Jump to content
British Speedway Forum

Assets


jawajoe

Recommended Posts

one day someone will challenge it in the courts and that'll be the end of that.

 

Some rider will be prevented from riding because of loans fees, etc and it will be challenged

IN Poland last weekend much of the chat was about riders leaving a club and going elsewhere when their contracts expire. Freedom of movement. Makes life much easier but assets have been the bane of British speedway for years.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

IN Poland last weekend much of the chat was about riders leaving a club and going elsewhere when their contracts expire. Freedom of movement. Makes life much easier but assets have been the bane of British speedway for years.

Not sure how or why the asset system came to prominence in the UK, however, as all riders are self-employed it is a ludicrous state of affairs.

 

Contracts should be signed, and maintained, by both parties. Once the season has ended the rider is free to negotiate a contract of his own free will.

 

No money should ever exchange hands for a loan fee. This should be one of the items on the agenda this winter but guess it will be swept under that massive carpet at the BSPA with all the other contentious issues...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure how or why the asset system came to prominence in the UK, however, as all riders are self-employed it is a ludicrous state of affairs.

 

Contracts should be signed, and maintained, by both parties. Once the season has ended the rider is free to negotiate a contract of his own free will.

 

No money should ever exchange hands for a loan fee. This should be one of the items on the agenda this winter but guess it will be swept under that massive carpet at the BSPA with all the other contentious issues...

I would agree apart from one thing. Contracts in Sport seem to mean something a lot different to those in Industry. Nobody seems to adhere to them on either side, Employer or Employee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Contracts should be signed, and maintained, by both parties. Once the season has ended the rider is free to negotiate a contract of his own free will.

 

No money should ever exchange hands for a loan fee. This should be one of the items on the agenda this winter but guess it will be swept under that massive carpet at the BSPA with all the other contentious issues...

The main problem with that approach is that it significantly reduces the incentive for clubs to offer opportunities to untried youngsters.

 

The ability to make them an asset gives some return on your investment, whereas one year contracts mean richer clubs will simply poach riders once they have proved they are capable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No promoter will take it to court because they all long for the day they sign a rider for nothing and he becomes and star. No rider will take it to court because no promoter will allow him to.

 

The asset system is going nowhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main problem with that approach is that it significantly reduces the incentive for clubs to offer opportunities to untried youngsters.

 

The ability to make them an asset gives some return on your investment, whereas one year contracts mean richer clubs will simply poach riders once they have proved they are capable.

 

I agree with your first point - I think football gets around that by some kind of fee for training the young player so far - in the lower leagues anyway. So rather than a transfer fee for a good youngster brought through by, say, Buxton - they would get compensation fee if he moved on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No promoter will take it to court because they all long for the day they sign a rider for nothing and he becomes and star. No rider will take it to court because no promoter will allow him to.

 

The asset system is going nowhere.

Quite agree, but riders are not assets. The promotion holds a riders registration riding in this country. Not quite the same.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I first signed a contract with wolves , I got the 5p which was on the bspa contract at the time , straight away they sold me for £250 to buxton and then because of owners changing tracks I got transferred to stoke with 4 other riders and fixtures and I remained contracted to stoke for the next 18 years where I was loaned out to Berwick , Glasgow , long Eaton for a fee and to any national league teams that had to pay ,stoke never stopped me riding for anybody but I always had to ask their permission if another team was interested

Edited by THE DEAN MACHINE
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BUT still unlikely to hold up in a court of law

But more likely to be upheld than in an asset situation. In a true asset situation, the rider would be owned by the promotion and therefore would need permission to ride anywhere else, including Poland, Sweden Denmark, etc. A registration only applies to this country, which would be much more acceptable, but its never going to be challenged as a rider will always ride where he wants to ride, therefore it is not a restraint of trade.

When I first signed a contract with wolves , I got the 5p which was on the bspa contract at the time , straight away they sold me for £250 to buxton and then because of owners changing tracks I got transferred to stoke with 4 other riders and fixtures and I remained contracted to stoke for the next 18 years where I was loaned out to Berwick , Glasgow , long Eaton for a fee and to any national league teams that had to pay ,stoke never stopped me riding for anybody but I always had to ask their permission if another team was interested

And for which you would be allowed to a sum of £50, and obviously must have signed the transfer document as it is a three party transaction.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But more likely to be upheld than in an asset situation. In a true asset situation, the rider would be owned by the promotion and therefore would need permission to ride anywhere else, including Poland, Sweden Denmark, etc. A registration only applies to this country, which would be much more acceptable, but its never going to be challenged as a rider will always ride where he wants to ride, therefore it is not a restraint of trade.

 

 

Exactly the same chance - zero.

 

Do you think perhaps Man Utd and the rest would have tried this if it had any chance of success? Sure you can go and play for Real on a free, but if you ever come back to the premiership you can only play for us? Any 'ownership' of riders with expired contracts is illegal.

Edited by OldRacer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ricky Wells is self employed - no UK Speedway club owns him or any other rider for that matter, as Tsunami has explained.

So if nobody owns him, why do the club obtain a loan fee?

 

Does anybody own your plumber or electrician?

 

An absolute farce of a position. Contract should be for a season only. No entitlement for anyone. That would put a stop to teams building up a lucrative asset base and reaping the benefit.

 

The rider would truly be self-employed and they would be able to negotiate freely on a contract for services basis, without anyones permission.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if nobody owns him, why do the club obtain a loan fee?

 

Does anybody own your plumber or electrician?

 

An absolute farce of a position. Contract should be for a season only. No entitlement for anyone. That would put a stop to teams building up a lucrative asset base and reaping the benefit.

 

The rider would truly be self-employed and they would be able to negotiate freely on a contract for services basis, without anyones permission.

That idea, to me, has a lot to recommend it.

 

Everyone would then know exactly how they stood, including those important folk who don't seem to matter much in Speedway - the Supporters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the are different situations. I think it wrong that teams can own an established foreign rider simply because he rides a requisite number of meetings for them. However, there has to be some benefit to clubs that take the time and trouble to nurture young talent. I think it's wrong that NL clubs can't own rider's registrations and gain some recompense for those that they help develop when they move on to the higher leagues. Likewise, Premiership and Championship clubs would be less likely to help and train novices if they gained nothing for those who become good enough to sign for another club. Similarly, under the present system, clubs own the registrations of riders they have bought from other clubs. It is only right that again they get some recompense, either through transfer or loan fees if those riders move elsewhere.

 

If there is no incentive the likelihood is that even fewer teams would invest their time and effort in helping young riders through training schools, general help and advice, or running NL teams.

Edited by Aces51
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy