Craig Cook Signs For Peterboro' In Prem League (double Downer)

[Gr8scot]

After speaking to Craig at Workington recently when he was so worried about finances, I fear this block could sicken him to the point of calling it a day...... How can that be in the best interest of British Speedway????

 

If anyone is interested in supporting Craig, there is an ipetition started:- http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/CraigCookSpeedway

Sorry I can't make that into a link - hope someone else can, thanks

 

We are all behind you Craig, best of luck!!!

Edited May 6, 2016 by Gr8scot

[Woz01]

Absolutely ridiculous. He has an actual PL average for god sake. Imagine next season when Brits have over inflated EL averages, will they not be allowed either?? Funny how Ellis move back into the NL wasn't stopped, which is pretty much the same situation!

Edited May 6, 2016 by woz01

[Aces51]

The link does work. 576 signatures already.

 

It really is pathetic to see the further reasons given by the BSPA for their decision. Belle Vue and Peterborough are both Friday tracks, there are 3 clashes, we had many more than that when Cook was a d/u last year. Belle Vue had no authority to give permission for Peterborough to talk to him, obviously both clubs thought that was within the rules, as did many on here, perhaps there's been a late addition to the rule book. In any event that could soon be remedied unless Edinburgh are objecting to the move. Strange that isn't mentioned though if they are.

 

All in all, Chapman has been in office for 6 months, his promised openness and transparency seems to have been put on the back burner and this decision tells us more about support for British riders than any useless rhetoric.

Edited May 6, 2016 by Aces51

[FAST GATER]

 

 

The football comparison is completely ridiculous for 101 reasons, the main one being football has a pool of players to pick from in the millions whereas British Speedway teams are lucky if they have a pool of hundreds to pick from.

 

However, the maths show me that every league is now heavily weighted in favour of riders who want to regularly race speedway meetings in this country, and that’s a good thing, that is what the majority of fans want. It is a trend that will continue as the rule is a seed that needs to be grown and progressed correctly.

 

There is a far clearer pathway for British riders and that has now evolved into a way to enhance the number of meetings British based riders can race (good it is a British league after all) which in theory will see them progress, get better and enable them to become “EL riders” or “PL riders” rather than the collection of riders over the years from the continent who were mediocre and selective in their appearances here.

 

To my mind the DU/D down rule is in place to increase the number of riders who are committed to racing in this country (and is in the process of achieving that) and to fill the void left from top stars who have chosen to walk away. The trend re the number of Young British riders continues today with the majority of reserve spots in the EL and PL being packed with British kids, many of whom are progressing and will become regulars in this country, some would have anyway but this rule has increased the chances of more riders doing it.

 

The FTR/Double Up system is one of the few long term plans that is currently in place, when it comes to fruition it will reduce the number of meetings featuring R/R and guests (in theory) as there will be a far larger number of home grown riders racing here. If it continues as it has and riders progress as a result of it and become EL second strings/PL second strings it further increase the chances of other young Brits stepping into the EL reserve spots and PL reserve spots.

 

Fans ask for long term, this plan is long term, not ideals but still the entire premise of the rule is completely missed by some, go through the league, do the actual math, take away riders who DU/Double Down and work out where the 20+ riders who are going to fill that void are coming from, or where the money is coming from to fill the cash vacuum left behind due to the demand left to sign riders to fill a 1-7 let alone compete.

 

I do need to ask again, what riders have been left out of a job, or retired as a result of the system? Without tangible evidence that just feels like a complete and utter false opposition, as the only riders I can see who have been left on the side line are guys like Bager, Palovaraa, Rasmus Jensen etc, guys being signed as replacements, who with the best will in the world are hardly going to define the future of British Speedway.

Re your 10 years’ time point, in 10 years’ time British Speedway will have removed the majority of dead wood from the continent and replaced them with home grown local riders who will likely be representing their region in the North/South league if it was to split in two, that league would then be supplemented with selected talent from the continent who want to commit to Britain in the way the likes of Holder, Pijper, Lindgren or Summers have.. but hey it is 10 years you can right whatever narrative you like, there is so much water to pass under the bridge anything could happen, they might be going round the tracks on vespa hybrids for all I know.

Sorry is this a broadcast on behalf of the BSPA FTR is just to save money TODAY and will do nothing for the sport except haste it's demise !!!!

[Deano]

 

 

The football comparison is completely ridiculous for 101 reasons, ........

 

Sorry mate, I'm not going to trawl through years of stats to try and pull out a few names I believe could have continued, but retired due to not getting a team place.

 

Surely you can see that if an employer gets away with employing 5 people to do 10 jobs and doesn't have a long term plan to get another 5 board, you are going to eventually struggle.

 

Speedway has never had a real decent development programme. Ones they have, always have an underlying cost advantage, like the Fast track riders.

 

I really hope you are right and that this is a turning point. But, for me I feel it is just the beginning of the end while the product just gets watered down further.

[FAST GATER]

 

Sorry mate, I'm not going to trawl through years of stats to try and pull out a few names I believe could have continued, but retired due to not getting a team place.

 

Surely you can see that if an employer gets away with employing 5 people to do 10 jobs and doesn't have a long term plan to get another 5 board, you are going to eventually struggle.

 

Speedway has never had a real decent development programme. Ones they have, always have an underlying cost advantage, like the Fast track riders.

 

I really hope you are right and that this is a turning point. But, for me I feel it is just the beginning of the end while the product just gets watered down further.

Could not agree more

[Jacques]

http://www.speedwaygb.co/news.php?extend.30419.1&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=facebook

 

 

BRITISH Speedway vice-chairman Rob Godfrey is keen to explain why Peterborough's bid to sign star rider Craig Cook has failed.

Panthers had announced their intention to bring in the Belle Vue man on a doubling-up basis - but the sport's management committee didn't approve the move.

And Godfrey insists Cook is welcome to ride in the Premier League and is also slamming suggestions of a vendetta against the East of England Showground club.

He said: "I'm annoyed by the amount of unfair criticism the association are taking over this.

"The fact of the matter is that I advised Peterborough promoter Ged Rathbone that any such move was unlikely to be approved, I told him this as a friend.

"You simply cannot sign a rider when he already rides for a club on your racenight. King's Lynn switched from a Wednesday to a Thursday and as a consequence they had to lose Lewis Kerr from their team as he was already signed to a Thursday night track.

"Here, we have Peterborough who are a declared Friday night racetrack as in the promoter's guide and yet Craig already rides for Belle Vue who are also a Friday track.

"I explained all this to Ged but he still went and released riders from his team.

"This is not a vendetta against Peterborough and not a vendetta against Craig. Craig is more than welcome to ride in the Premier League, but not for a Friday night track and if we allowed it to happen now, everyone would be trying the same thing.

"Doubling-up is a necessary evil in the sport, as an association we have a responsibility to maintain control of the situation.

"I hope people, even our fiercest critics, can at least appreciate my explanation as to how this decision was reached."

[sparkafag]

 

Sorry mate, I'm not going to trawl through years of stats to try and pull out a few names I believe could have continued, but retired due to not getting a team place.

 

Surely you can see that if an employer gets away with employing 5 people to do 10 jobs and doesn't have a long term plan to get another 5 board, you are going to eventually struggle.

 

Speedway has never had a real decent development programme. Ones they have, always have an underlying cost advantage, like the Fast track riders.

 

I really hope you are right and that this is a turning point. But, for me I feel it is just the beginning of the end while the product just gets watered down further.

 

 

I wouldn’t ask you to trawl through years of stats to find riders but if you use the opposition of it retires riders I don’t think it is too much to ask what that is based on, as it seems it is, well, nothing. If it hasn't actually retired riders then it is a poor point to attempt to use to add weight against the rule.

 

I don’t think the employee is getting away with it either. I think it is a constructive way to see speedway in this country through a turbulent financial time, while also developing more riders.

 

The current development programme is literally doing that, developing riders, and there is visible and tangible evidence to support that, eg loads of Brits getting loads of meetings and getting better as a result of it, if that trend continues it increase the number of riders that can be signed and thus decreases the need for DU rules/R/R and guests, but it will take time.

The alternative you are suggesting is clubs spend more to attract riders who don’t want to race here, I fail to see how that benefits the product short term give that crowds didn’t massively increase when those riders were here and clubs were spending money on them, the watering down of the product is to fall in line with the people who want to attend.

 

The alternative speedway often advocated of GP stars racing here and a strong EL has been done, and it wasn’t working that’s why most rider’s demands are no longer met, and in the short/medium/long term the livelihood of clubs rather than supposed riders who are left on the shelf or retired is far more important, given those clubs need to be there to employ the riders.

[SCB]

Peterborough have 5 Friday home meetings planned. 5 might seem like a lot but on 2 of them Fridays its a GP weekend so the BV Colts are racing at home! So it's been rejected because of 3 clashes.

 

How many doubling up riders will miss less than 3 meetings? Not many I bet!

[sparkafag]

Sorry is this a broadcast on behalf of the BSPA

 

No

[screm]

Peterborough have 5 Friday home meetings planned. 5 might seem like a lot but on 2 of them Fridays its a GP weekend so the BV Colts are racing at home! So it's been rejected because of 3 clashes.

 

How many doubling up riders will miss less than 3 meetings? Not many I bet!

 

Looks like the BSPA had to come up with something and poor old Godfrey has been booted out to give their reasons and excuses.

[SCB]

He'd miss 5 away meetings! So this crap about home clashes is just that, crap. 3 home meetings vs 5 away!

[BWitcher]

Peterborough have 5 Friday home meetings planned. 5 might seem like a lot but on 2 of them Fridays its a GP weekend so the BV Colts are racing at home! So it's been rejected because of 3 clashes.

 

How many doubling up riders will miss less than 3 meetings? Not many I bet!

 

Any additional away meetings?

 

What about rain-offs that could cause additional clashes?

 

Not saying I agree with BSPA decision, although there is a semblance of logic to it.

 

Edited as you'd just replied..

 

So he would now be missing 8 meetings in total. Hmm... quite a bit of logic to it then.

Edited May 6, 2016 by BWitcher

[Aces51]

Peterborough have 5 Friday home meetings planned. 5 might seem like a lot but on 2 of them Fridays its a GP weekend so the BV Colts are racing at home! So it's been rejected because of 3 clashes.

 

How many doubling up riders will miss less than 3 meetings? Not many I bet!

It tells us a lot that those who make stupid decisions like this then dig the hole deeper trying to justify themselves.

 

Surely, if you are going to apply fixture clashes as a justification then it should apply across the board. How many meetings are those who ride in foreign leagues and the GP's going to miss?

Edited May 6, 2016 by Aces51

[SCB]

 

Any additional away meetings?

 

What about rain-offs that could cause additional clashes?

 

Not saying I agree with BSPA decision, although there is a semblance of logic to it.

 

Edited as you'd just replied..

 

So he would now be missing 8 meetings in total. Hmm... quite a bit of logic to it then.

Thing is, if they planned meetings at the start of the year to avoid clashes I'd agree but they don't. So why worry now?

[bigcatdiary]

Looks like the BSPA had to come up with something and poor old Godfrey has been booted out to give their reasons and excuses.

Its not hard to see who was the driving force was behind the decision.

[screm]

 

Any additional away meetings?

 

What about rain-offs that could cause additional clashes?

 

Not saying I agree with BSPA decision, although there is a semblance of logic to it.

 

Edited as you'd just replied..

 

So he would now be missing 8 meetings in total. Hmm... quite a bit of logic to it then.

 

Couldn't you say that about virtually any doubling up/down rider.

[BWitcher]

Thing is, if they planned meetings at the start of the year to avoid clashes I'd agree but they don't. So why worry now?

 

Is there a precedent, has a double upper ever been signed before with the same home race night?

 

Couldn't you say that about virtually any doubling up/down rider.

 

Yes, so the situation is problematic to begin with.. without throwing in the same home race night as well.

[bigcatdiary]

Thing is, if they planned meetings at the start of the year to avoid clashes I'd agree but they don't. So why worry now?

Set race nights for each league would avoid any problems for double uppers and guests.

[Aces51]

 

Any additional away meetings?

 

What about rain-offs that could cause additional clashes?

 

Not saying I agree with BSPA decision, although there is a semblance of logic to it.

 

Edited as you'd just replied..

 

So he would now be missing 8 meetings in total. Hmm... quite a bit of logic to it then.

That wasn't the reason given. It was because both are Friday tracks so the objection relates purely to home matches. Godfrey goes further and says he can sign for any team other than a Friday track so it seems the BSPA are quiet happy about away clashes.