Knighted Rocket Posted January 14, 2018 Report Share Posted January 14, 2018 (edited) 20 hours ago, Shadders said: Worryingly quiet Scott Nicholl's said on his video that we will like the final rider implying the deal is done. Edited January 14, 2018 by Knighted Rocket 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panthers89 Posted January 15, 2018 Report Share Posted January 15, 2018 20 hours ago, Knighted Rocket said: Scott Nicholl's said on his video that we will like the final rider implying the deal is done. He’s hardly going to come out and say, ‘well the last rider, he ain’t brilliant to be honest.’ let’s face it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveLyric2 Posted January 15, 2018 Report Share Posted January 15, 2018 On 1/13/2018 at 7:27 PM, lewy said: I would say your final rider will be kk probably Matt Ford causing the delay imo If true, then I guess its down to how much Jensen is prepared to pay for him as Matt will be wanting decent dosh rather than just a loan fee!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INCOGNITO Posted January 15, 2018 Report Share Posted January 15, 2018 3 minutes ago, Skidder1 said: If true, then I guess its down to how much Jensen is prepared to pay for him as Matt will be wanting decent dosh rather than just a loan fee!! Think at KK age a loan fee would be better for Poole as loan fees were graded by averages of a loan fee of just under seven grand which could extend for a few more years would be more income than a transfer fee of roughly £12-15,000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveLyric2 Posted January 15, 2018 Report Share Posted January 15, 2018 11 minutes ago, INCOGNITO said: Think at KK age a loan fee would be better for Poole as loan fees were graded by averages of a loan fee of just under seven grand which could extend for a few more years would be more income than a transfer fee of roughly £12-15,000 I'm not sure that anyone else would want to loan him in future years so a sale now might well be better business - especially as MF has already publicly stated he may well sell a couple of assets to help 'balance his books' from last year!! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff Posted January 15, 2018 Report Share Posted January 15, 2018 G'wan Steve, take it to the Courts to end this nonsense. I look forward to a rider being able to leave 'on a Kasprzak' at the end of their contract. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevebrum Posted January 15, 2018 Report Share Posted January 15, 2018 6 hours ago, INCOGNITO said: Think at KK age a loan fee would be better for Poole as loan fees were graded by averages of a loan fee of just under seven grand which could extend for a few more years would be more income than a transfer fee of roughly £12-15,000 Buying assets is a waste of time. Kasprzak will just do 'a Miedzinski' and go where he wants and no sale forced. KK is worth very little anyway, and I'm sure MF is hoping to get top dollar for a rider he knows gives little effort to the UK top flight. Loan it is then unless Rye really want to buy him, poor things!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILIPRISING Posted January 15, 2018 Report Share Posted January 15, 2018 THE real issue is not so much when a rider challenges the obvious illegality of the asset and loan system but when a promoter is prepared to break the mould and simply sign a rider who is out of contract regardless of the consequences. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E I Addio Posted January 15, 2018 Report Share Posted January 15, 2018 I am just thinking aloud here , but let’s take the scenario you suggest, and promoter A signs a rider out of contract who is an asset of promoter B . What happens next ? Step one, can the BSPA refuse to sanction promoter A’s team, in which case he can’t compete without signing someone else ? That would mean it’s pointless signing the rider in the first place. If not, what would be the next step ? Presumably litigation, but the downside of that is that is would take probably two years and a lot of money the get to court . Next question. what would promoter B sue for ? Presimably his only loss would be for loan fees. I dont know what a seasons loan fee amounts to but if it is less than about £5000 it would probably go to the small claims court with no costs being awarded so employing lawyers would probably cost more than the amount involved. Given the dire state of speedways finances would any promoter really want to to take such a case on ? Would any rider be bothered to when he can get another job easy enough? These are thoughts that I have pondered over for a few years now, not saying I am right but it seems to me that given the state of speedways finances, it seems to me that nobody is likely to have the time, money or inclination to do anything other than trundle along* in the same old way. Anyone else have thoughts on the practicality of the situation? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hamish McRaker Posted January 15, 2018 Report Share Posted January 15, 2018 Rider submits a transfer request to the "owning" club, naming the new club as the other party. The two clubs fail to agree on a transfer fee, meaning it has to go to an arbitration. Meanwhile, whilst the arbitration date is awaited, BSPA sanction the rider moving to the new club and the season starts with him in the team. The arbitration (eventually) sets a transfer fee but the new club appeals the decision. Transfer fee finally ratified, but the new club just doesn't pay. Repeat as necessary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveLyric2 Posted January 16, 2018 Report Share Posted January 16, 2018 Club would have its Promoter licence suspended and be fined if an agreed tribunal transfer fee is not paid! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phillipsr Posted January 16, 2018 Author Report Share Posted January 16, 2018 44 minutes ago, Skidder1 said: Club would have its Promoter licence suspended and be fined if an agreed tribunal transfer fee is not paid! How can you fine someone for not complying with an illegal rule 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz01 Posted January 16, 2018 Report Share Posted January 16, 2018 1 hour ago, Skidder1 said: Club would have its Promoter licence suspended and be fined if an agreed tribunal transfer fee is not paid! If I remember correctly Birmingham were ordered to pay a transfer fee to Coventry for Ben Barker. It was never paid and it was then changed to a loan fee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveLyric2 Posted January 16, 2018 Report Share Posted January 16, 2018 2 hours ago, phillipsr said: How can you fine someone for not complying with an illegal rule If it went to a tribunal then all sides would have to agree to abide with the decision or face the Association/Bureau/ACU penalty!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RPNY Posted January 16, 2018 Report Share Posted January 16, 2018 Be Much better if we had Linus anyway Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E I Addio Posted January 16, 2018 Report Share Posted January 16, 2018 2 hours ago, phillipsr said: How can you fine someone for not complying with an illegal rule The rule kus not illegal unless and until it is tested in the courts. The general opinion is that it very likely would be deemed illegal but as long as both sides consent to the situation there is no problem. It seems to me therefore, that the real issue therefore is whether anyone is prepared to invest the time and money fighting such a case. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coventry_Bee Posted January 16, 2018 Report Share Posted January 16, 2018 Oh I remember very well the oxford and Hamill and Hancock row regarding ownership, not being able to use them and such like. Buying riders is a waste, no idea why Leicester did with Sarj to be honest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knighted Rocket Posted January 16, 2018 Report Share Posted January 16, 2018 (edited) On 15/01/2018 at 6:52 AM, Panthers89 said: He’s hardly going to come out and say, ‘well the last rider, he ain’t brilliant to be honest.’ let’s face it! If the rider was not to his liking I guess he would have not referred to it at all. Edited January 16, 2018 by Knighted Rocket error Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben91 Posted January 20, 2018 Report Share Posted January 20, 2018 The asset system needs to be scrapped. It should have been done years ago but while promotors are deciding the rules between themselves then the self-serving asset system will remain. Riders are self-employed contractors and should be signing year-long contracts with the team they have agreed to ride for on a season by season basis. I'm disappointed to see Linus is in discussions with Poole, I'm assuming that our promotion didn't explore the avenue of signing him at all, swap him in for Harris (if KK is the last rider) and the team looks a whole lot better to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveLyric2 Posted January 20, 2018 Report Share Posted January 20, 2018 Linus is a Poole asset so why wouldn't he be in discussion with Poole? He was first choice to replace the injured KK early last season but couldn't make the fixtures work for him, hence Poole getting Zengota instead!! 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.