Jump to content
British Speedway Forum
NeilWatson

Facilities For 'unavailable' Riders

Recommended Posts

I would be interested to hear other views on Clubs' use of a facility for an Australian rider who has simply gone home before the end of the season.

 

I emphasise that I have no doubt that the rulebook permits this, but is it the right thing for the sport?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if the club were unaware of his intentions(unlikely i know) then the club should be allowed a facility because the rider has left the club in the lurch.the rider should also be discipled .if the club knew of his plans certainly not,as they should have arranged cover prior to him leaving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rule book actually reads as follows:

 

 

18.1.2 To complete Team Line-Ups in the event of an Absent Rider(s), a Team may utilise a "Facility" to cover the absence of a Rider(s) who:

 

A is on FIM World Speedway Championship duty.

B is engaged elsewhere at a BSPA shared or fee Meeting.

C is recalled by a Rider’s Federation (with prior notification) for compulsory International or National Championship duty.

D has been injured whilst speedway racing, Within 48 hours of the injury occurring, if no evidence is available, a Medical Certificate must be sent to the SCB; failure to do so will result in the mandatory suspension of the Rider’s SCB Registration for the next home fixture. NB. The BSPA MC cannot overrule the suspension.

E is sick or carrying a non-speedway injury for which a Medical Certificate must be supplied to the SCB within 48 hours of the sickness / injury occurring in which case the Rider may only return within 7 days (including his Team’s next home Meeting) with the express permission of the MC. However failure to provide a Certificate will nevertheless result in the mandatory suspension of the Rider’s SCB Registration for the next home fixture. NB. The BSPA MC cannot overrule the suspension.

F has been suspended by the FIM, ACU or SCB.

G is in dispute with his Club, provided that the circumstances have been accepted by the MC, who will determine the Facility and period of the Rider’s inactivity.

H is engaged in an FIM Longtrack Championship Meeting (for the day of the Meeting only - no facility is permitted for practice day).

I being a PL Rider whose own Federation does not have a current Agreement with the BSPA and is competing in another National League or Open Meeting. This will result in the Competitor’s SCB Registration being suspended for 1 (one) season and the Team will be automatically granted be a facility for a maximum period of 28 days, after which it must re-declare.

J is awaiting clearance from the SCB Medical Advisor

K in the NL only, is absence for any reason

 

So it's perfectly legal for, for example, Buxton to have a facility for Morris and for the Heathens to have been given a facility for Dyer and Anderson for the Stoke meetings.

 

But no I don't think it's right that riders can just disappear when it suits them. And I was displeased with our duo not bothering to ride our last two fixtures (although rained off in the end) because they'd crated their equipment before the end of the season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't see how it is any different from a rider 'witholding his services' in the EL/PL for which there is a facility for 28 days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't see how it is any different from a rider 'witholding his services' in the EL/PL for which there is a facility for 28 days.

 

That's how I thought of it anyway. I expected some thread like this to be started due to Buxton winning something :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's how I thought of it anyway. I expected some thread like this to be started due to Buxton winning something rolleyes.gif

 

That certainly WASN'T why I started the thread and I am quite offended you should think so. I made a firm point that there was no allegation of rule-breaking, nor did I mention any specific team or rider.

 

I simply feel it is a point worthy of discussion and it has already obliquely brought to mind another issue - that of consistent rules.

 

If all three leagues did ride to a common code then it would be a non-issue anyway as Jayne has said above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if the club were unaware of his intentions(unlikely i know) then the club should be allowed a facility because the rider has left the club in the lurch.the rider should also be discipled .if the club knew of his plans certainly not,as they should have arranged cover prior to him leaving.

 

Yes, KBT, I feel that the club should be granted a facility and that the rider concerned should be penalised.

 

Best though that we leave it to the Lord to choose who should be 'discipled'. :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought riders were contracted until the end of October?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But no I don't think it's right that riders can just disappear when it suits them. And I was displeased with our duo not bothering to ride our last two fixtures (although rained off in the end) because they'd crated their equipment before the end of the season.

I've edited your post but appreciate the extract: just wondered if you knew the length of the visas that Jake and Micky were on this year and also if you were aware of the difficulties and costs involved in shipping gear from the UK to OZ. I know Mark Jones had to return earlier because he'd agreed to take part in Ashley's Memorial meeting in March and his visa ran out before the season finished. I'm not sure if MA organised a Container this year or if the lads have to sort it out themselves, but obviously if they're taking part in any MA-sanctioned comp down here they'd have to be prepared properly, wouldn't you agree?

 

That certainly WASN'T why I started the thread and I am quite offended you should think so.

 

As soon as I saw a certain Nationality mentioned in your opening line I had a pretty good idea why you started this thread; in fact it was elementary, my dear NeilWatson.

Edited by BigFatDave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I expected some thread like this to be started due to Buxton winning something

 

Hang on mate. Yes, I mentioned Buxton and Morris but I also mentioned my displeasure at the situation with two riders at my own club. With Morris having grown up a Heathens fan through his father, who is a member on the Cradley Forum - and people on it have obviously kept on a keen eye on Morris, they were obvious examples that jumped to mind.

 

I know it's almost Halloween but there was nothing sinister about it. :P

 

Don't see how it is any different from a rider 'witholding his services' in the EL/PL for which there is a facility for 28 days.

 

I simply feel it is a point worthy of discussion and it has already obliquely brought to mind another issue - that of consistent rules.

 

If all three leagues did ride to a common code then it would be a non-issue anyway as Jayne has said above.

 

I'm not sure if you're agreeing with Jayne there or not Neil. The rules are not consistent as you suggest but Jayne is suggesting that it is the same. Surely the difference is that in the EL/PL a rider withholding his services will get banned and the club gets a facility for 28 days, giving time to make alternative arrangements for the rider that has gone AWOL. But in the NL the rules allow a rider a to go missing without giving a reason and then simply come back. It also allows a club to leave a rider out for no reason, get a facility and then bring the rider back in. That's useful if you've got a rider that is crap at 'x' and doesn't fancy it 'this' week!!!

 

I thought riders were contracted until the end of October?

In theory, but there's always the possibility that certain individuals could have negotiated a different deal. :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've edited your post but appreciate the extract: just wondered if you knew the length of the visas that Jake and Micky were on this year and also if you were aware of the difficulties and costs involved in shipping gear from the UK to OZ. I know Mark Jones had to return earlier because he'd agreed to take part in Ashley's Memorial meeting in March and his visa ran out before the season finished. I'm not sure if MA organised a Container this year or if the lads have to sort it out themselves, but obviously if they're taking part in any MA-sanctioned comp down here they'd have to be prepared properly, wouldn't you agree?

 

IIRC there was a long thread about whether Mark Jones was riding over here legally or not. I think it was something to do about whether his visa was correct. If Jake and Micky were on the right visas I don't think there was a 6 month time limit.

They probably left before the end of the season to get home early for the OZ season. This (to me) just shows lack of committment to a team or not thinking of the consequences of leaving a team before season end. It's well known that the season ends 31 October and it should never be presumed that any team's season will end before that date as has been shown these past couple of weeks. It is perhaps something that should be made clear by promoters to riders at the start of next season, giving this season as an example - and therefore no excuses for early departures at the end of next season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've edited your post but appreciate the extract: just wondered if you knew the length of the visas that Jake and Micky were on this year and also if you were aware of the difficulties and costs involved in shipping gear from the UK to OZ. I know Mark Jones had to return earlier because he'd agreed to take part in Ashley's Memorial meeting in March and his visa ran out before the season finished. I'm not sure if MA organised a Container this year or if the lads have to sort it out themselves, but obviously if they're taking part in any MA-sanctioned comp down here they'd have to be prepared properly, wouldn't you agree?

 

But they are coming over here to further their career, I think it's safe to assume that it would be very hard for their career to reach the level that it would whilst riding over here. So they should treat the opportunity with the respect it deserves as I don't see Poland or Sweden clamouring for all the young riders from other nations to ride over there and develop them.

 

Why should the league bend over backwards to let them have team spots and then let them pick and choose their meetings so they can arrive late and go home early?

 

Bottom line is that I don't care about visa's and the amount of time or costs that are involved in them getting over here to ride, that their choice as they want to develop as a Speedway rider.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thread is not really about the reasons why the Aussies are not riding the last couple of weeks of the season but about the rules that allow teams to have a facility for them. The rules allow it but that's not right, surely?

 

And just for the record I am pro-Commonwealth riders in the NL so please don't let this descend in to more accusations of anti-Aussie attitude by Brits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IIRC there was a long thread about whether Mark Jones was riding over here legally or not. I think it was something to do about whether his visa was correct. If Jake and Micky were on the right visas I don't think there was a 6 month time limit.

They probably left before the end of the season to get home early for the OZ season. This (to me) just shows lack of committment to a team or not thinking of the consequences of leaving a team before season end. It's well known that the season ends 31 October and it should never be presumed that any team's season will end before that date as has been shown these past couple of weeks. It is perhaps something that should be made clear by promoters to riders at the start of next season, giving this season as an example - and therefore no excuses for early departures at the end of next season.

 

I agree with this 100 percent, if you start the season you should be commited to see the distance.

I think you will find if Jake and Micky had been required for the play offs they would have been avalaible.

I know that Jake isnt flying home till monday, not sure about Micky.

Robert is booked to fly home tuesday, we knew the season finished on the 31st and booked flights accordingly.

 

Chopper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×

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