Newcastle Vs Edinburgh SGB Champ Shield Easter Sunday 21 April

[StevePark]

10 minutes ago, crescent girl said:

Both the mentioned riders have patriality

Yes, but there are "strings attached."

[Sings4Speedway]

18 minutes ago, StevePark said:

Yes, but there are "strings attached."

Learn something new every day....

[Dandelion]

5 hours ago, Sings4Speedway said:

Surely a change has to come sooner rather than later surrounding Phillips before the fans start to turn against the promotion? Whilst the selection lower is a bit slim with Jenkins starting the season below par he still looks a better option and Luke Harris has to be worth a look at for the future? Forget Edwards as Eastbourne have that deal sown up while others were sleeping. Phillips has had his chances and not taken them, now he is just blocking a spot for another Brit and its almost getting to the point that the interests of speedway card is played.  As for Bjerre he has been around far too long to be having poor equipment and that is just not good enough.

Don't see why anyone can complain about Bjerre... Yes he started the season off slow, but the last two home meetings, particularly the last one, he's been great... He seems like a big team man too... Gifting Matty that win and slowing down to help Max, just to be passed on the line by Josh Pickering... I think our heatleaders are strong and don't need to be touched, I like Matty at 4, he's impressed me in a much harder position than last season, obviously Max is performing very well at reserve and looks like he'll be good enough to step up... It's just the other two... No offence

18 hours ago, Uluru said:

My Glasgow mate said Jedd List was belting around Berwick after their match there, looked fast and confident.  He's well worth a punt.

What Rob Godfrey did to him was despicable.   If Newcastle took him on he could well do to Scunthorpe what Jye Etheridge did to Edinburgh.

Rob is generally the first to publically shame teams for making similar moves... One rule for one and another rule for another

[leander]

10 hours ago, StevePark said:

 

We don't have a sponsorship licence thingy.

Don't need one, and there are no 'strings attached'. Both have 5 year paltriality visa's as they have an uk grandparent. Essentially they can do any job they want without needing 'employer sponsorship'. That is why MacDonald has come over, despite Workington closing, and List hasn't been sent home.

 

[StevePark]

1 minute ago, leander said:

Don't need one, and there are no 'strings attached'. Both have 5 year paltriality visa's as they have an uk grandparent. Essentially they can do any job they want without needing 'employer sponsorship'. That is why MacDonald has come over, despite Workington closing, and List hasn't been sent home.

 

You clearly know more than the Diamonds management then

[bigred]

Surely list will be a scunny asset now.

[leander]

4 minutes ago, StevePark said:

You clearly know more than the Diamonds management then

From the gov.uk website

Overview

You can apply for a UK Ancestry visa if you:

• are a Commonwealth citizen
• are applying from outside the UK
• are able to prove that one of your grandparents was born in the UK
• are able and planning to work in the UK
• meet the other eligibility requirements

 

Fees

Your UK Ancestry visa will cost £516.

Healthcare surcharge

You may also have to pay the healthcare surcharge as part of your application. Check how much you’ll have to pay before you apply.

Get a faster decision on your application

If you’re applying to extend in the UK you can pay an extra £800 for the super priority service to get a decision within 1 working day.

How long you can stay

You can stay in the UK for 5 years on this visa.

You can apply to extend your visa.

You can also apply to settle in the UK permanently.

What you can and cannot do

You can:

• work
• study
• bring family members

You cannot:

• change (‘switch’) into this visa if you’re already in the UK on another visa
• get public funds

 

Further on it states you need to prove you have either offers of employment or a business plan if you are self employed. They must already have done that otherwise they wouldn't have been allowed in. It is essentially to prove they have the means to live without applying for benefits. 

[leander]

18 minutes ago, bigred said:

Surely list will be a scunny asset now.

Doubt it. He needs to ride a certain number of official (not challenges) fixtures before that happens. Not sure how many it is now but it used to be 12, It is certainly more than the 3 or 4 he's done for Scunthorpe.

[bigred]

25 minutes ago, leander said:

Doubt it. He needs to ride a certain number of official (not challenges) fixtures before that happens. Not sure how many it is now but it used to be 12, It is certainly more than the 3 or 4 he's done for Scunthorpe.

Ah ok.just presumed he’d of signed a contract to scunny before he did a meeting ..

[ruffdiamond]

1 hour ago, StevePark said:

You clearly know more than the Diamonds management then

Well, that wouldn't be too difficult,,, would it ?

[StevePark]

33 minutes ago, leander said:

From the gov.uk website

Further on it states you need to prove you have either offers of employment or a business plan if you are self employed. They must already have done that otherwise they wouldn't have been allowed in. It is essentially to prove they have the means to live without applying for benefits. 

What it doesn't say is, if they are in this country, their employers must know where they are at any time, which, apparently, is a pain in the rear end.

This is what I've been told at any rate.

[leander]

9 minutes ago, StevePark said:

What it doesn't say is, if they are in this country, their employers must know where they are at any time, which, apparently, is a pain in the rear end.

This is what I've been told at any rate.

If you are self-employed then you don't have an employer other than yourself. You are effectively "contracted" to do a job. i.e. paid to to ride by the promoting company, in the same way you'd pay a plumber to redo your bathroom. Unlike a "work" visa which has far stricter conditions. They can do any job or jobs they want as long as they can prove they can afford to live over here. There is nothing in the qualifying criteria which stipulates that anyone has to know where they are 24/7. 

[tyretrax]

22 hours ago, leander said:

Doubt it. He needs to ride a certain number of official (not challenges) fixtures before that happens. Not sure how many it is now but it used to be 12, It is certainly more than the 3 or 4 he's done for Scunthorpe.

I think this rule only applies to Glasgow.

[bigred]

21 hours ago, leander said:

If you are self-employed then you don't have an employer other than yourself. You are effectively "contracted" to do a job. i.e. paid to to ride by the promoting company, in the same way you'd pay a plumber to redo your bathroom. Unlike a "work" visa which has far stricter conditions. They can do any job or jobs they want as long as they can prove they can afford to live over here. There is nothing in the qualifying criteria which stipulates that anyone has to know where they are 24/7. 

If all riders are self employed,then how does a club stil hold there contract even after they have finished riding for the club? Surely they should be free to ride for whoever they want .can anyone explain this one please.

[leander]

1 hour ago, bigred said:

If all riders are self employed,then how does a club still hold there contract even after they have finished riding for the club? Surely they should be free to ride for whoever they want .can anyone explain this one please.

Other than the fact that the club doesn't hold their contract after they've finished riding for them, I can't. They are however regarded as an asset of the club. This applies in the UK only. No other country (as far as I know) operates this system. How this would hold up in a court of law I wouldn't know as nobody yet has challenged the system. I suppose it would take something like club A wanting to use a rider from club B and club B saying no we are not prepared to loan or sell him to you under any circumstances for someone to challenge this.

[StevePark]

8 minutes ago, leander said:

Other than the fact that the club doesn't hold their contract after they've finished riding for them, I can't. They are however regarded as an asset of the club. This applies in the UK only. No other country (as far as I know) operates this system. How this would hold up in a court of law I wouldn't know as nobody yet has challenged the system. I suppose it would take something like club A wanting to use a rider from club B and club B saying no we are not prepared to loan or sell him to you under any circumstances for someone to challenge this.

Would it not then go to a tribunal, like it did when we bought Matej Kus?

[leander]

1 minute ago, StevePark said:

Would it not then go to a tribunal, like it did when we bought Matej Kus?

I thought that was over the transfer fee. Redcar agreed to sell him and  we agreed to buy him, but Redcar wanted more than we were prepared to pay so a tribunal set the fee, which I assume was somewhere in the middle. In my example above Redcar would have refused to sell him point blank for any amount. Something which a tribunal couldn't force them to do. 

[bigred]

53 minutes ago, leander said:

I thought that was over the transfer fee. Redcar agreed to sell him and  we agreed to buy him, but Redcar wanted more than we were prepared to pay so a tribunal set the fee, which I assume was somewhere in the middle. In my example above Redcar would have refused to sell him point blank for any amount. Something which a tribunal couldn't force them to do. 

This is the thing I don’t understand!! How can a club own a riders contract and loan them out or sell them  if they are self employed.it would be like a self employed builder working for a building company A,then moving to Company B Ona self employed basis and company A selling him or renting him for a fee...don’t sound right .surely they should be able to go where ever he chooses unless he is being paid while not working/riding for the company/ club ..

[Tsunami]

21 hours ago, bigred said:

This is the thing I don’t understand!! How can a club own a riders contract and loan them out or sell them  if they are self employed.it would be like a self employed builder working for a building company A,then moving to Company B Ona self employed basis and company A selling him or renting him for a fee...don’t sound right .surely they should be able to go where ever he chooses unless he is being paid while not working/riding for the company/ club ..

You don't have to understand it. Whether it is legal or not, it has worked in speedway for many decades without any major serious problems. There are tribunals to resolve issues that occur and an appeal procedure. Nobody is forced to ride where they don't want to ride, and in the case of transfers between clubs, the rider has to agree to be bought and is entitled to a percentage of the transaction, and if he stays with the same promotion for over 10 years he can be awarded a testimonial meeting keeping the takings from such a meeting. 

Do you understand that ?

[ruffdiamond]

20 minutes ago, Tsunami said:

You don't have to understand it. Whether it is legal or not, it has worked in speedway for many decades without any major serious problems. There are tribunals to resolve issues that occur and an appeal procedure. Nobody is forced to ride where they don't want to ride, and in the case of transfers between clubs, the rider has to agree to be bought and is entitled to a percentage of the transaction, and if he stays with the same promotion for over 10 years he can be awarded a testimonial meeting keeping the takings from such a meeting. 

Do you understand that ?

I get what your saying Dave, it has been going on for 'donkeys ears',,, but with the sport being in its ellement of glory, maybe some things need to change.