do this? I just think its a bit crap for Aaron as he is the one in limbo regarding his career. Agreed if you get offered a team place for a lot more money you would be stupid not to take it! Heavy is just being bitter about the whole thing Spot on valuation off Summers.I dont get this Glasgow moneybags thing,surely Edinburgh,Peterborough,Sheffield and Workingtons top 5 will cost just as much as Glasgows proposed top 5 I bet it doesn't Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whiteliner Posted December 25, 2014 Report Share Posted December 25, 2014 At the end of the day the following applies: Is Summers a Redcar asset ? Yes Does Havelock have to sell or release him ? No Has a price been set by Havelock ? Yes Do Glasgow have to pay that price ? No Should Summers be aloud to move just because he has asked for a transfer ? No Havelock has his team in place for the next season so why should he be bothered about any of his riders who are not fixed up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heather21 Posted December 25, 2014 Author Report Share Posted December 25, 2014 He should be allowed to move if he cannot be included in the Redcar team, which he can't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikebaker Posted December 25, 2014 Report Share Posted December 25, 2014 Cannot get Aaron wanting a move to Ashfield. Has not a great record there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lioness Posted December 25, 2014 Report Share Posted December 25, 2014 Havelock has his team in place for the next season so why should he be bothered about any of his riders who are not fixed up. and in the season of goodwill the compassionate society is alive and well Im not quite sure whats worse - the implication (rightly or wrongly) that Havelock thinks that way or the apparent approval of the idea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whiteliner Posted December 25, 2014 Report Share Posted December 25, 2014 He should be allowed to move if he cannot be included in the Redcar team, which he can't. Sorry heather, It should of said "allowed to move at a lower price", I got a bit ahead of myself. He is being allowed to move but only at the price Havelock has asked. Can you imagine the uproar if riders were just allowed to pick and choose where they wanted to ride when they are an asset of another club. It does seem as though Havelock has spit his dummy out with Glasgow and I wouldnt be at all suprised to see some sort of deal sorted out before the season starts, even a loan deal with Berwick. Havelock is set in his ways and anyone who upsets him feels his wrath be it riders, sponsors or fans. and in the season of goodwill the compassionate society is alive and well Im not quite sure whats worse - the implication (rightly or wrongly) that Havelock thinks that way or the apparent approval of the idea Oh believe me Lioness, I in no way approve of that way of thinking but I have been around Mr Havelock for long enough to know that when he falls out with people be it riders, sponsors or fans they certainly know about it. He feels for nothing or no one apart from himself from what I have witnessed. Stubborn he invented the word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lioness Posted December 25, 2014 Report Share Posted December 25, 2014 Oh believe me Lioness, I in no way approve of that way of thinking but I have been around Mr Havelock for long enough to know that when he falls out with people be it riders, sponsors or fans they certainly know about it. He feels for nothing or no one apart from himself from what I have witnessed. Stubborn he invented the word. Apologies for mis interpreting it and thinking you were saying that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MD Posted December 25, 2014 Report Share Posted December 25, 2014 Can you imagine the uproar if riders were just allowed to pick and choose where they wanted to ride when they are an asset of another club. No one is an asset of any club, their 'asset' status has no monetary or legal value and you couldn't take it to a bank and borrow against it. It is an archaic system that the administration of British speedway has failed to adapt from, having been outlawed by EU law most notably football around 20 years ago as a result of the Jean Marc Bosman ruling. Poland as an EU nation operate a system where riders are free to move after the end of their contract following the season end, why doesn't Britain. With Glasgow having deep pockets this year perhaps some of it could be spent on strong legal advice, then hope they don't get ostracised as Sands did around 2001. Should they part with any money for Summers they want their head looked at. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted December 25, 2014 Report Share Posted December 25, 2014 He should be allowed to move if he cannot be included in the Redcar team, which he can't. i believe that redcar had planned to use aaron , until he was approached by glasgow who didn't have permission to speak to him. i can see why redcar are hacked off regarding this . maybe thats why they put a £25k price on his head. can see this going to arbitration , and may meet somewhere in the middle , but having said that all the favours are in redcars court as aaron was in there 2015 plans. so the only outcome i see is glasgow having to pay a higher price for spud or walking away and spud been left with no 2015 place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whiteliner Posted December 25, 2014 Report Share Posted December 25, 2014 MD, I agree with you, but thats how speedway operates in this country and has done for as long as I can remember. The way I see it, all riders are self employed and are owned by nobody. A contract is offered and they either accept it or they dont. I agree that no fee's should be exchanged by any clubs. Lets face it if I employ a plumber to do a job for me then he goes and works for somebody else, I dont get a fee for him. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heather21 Posted December 25, 2014 Author Report Share Posted December 25, 2014 What annoys me is that if Glasgow did approach Aaron illegally and they did offer more money and blah de fn blah, its Aaron that will be punished for it by possibly ending up without a team place, not Glasgow! Get a grip havvy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted December 25, 2014 Report Share Posted December 25, 2014 What annoys me is that if Glasgow did approach Aaron illegally and they did offer more money and blah de fn blah, its Aaron that will be punished for it by possibly ending up without a team place, not Glasgow! Get a grip havvy. it would be unfortunate for aaron, however glasgow did break the rules by approaching him illegally and upsetting redcars team building plans. think thats why aaron had to ask for a transfer. he will also lose his 4 years towards a testimonial that he gained at redcar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MD Posted December 25, 2014 Report Share Posted December 25, 2014 What annoys me is that if Glasgow did approach Aaron illegally He isn't bound by any law or obligation so why would it be illegal? He never signed a contract to ride for Redcar next year. If he had, different story. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted December 25, 2014 Report Share Posted December 25, 2014 He isn't bound by any law or obligation so why would it be illegal? He never signed a contract to ride for Redcar next year. If he had, different story. a footballer is self employed but is owner by a club speedway is no different, each rider is owned by a club after they have done 4 home and 4 away matches. Each club have an asset base made up of riders, if they don't meet the required figure money has to be lodged as a bond Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heather21 Posted December 25, 2014 Author Report Share Posted December 25, 2014 He isn't bound by any law or obligation so why would it be illegal? He never signed a contract to ride for Redcar next year. If he had, different story. Exactly what I am thinking. Riders should be allowed to see what their options are. Brian Havelock having a total toy out the pram moment! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MD Posted December 25, 2014 Report Share Posted December 25, 2014 a footballer is self employed but is owner by a club speedway is no different, each rider is owned by a club after they have done 4 home and 4 away matches. No one is owned by anyone, slavery is over. Footballers are contracted to a club for the length of their contract, should they wish to move to another club during that contractual period the pursuing team will have to pay a transfer fee based on the players ability and the length of time remaining on the original contract. At the end of the contractual period, the player is free to sign for whom he chooses without any transfer fee due to the previous club. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heather21 Posted December 25, 2014 Author Report Share Posted December 25, 2014 it would be unfortunate for aaron, however glasgow did break the rules by approaching him illegally and upsetting redcars team building plans. think thats why aaron had to ask for a transfer. he will also lose his 4 years towards a testimonial that he gained at redcar. Yes but again that isn't his fault, and he is the one that could potentially miss out on a team place! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted December 25, 2014 Report Share Posted December 25, 2014 No one is owned by anyone, slavery is over. Footballers are contracted to a club for the length of their contract, should they wish to move to another club during that contractual period the pursuing team will have to pay a transfer fee based on the players ability and the length of time remaining on the original contract. At the end of the contractual period, the player is free to sign for whom he chooses without any transfer fee due to the previous club. If this is correct then why has glasgow offered 12k for summers to redcar If no one owns summers then surely glasgow would have announced he is riding for them in 2015 ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bellers101 Posted December 26, 2014 Report Share Posted December 26, 2014 What annoys me is that if Glasgow did approach Aaron illegally and they did offer more money and blah de fn blah, its Aaron that will be punished for it by possibly ending up without a team place, not Glasgow! Get a grip havvy. Illegal. End of story really. Naughty Glasgow and from what ive heard Havvy is happy to hang Aaron and Glasgow out to dry although Aaron may have an EL spot lined up so all isnt lost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heather21 Posted December 26, 2014 Author Report Share Posted December 26, 2014 Illegal. End of story really. Naughty Glasgow and from what ive heard Havvy is happy to hang Aaron and Glasgow out to dry although Aaron may have an EL spot lined up so all isnt lost. I said IF. I have no idea of when Aaron was approached. 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.