Jump to content
British Speedway Forum

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, BWitcher said:

No they aren't.

Why don't you try reading the 'black and white' rules?

People are either too thick to understand what you’re saying or too pig headed to acknowledge it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, soupy said:

That is the rules for everybody's sake and is in black and white and there should be no descrepencies for any team no matter what ifs and buts.

It's obvious, but it still won't stop BWitcher from arguing that black is white. :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they take out the appeals  process would that keep everybody happy.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, soupy said:

No they are sticking to the black and white rules no ifs and buts.

OK. Let's take this one step at a time.....

What were Edinburgh asking them to consider?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve Evans has posted the evidence that was endorsed by the AMA stating Luke's case for special dispensation for a visa on facebook. I believe this was presented to the bspa in December. It is pretty comprehensive and describes exactly the scenario that the special dispensation was set up for. 

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10156813358991754&id=646901753

Apologies I'm on my phone otherwise I would attach the images for non fbers 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BWitcher said:

The UKVI have already stated he meets the criteria for a discretionary endorsement so the BSPA statement on the issue is quite simply an out and out lie.

Where have they stated that? Someone on the end of the phone saying it "seems like" a valid case isn't really a ringing endorsement is it?

And to the Edinburgh fans, the fact that the regulations allow for the right of appeal doesn't mean that one is automatically successful.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Alan_Jones said:

Where have they stated that? Someone on the end of the phone saying it "seems like" a valid case isn't really a ringing endorsement is it?

And to the Edinburgh fans, the fact that the regulations allow for the right of appeal doesn't mean that one is automatically successful.

Absolutely and i don't think anyone is suggesting that should be the case. The BSPA should however give more clarity on why the appeal was unsuccessful. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Alan_Jones said:

Where have they stated that? Someone on the end of the phone saying it "seems like" a valid case isn't really a ringing endorsement is it?

And to the Edinburgh fans, the fact that the regulations allow for the right of appeal doesn't mean that one is automatically successful.

Quite correct and indeed I don't particularly have a problem with the appeal failing.

However, the appeal is for cases that don't fit the criteria. So saying the appeal has failed because it doesn't fit the criteria is dumb even by BSPA standards.

If they wish to stick to the hard and fast criteria, remove the appeal procedure and say so. Otherwise, once again, it leaves the door open for one rule to be applied for one and another for someone else.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, JanAnderson said:

Absolutely and i don't think anyone is suggesting that should be the case. The BSPA should however give more clarity on why the appeal was unsuccessful. 

These procedures were clarified and implemented forcibly in recent years when British Speedway ran a serious risk of losing the use of all visa riders.

There's all the clarity that you need.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, lucifer sam said:

These procedures were clarified and implemented forcibly in recent years when British Speedway ran a serious risk of losing the use of all visa riders.

There's all the clarity that you need.

 

Remove the appeal process then and simply have a hard and fast rule. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing that has been forgotten in all this is the person that is really punished is the rider.  Edinburgh will have to move on, they'll sign someone else as they have to have a 7th rider who by the way will almost certainly be another new foreigner on 5.20 so the decision won't benefit any young british riders.

But Luke Becker is going to lose a vital year in his speedway development, he's an 18 year old kid who has shown glimpses of real potential and is obviously well thought of in American circles.  It is also a double whammy, he was in with a shout of becoming American champion when he crashed in the final of the 2nd round and broke his ankle. Depriving him of an almost certain top 3 finish (he was 8 points ahead of 4th place after that 2nd round), a big chance of winning the title and now due to this truly awful decision a contract to race in the UK.

Now it isn't up to the BSPA to help develop young american riders but this is an 18 year old lad willing to move to the other side of the world to develop his skills and hopefully follow in the footsteps of many top compatriots.  Apparently one of the things submitted with the appeal was a glowing report from Greg Hancock.

The UKVI don't have experts in speedway that is why these discretionary processes are left up to the BSPA MC. They had 2 questions to ask:

1) If the rider did not miss a round of the American Championships would he have finished in the top 4 - The only answer to that is YES

2) Is the riders record in speedway at the highest level and will they contribute to the development of the sport - Now according to the MC winning races in the World Cup race off at 18 years of age isn't good enough.  

Now as some people have suggested they could state that they have decided no one is going to get a Visa as a result of an appeal but that should have been stated in the conference because it is effectively changing the rules. Either way they didn't state that they just effectively said they won't consider the appeal because others in the past have abused the system. Two wrongs don't make a right and as I said at the start they are punishing a young rider who's case exactly meets the requirement for a discretionary endorsement.

So the only question outstanding I would ask is if it was a different team in the league, e.g. Scunthorpe, he was signing for would the answer be different.......  I think almost certainly YES and shame on those who made this decision.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wondering..

If Luke Becker is not a good candidate for discretionary recommendation for a visa , then can someone give an example of who would be? There must be some cases as otherwise there would be no point in having the discretionary provision.

The decision looks perverse and misguided, however maybe this is about the politics of brexit.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, arnieg said:

Just wondering..

If Luke Becker is not a good candidate for discretionary recommendation for a visa , then can someone give an example of who would be? There must be some cases as otherwise there would be no point in having the discretionary provision.

The decision looks perverse and misguided, however maybe this is about the politics of brexit.

That's the thing arnieg. Edinburgh contacted UKVI to clarify if he should be eligible and were told that as he had an injury yes he should be considered. As I said in my post they leave the decision up to the MC as they are better to judge the 2nd question, i.e. yes barring injury he probably would have qualified but is he good enough? The MC have not said NO to this they have just said he won't be considered.

If they are to deny Luke the opportunity to race in the UK then they should at least have the balls to tell the lad why they don't think he is good enough.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, scotchopper said:

.

So the only question outstanding I would ask is if it was a different team in the league, e.g. Scunthorpe, he was signing for would the answer be different.......  I think almost certainly YES and shame on those who made this decision.

 

Paranoia levels reaching critical along the M8 as a result of this team building setback 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×