Jump to content
British Speedway Forum

Recommended Posts

Exactly, most riders are earning in 2 or more EU countries so i dont see how it can become a restrictment of earning just because they are not riding here.

 

IT'S not a restriction on earning, it's a restriction of trade. The fact that they ride elsewhere is (in my opinion) irrelevant. As a self-employed tradesman any restriction on a rider "trading his wares" so to speak is surely illegal?

 

I was quite heavily involved in soccer journalism at the time of the Bosman ruling and have always thought that British speedway would have to toe the line one day. I still do. SS has asked the question of many promoters over the years but they generally close ranks and say that it would be the ruination of British speedway. Presumably they include "rider assets" on their balance sheets.

 

Scrapping the asset system might result in some short term pain but could prove hugely beneficial in the longer term and might actually become a more practical and workable form of rider distribution than some of the artificial and contrived methods currently in use.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ironic isn't it, last season Posh didn't want Hans (past it, over the hill etc) didn't want Batch either (reasons unknown to me) so loaned to us. Great result and they shot themselves in the foot, now suddenly they want them back. Not surprising Hans & Batch are not interested, they want to stay with a successful team and fans who appreciate them.

Whether we will get them remains to be seen.

 

Andersen is still one of Panthers fans favourites I'd say despite not riding for the club. You're right in that we somehow engineered a massive own goal but do we want them back? That is the big question.

 

This is always worth a read (Panthers programme 2009) - gratituded and all that!

 

I know many of you have wondered what is the truth regarding Hans Andersen and his loan move to Poole and the reasons why he left last season for Coventry before I took over the club. Briefly, Hans was owed around by £60,000 . This was made up of £15,000 sponsorship in 2007 from a company owned by Colin Horton that was wound up by him with the result that Hans was never paid. The remainder was for unpaid wages and for bike covers he had paid for on behalf of the club. A total of around £45,000. When I brought the club from Colin Horton one of the things I did as part of the deal was to deduct from the sale price all moneys owing to all riders, including Hans. As a result Hans was paid all wages outstanding and also the money for the bike covers, leaving only the old Colin Horton debt of £15,000. Hans decided this year not to ride in England and concentrate his time on the GP series. He later changed his mind in late April, early May and decided he did want to ride in England. Since he is an asset of Peterborough he was always likely to be considered for a return to the club. However we made the decision to stay with the team we had. Hans was told of their decision and given permission to speak to other clubs, including Coventry and Poole. He agreed terms with Poole and that would normally have been the end of the matter but Poole never made contact with Peterborough to agree the terms and conditions of the loan agreement and sign the necessary paperwork. Clearly this is contrary to the rules of the BSPA but nevertheless the BSPA accepted his inclusion in the Poole 1-7 declaration and to this day no signed agreement is in place yet he is still riding for Poole.Our take on the situation is fairly simple. We have had no wish to stop Hans earning his living but we may possibly need to use him at ourselves this year, in the event of injury for example, and for that reason would only have given him permission for a minimum loan of 28 days which could have been renewed or extended if we didn’t need him. I have no animosity towards Hans regarding this and he is only the meat in the sandwich so to speak and earning a living in the only way he knows how, but clearly the actions of Poole are far from transparent and are in fact dishonest, contrary to the BSPA rules and indeed civil law in that they are using our club asset without our consent and without payment. Watch this space for the next instalment! (2012 by the looks of it?)

Edited by Crump99

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't know about Sweden but aren't riders in Poland actually employed by the clubs for the duration of the contract and paid something whether they ride or not (with extra payments for points)?

 

I can see that proposal going down well in this country.

 

Think its an excellent idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Andersen is still one of Panthers fans favourites I'd say despite not riding for the club. You're right in that we somehow engineered a massive own goal but do we want them back? That is the big question.

 

This is always worth a read (Panthers programme 2009) - gratituded and all that!

 

I know many of you have wondered what is the truth regarding Hans Andersen and his loan move to Poole and the reasons why he left last season for Coventry before I took over the club. Briefly, Hans was owed around by £60,000 . This was made up of £15,000 sponsorship in 2007 from a company owned by Colin Horton that was wound up by him with the result that Hans was never paid. The remainder was for unpaid wages and for bike covers he had paid for on behalf of the club. A total of around £45,000. When I brought the club from Colin Horton one of the things I did as part of the deal was to deduct from the sale price all moneys owing to all riders, including Hans. As a result Hans was paid all wages outstanding and also the money for the bike covers, leaving only the old Colin Horton debt of £15,000. Hans decided this year not to ride in England and concentrate his time on the GP series. He later changed his mind in late April, early May and decided he did want to ride in England. Since he is an asset of Peterborough he was always likely to be considered for a return to the club. However we made the decision to stay with the team we had. Hans was told of their decision and given permission to speak to other clubs, including Coventry and Poole. He agreed terms with Poole and that would normally have been the end of the matter but Poole never made contact with Peterborough to agree the terms and conditions of the loan agreement and sign the necessary paperwork. Clearly this is contrary to the rules of the BSPA but nevertheless the BSPA accepted his inclusion in the Poole 1-7 declaration and to this day no signed agreement is in place yet he is still riding for Poole.Our take on the situation is fairly simple. We have had no wish to stop Hans earning his living but we may possibly need to use him at ourselves this year, in the event of injury for example, and for that reason would only have given him permission for a minimum loan of 28 days which could have been renewed or extended if we didn’t need him. I have no animosity towards Hans regarding this and he is only the meat in the sandwich so to speak and earning a living in the only way he knows how, but clearly the actions of Poole are far from transparent and are in fact dishonest, contrary to the BSPA rules and indeed civil law in that they are using our club asset without our consent and without payment. Watch this space for the next instalment! (2012 by the looks of it?)

 

Oh my god Poole break the rules, the shock of it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you'll find they did but lost all contact with him once the season finished. They tried contacting him several times all to no avail. It all became clear why later. I stand to be corrected here, but didn't Swindon have to pay a fine for illegally poaching/approaching a rider last year?

 

That old nutshell? I got fined £100 for not speaking to Rick or Julie although I had spoken to Trevor Swales who told me I had permission to speak to Hans and Batch. I assumed, wrongly, that he had the authority as he did not tell me otherwise. The fine was for not speaking to a promoter, not for an illegal approach. Ironically, Trevor became a promoter very shortly afterwards..

Edited by Midland Robin
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh my god Poole break the rules, the shock of it.

 

Be fair, they might have been a bit miffed by Bratters May 2009 programme :o

 

I have an admission to make tonight. Presently, I have no clue as to what the rules are for team building following the issue of green sheets for three of our riders. Poole have declared Hans Andersen in their side using one set of criteria and Coventry have declared Scott Nicholls in their side using a different set of criteria. We thought about trying to declare Nicki Pedersen in our side to replace Karol Zabik and perhaps if we had shouted loud enough and threatened to pull out of the league then we might have got an our own way and in doing so created a third criteria for declaring a team after the issue of green sheets. You couldn’t make it up – actually you probably could. I told the Chairman of the BSPA last week that they were opening up a can of worms, well, the worms are certainly wriggling all over the place currently. I felt our victory over Poole was a hollow victory and I complained in writing to the BSPA about the manner in which Poole conducted themselves during the meeting. Riders waving their partners by in order that they got the bonus point, and in doing so put their partner out of a job. A rider not wanting to take part in the rerun of a race because his point would assist in putting a member of the team out of a job, who was supposed to not be put out of a job. I witnessed it all with my own eyes, this was not hearsay, I saw what was going on and why the hell should I not tell you how YOU the paying public were cheated on the evening of May 14 by Poole Speedway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That old nutshell? I got fined £100 for not speaking to Rick or Julie although I had spoken to Trevor Swales who told me I had permission to speak to Hans and Batch. I assumed, wrongly, that he had the authority as he did not tell me otherwise. The fine was for not speaking to a promoter, not for an illegal approach. Ironically, Trevor became a promoter very shortly afterwards..

 

I did post that I stand to be corrected. I remembered Swindon being fined, I thought it was for one of the Panthers' riders so not altogether wrong!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd make Hans the offer of a contract and offer Peterborough slightly more than we already have and let arbitration split the difference :P . I'd pay the £100 fine for ya, Patch. ;) Job done.

 

Peter Kildemand is nominated for athlete of the year in Denmark, please support and vote for him! cheers

http://www.tv2fyn.dk...&video_id=58060

Done and our boy appears to be in the lead. So no change there then. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting & clever move that Swindon have asked for permission to speak to Kenneth Bjerre so hopefully that should see things move along quickly now.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting & clever move that Swindon have asked for permission to speak to Kenneth Bjerre so hopefully that should see things move along quickly now.

 

Can't see what will be gained when permission to speak will be refused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Calling their bluff I think.

Pointless and childish. Wont change anything.

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