Breakaway League

[mikebv]

2 hours ago, iris123 said:

Interesting thoughts after the week football just had with threats to ban breakaway clubs from leagues and players from national teams etc

I believe the breakaway league was having to be called "The Kicking An Air Filled Spherical Object Around A Desgnated Marked Out Field European Super League"...

[George Dodds]

4 hours ago, Halifaxtiger said:

They do apparently.

Its why Isle of Wight have referred to their season as 'shale track racing'.

Humph has mentioned that an attempt to ban riders - no matter how it is dressed up - will be a restraint of trade and that is contrary to common law.   

I have looked into this a bit - see the IOW 2020 thread - and he's almost certainly right.  

But why would they need to ban anyone at all? Let's face it only riders not already racing on a Thursday night and prepared to haul their asses down to the Isle of Wight would possibly be involved. See the attraction for those living in the area who don't want to venture north for rides in the NDL. Time will tell whether it's a revolution - the proof will come not from the number of keystrokes supporting the venture/management but the numbers paying on the gate or joining membership schemes. Time will tell.

[Ray Stadia]

5 hours ago, Halifaxtiger said:

They do apparently.

Its why Isle of Wight have referred to their season as 'shale track racing'.

There used to be a speedway/grass track parts and spares supplier called 'Shaleway', long gone I think. In my opinion, Shaleway or Shaleway Racing could be a good alternative name. 

Edited April 28, 2021 by Ray Stadia

[Halifaxtiger]

12 minutes ago, George Dodds said:

But why would they need to ban anyone at all? Let's face it only riders not already racing on a Thursday night and prepared to haul their asses down to the Isle of Wight would possibly be involved. See the attraction for those living in the area who don't want to venture north for rides in the NDL. Time will tell whether it's a revolution - the proof will come not from the number of keystrokes supporting the venture/management but the numbers paying on the gate or joining membership schemes. Time will tell.

You might well ask, but I doubt that the BSPL will  view favourably someone attempting to run speedway outside their control - it could, after all, lead to more clubs breaking away. Moreover they have a nasty reputation for being vindictive.

You are absolutely right about success or failure, but at least the Warriors promotion will have the satisfaction of being able to control their own destiny rather than being dictated to by others who have no financial involvement in the NL whatsoever. 

 

Edited April 28, 2021 by Halifaxtiger

[George Dodds]

2 hours ago, Halifaxtiger said:

You might well ask, but I doubt that the BSPL will  view favourably someone attempting to run speedway outside their control - it could, after all, lead to more clubs breaking away. Moreover they have a nasty reputation for being vindictive.

You are absolutely right about success or failure, but at least the Warriors promotion will have the satisfaction of being able to control their own destiny rather than being dictated to by others who have no financial involvement in the NL whatsoever. 

 

can't beat a good conspiracy theory.

Point the finger at Health and Safety first, then try the Eu, then the BSPL, then the Government. Don't forget microchips in the vaccine so Godfrey can track any rider partaking in illegal track action and have him terminated by the Men in Black.

Apart from the the over-active imaginations of the usual suspect forum truth stretchers is there any evidence/suggestion of sanctions against anyone taking part?

They don't ban anyone who takes part in flat-tracking do they?

[Biffa]

I am sure I saw an advert/fixture for a Nora meeting at either Redcar or Scunthorpe in a recent Speedway Star. Apologies if I am wrong but will look back tonight after work to see if I can see it. 

[Halifaxtiger]

1 hour ago, George Dodds said:

can't beat a good conspiracy theory.

Point the finger at Health and Safety first, then try the Eu, then the BSPL, then the Government. Don't forget microchips in the vaccine so Godfrey can track any rider partaking in illegal track action and have him terminated by the Men in Black.

Apart from the the over-active imaginations of the usual suspect forum truth stretchers is there any evidence/suggestion of sanctions against anyone taking part?

They don't ban anyone who takes part in flat-tracking do they?

None whatsoever.

Then again, I never said there was - just confirmed that any attempt to do so would be contrary to common law.

What I would point out is that when a number of former riders - possibly including Scott Courtney - attempted to create a kind of GP series outside of the BSPL a few years ago the SCB confirmed that any track that held a round would have their licence revoked. 

[George Dodds]

41 minutes ago, Halifaxtiger said:

None whatsoever.

Then again, I never said there was - just confirmed that any attempt to do so would be contrary to common law.

What I would point out is that when a number of former riders - possibly including Scott Courtney - attempted to create a kind of GP series outside of the BSPL a few years ago the SCB confirmed that any track that held a round would have their licence revoked. 

I note that it was the tracks - which presumably were licensed with the SCB rather than the riders that were threatened. There may also have been an FIM element to the objection as it could have ben seen to be in opposition to one of their sanctioned events.

As for the oft-quoted "restraint of trade" I see it as little more than an excuse for lawyers to argue that black is white and night is day for £150 an hour. If the trade is riding motorcycles on dirt tracks they are not being stopped from doing that - merely not doing so in specific competitions. Plenty of precedent exists to say that sport is not treated the same in the eyes of the law as normal life. Sports are allowed to have rules and regulations which impact on the employment opportunities - for example this year's rising stars element to Championship and Premiership which effectively excludes anyone without claim to a British passport but would not be deemed a restraint of trade - although if you offered a lawyer the money they would happily take it to court.

[Humphrey Appleby]

8 hours ago, iris123 said:

Interesting thoughts after the week football just had with threats to ban breakaway clubs from leagues and players from national teams etc

Think we need to separate the issue of clubs and players. 

In football, players will usually only be only under contract to one team at a time, so players playing for super league teams won't be off playing for anyone else unlike speedway riders. The closest equivalent was when the cricket authorities tried to ban players who'd signed-up to the 'breakaway' World Series Cricket, and they lost that case on the grounds of restraint-of-trade. So if they're not under exclusive contract to one team in one system at given moment in time, there will be nothing to stop them playing or riding in the other system.

As for the clubs, I'd think it's perfectly fine for leagues to insist that member teams exclusively play in their competitions. That's no different to signing a contract to run (say) a MacDonalds franchise and then wanting to turn it into a Burger King... 

National teams - probably a bit of grey area as they're inherently a 'restraint-of-trade' situation as they're only open to specific nationalities anyway. I suspect the likes of the FA could probably argue they're representatives of member clubs so aren't obliged to pick representatives of non-member clubs, but probably many super league players wouldn't be that bothered about playing in national team competitions anyway. 

As for motor sport, I hold Motorsport UK licences as both a competitor and official, and have occasionally competed in non-MSUK events, including a 'national championship'. No-one could really care less, and whilst I know that's 4-wheeled sport, a quick look at the ACU Handbook doesn't seem to suggest anything different. 

Of course, in a professional sport, promotions aren't obliged to contract particular riders, so could effectively ban them from the official leagues. But I suspect it there was known to be blacklist, it would come back to a restraint-of-trade thing. 

[Halifaxtiger]

1 hour ago, George Dodds said:

I note that it was the tracks - which presumably were licensed with the SCB rather than the riders that were threatened. There may also have been an FIM element to the objection as it could have ben seen to be in opposition to one of their sanctioned events.

As for the oft-quoted "restraint of trade" I see it as little more than an excuse for lawyers to argue that black is white and night is day for £150 an hour. If the trade is riding motorcycles on dirt tracks they are not being stopped from doing that - merely not doing so in specific competitions. Plenty of precedent exists to say that sport is not treated the same in the eyes of the law as normal life. Sports are allowed to have rules and regulations which impact on the employment opportunities - for example this year's rising stars element to Championship and Premiership which effectively excludes anyone without claim to a British passport but would not be deemed a restraint of trade - although if you offered a lawyer the money they would happily take it to court.

Restraint of trade is well established in common law and has the intention of stopping employers being able to prevent employees from earning a living as they see fit.

It is defined as  :'The principle that an individual should be free to follow his trade and use his skills without undue interference. The principle renders a contractual term purporting to restrict an individual's freedom to work for others or carry out his trade or business (a restrictive covenant) void unless it is designed to protect legitimate business interests and no wider than reasonably necessary'.

Glossary | Practical Law (thomsonreuters.com)

In such circumstances : 'Courts or tribunals would normally rule against a blanket ban on working for a competitor because it would be a 'restraint of trade' – a general legal principle used to stop attempts to stifle competition'.  

Restraint of trade | WorkSmart: The career coach that works for everyone 

As such, should the BSPL attempt to ban riders from riding in meetings at the Isle of Wight they would almost certainly be acting contrary to common law.

An individual sport can write all the rules and regulations they want but at no time do such rules and regulations supersede legislation, as sports such as cricket, darts and skiing found out when they tried to stop players competing for rival organisations (or impose punishments when they did).

[mikebv]

And should the BSPL ever actually ban any riders for riding at the IOW, then who would ride for the teams in their leagues?

Most riders seem to have two teams as it is, so banning any of them would create some big holes to be filled..

And as the IOW seem to be trying to run their 'Speedw', (er I mean 'Shale Sport" Meetings) at a level more akin to the 'old' NL strength it will therefore include a number of 'decent level riders', which would mean a fair few NDL heat leaders and Championship Reserves would need finding to replace them from a pool of lesser talent..

To be honest. I can't really see the BSPL being too bothered what happens on the island, (hope so anyway), and if they are, they really need to focus on the much more important matters..

Such as promoting their sport aggressively as we leave the various lockdown rules behind.. 

 

[Triple.H.]

I reckon the IOW should have called the meetings they are running, Zuzel, most of those who follow speedway would know what it is, those that don't may have been intrigued by the unusual name, hopefully intrigued enough to pay a visit

[Humphrey Appleby]

3 hours ago, George Dodds said:

As for the oft-quoted "restraint of trade" I see it as little more than an excuse for lawyers to argue that black is white and night is day for £150 an hour. If the trade is riding motorcycles on dirt tracks they are not being stopped from doing that - merely not doing so in specific competitions. Plenty of precedent exists to say that sport is not treated the same in the eyes of the law as normal life. Sports are allowed to have rules and regulations which impact on the employment opportunities - for example this year's rising stars element to Championship and Premiership which effectively excludes anyone without claim to a British passport but would not be deemed a restraint of trade - although if you offered a lawyer the money they would happily take it to court.

Usually the biggest winners in any legal dispute are the lawyers, which is why the speedway authorities shouldn't be risking getting sued and having to defend a futile action. There is a  precedent with the World Series Cricket case (and possibly others), about the illegality of trying to ban competitors who participate in unsanctioned events. 

Having rights to work in a particular country is a completely different issue, although until 1 January 2021 it would have course been illegal to prevent other EU citizens from riding.

Which other sports have rules and regulations that impact on employment opportunities? Even the points limit in speedway in principle doesn't discriminate against particular individuals. 

[iris123]

5 minutes ago, Humphrey Appleby said:

Usually the biggest winners in any legal dispute are the lawyers, which is why the speedway authorities shouldn't be risking getting sued and having to defend a futile action. There is a  precedent with the World Series Cricket case (and possibly others), about the illegality of trying to ban competitors who participate in unsanctioned events. 

Having rights to work in a particular country is a completely different issue, although until 1 January 2021 it would have course been illegal to prevent other EU citizens from riding.

Which other sports have rules and regulations that impact on employment opportunities? Even the points limit in speedway in principle doesn't discriminate against particular individuals. 

It is all speculation really. But anyway at this level they should all have proper jobs, and this would be more of a hobby. So I even wonder if it comes under restriction of trade.....

[stevehone]

are the IOW going to run at amateur level so not 'paying' riders, but maybe prize money?

i would think maybe the best option is riders without a BSPL contract, and you never know it could actually do both of the organisations the world of good, i.e still give track time and bring on young riders ready to move to a club 

[Halifaxtiger]

11 hours ago, mikebv said:

And should the BSPL ever actually ban any riders for riding at the IOW, then who would ride for the teams in their leagues?

Most riders seem to have two teams as it is, so banning any of them would create some big holes to be filled..

And as the IOW seem to be trying to run their 'Speedw', (er I mean 'Shale Sport" Meetings) at a level more akin to the 'old' NL strength it will therefore include a number of 'decent level riders', which would mean a fair few NDL heat leaders and Championship Reserves would need finding to replace them from a pool of lesser talent..

To be honest. I can't really see the BSPL being too bothered what happens on the island, (hope so anyway), and if they are, they really need to focus on the much more important matters..

Such as promoting their sport aggressively as we leave the various lockdown rules behind.. 

 

I think the threat of a ban (and hence a rider losing the chance to ride in the NL, Championship or Premiership) is more likely to be the action to be taken.

My suspicion is that Isle of Wight could launch a legal challenge to such an action (even though they are not directly affected in terms of earnings) using restraint of trade because of the effect on their business. Clearly, it would be designed to suppress competition. 

I really hope you are right about the BSPL but experience suggests they can be vindictive to those who cross them (even if  their selfishness and stupidity has been the cause of a dispute). We haven't had a direct challenge like this for years so it will be interesting to see just how they react. 

Very difficult to argue with your final point. You would think the BSPA would have better things to do than picking a fight with the Warriors but then failing to focus on important issues rather than trivia has often been one of their faults.

The fact that a person is part time, low earnings in my view does not affect restraint of trade. The fact of the matter remains that an employer would be attempting to stop them working and receiving pay from an alternative source, and that is the very essence of why this piece of common law exists.

[mikebv]

1 hour ago, Halifaxtiger said:

I think the threat of a ban (and hence a rider losing the chance to ride in the NL, Championship or Premiership) is more likely to be the action to be taken.

My suspicion is that Isle of Wight could launch a legal challenge to such an action (even though they are not directly affected in terms of earnings) using restraint of trade because of the effect on their business. Clearly, it would be designed to suppress competition. 

I really hope you are right about the BSPL but experience suggests they can be vindictive to those who cross them (even if  their selfishness and stupidity has been the cause of a dispute). We haven't had a direct challenge like this for years so it will be interesting to see just how they react. 

Very difficult to argue with your final point. You would think the BSPA would have better things to do than picking a fight with the Warriors but then failing to focus on important issues rather than trivia has often been one of their faults.

The fact that a person is part time, low earnings in my view does not affect restraint of trade. The fact of the matter remains that an employer would be attempting to stop them working and receiving pay from an alternative source, and that is the very essence of why this piece of common law exists.

I would think that given the plans the IOW have for the season they will need maybe a pool of 35 or so riders to allow their team and the visiting teams to remain 'fresh', and not have the same lads riding each time...

And around  15 or so of these lads will be around NL heat leader level if their points limit is used...

These 15 lads alone could easily be filling 30 spaces in the 2nd and 3rd tiers, so 'if' (and for me it is unlikely, but as you allude to, "you never know with the BSPL"), any bans are threatened, they could easily stand together and say "we are doing it", and they would have to be given permission I would suggest given their huge collective impact to the two leagues mentioned..

Getting competitive teams out every meeting during the pandemic will be enough of a challenge to the three leagues I would imagine, so any ban threat (particularly to the level of rider that is so fundamental to two leagues), would hardly be made coming from any position of strength..

Hopefully the IOW can just get on with the task of providing 'Shale Sport' entertainment, in their customary pro active style, without any nonsense getting in the way...

 

[iris123]

The other problem could be if the IOW ever change their mind and want to come back into the BSPA fold....

[Halifaxtiger]

3 hours ago, mikebv said:

I would think that given the plans the IOW have for the season they will need maybe a pool of 35 or so riders to allow their team and the visiting teams to remain 'fresh', and not have the same lads riding each time...

And around  15 or so of these lads will be around NL heat leader level if their points limit is used...

These 15 lads alone could easily be filling 30 spaces in the 2nd and 3rd tiers, so 'if' (and for me it is unlikely, but as you allude to, "you never know with the BSPL"), any bans are threatened, they could easily stand together and say "we are doing it", and they would have to be given permission I would suggest given their huge collective impact to the two leagues mentioned..

Getting competitive teams out every meeting during the pandemic will be enough of a challenge to the three leagues I would imagine, so any ban threat (particularly to the level of rider that is so fundamental to two leagues), would hardly be made coming from any position of strength..

Hopefully the IOW can just get on with the task of providing 'Shale Sport' entertainment, in their customary pro active style, without any nonsense getting in the way...

 

According to their Facebook page, it looks like the Warriors will indeed have the 7 same riders.

[barrybishop]

32 minutes ago, Halifaxtiger said:

According to their Facebook page, it looks like the Warriors will indeed have the 7 same riders.

Not quite  but almost....