jawajoe 14 Posted October 14, 2017 Can anyone tell me who owns Ricky Wells contract?? Thanks for any information given. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Red Flag 454 Posted October 14, 2017 Can anyone tell me who owns Ricky Wells contract?? Thanks for any information given. Pretty sure Wolves 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cowboy cookie returns? 747 Posted October 14, 2017 Ricky Wells I would guess owns his contact as the asset system is not really legal Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
steve roberts 9,242 Posted October 14, 2017 Ricky Wells I would guess owns his contact as the asset system is not really legal ...assets have always been ambiguous within speedway circles. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ch958 2,393 Posted October 14, 2017 one day someone will challenge it in the courts and that'll be the end of that. Some rider will be prevented from riding because of loans fees, etc and it will be challenged 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PHILIPRISING 7,298 Posted October 15, 2017 one day someone will challenge it in the courts and that'll be the end of that. Some rider will be prevented from riding because of loans fees, etc and it will be challenged IN Poland last weekend much of the chat was about riders leaving a club and going elsewhere when their contracts expire. Freedom of movement. Makes life much easier but assets have been the bane of British speedway for years. 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theblueboy 960 Posted October 15, 2017 IN Poland last weekend much of the chat was about riders leaving a club and going elsewhere when their contracts expire. Freedom of movement. Makes life much easier but assets have been the bane of British speedway for years. Not sure how or why the asset system came to prominence in the UK, however, as all riders are self-employed it is a ludicrous state of affairs. Contracts should be signed, and maintained, by both parties. Once the season has ended the rider is free to negotiate a contract of his own free will. No money should ever exchange hands for a loan fee. This should be one of the items on the agenda this winter but guess it will be swept under that massive carpet at the BSPA with all the other contentious issues... 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The White Knight 9,039 Posted October 15, 2017 Not sure how or why the asset system came to prominence in the UK, however, as all riders are self-employed it is a ludicrous state of affairs. Contracts should be signed, and maintained, by both parties. Once the season has ended the rider is free to negotiate a contract of his own free will. No money should ever exchange hands for a loan fee. This should be one of the items on the agenda this winter but guess it will be swept under that massive carpet at the BSPA with all the other contentious issues... I would agree apart from one thing. Contracts in Sport seem to mean something a lot different to those in Industry. Nobody seems to adhere to them on either side, Employer or Employee. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MattK 3,447 Posted October 15, 2017 Contracts should be signed, and maintained, by both parties. Once the season has ended the rider is free to negotiate a contract of his own free will. No money should ever exchange hands for a loan fee. This should be one of the items on the agenda this winter but guess it will be swept under that massive carpet at the BSPA with all the other contentious issues... The main problem with that approach is that it significantly reduces the incentive for clubs to offer opportunities to untried youngsters. The ability to make them an asset gives some return on your investment, whereas one year contracts mean richer clubs will simply poach riders once they have proved they are capable. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SCB 0 Posted October 15, 2017 No promoter will take it to court because they all long for the day they sign a rider for nothing and he becomes and star. No rider will take it to court because no promoter will allow him to. The asset system is going nowhere. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ch958 2,393 Posted October 15, 2017 The main problem with that approach is that it significantly reduces the incentive for clubs to offer opportunities to untried youngsters. The ability to make them an asset gives some return on your investment, whereas one year contracts mean richer clubs will simply poach riders once they have proved they are capable. I agree with your first point - I think football gets around that by some kind of fee for training the young player so far - in the lower leagues anyway. So rather than a transfer fee for a good youngster brought through by, say, Buxton - they would get compensation fee if he moved on. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tsunami 10,219 Posted October 21, 2017 No promoter will take it to court because they all long for the day they sign a rider for nothing and he becomes and star. No rider will take it to court because no promoter will allow him to. The asset system is going nowhere. Quite agree, but riders are not assets. The promotion holds a riders registration riding in this country. Not quite the same. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PHILIPRISING 7,298 Posted October 21, 2017 Quite agree, but riders are not assets. The promotion holds a riders registration riding in this country. Not quite the same. BUT still unlikely to hold up in a court of law 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
THE DEAN MACHINE 4,735 Posted October 21, 2017 (edited) When I first signed a contract with wolves , I got the 5p which was on the bspa contract at the time , straight away they sold me for £250 to buxton and then because of owners changing tracks I got transferred to stoke with 4 other riders and fixtures and I remained contracted to stoke for the next 18 years where I was loaned out to Berwick , Glasgow , long Eaton for a fee and to any national league teams that had to pay ,stoke never stopped me riding for anybody but I always had to ask their permission if another team was interested Edited October 21, 2017 by THE DEAN MACHINE 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tsunami 10,219 Posted October 21, 2017 BUT still unlikely to hold up in a court of law But more likely to be upheld than in an asset situation. In a true asset situation, the rider would be owned by the promotion and therefore would need permission to ride anywhere else, including Poland, Sweden Denmark, etc. A registration only applies to this country, which would be much more acceptable, but its never going to be challenged as a rider will always ride where he wants to ride, therefore it is not a restraint of trade. When I first signed a contract with wolves , I got the 5p which was on the bspa contract at the time , straight away they sold me for £250 to buxton and then because of owners changing tracks I got transferred to stoke with 4 other riders and fixtures and I remained contracted to stoke for the next 18 years where I was loaned out to Berwick , Glasgow , long Eaton for a fee and to any national league teams that had to pay ,stoke never stopped me riding for anybody but I always had to ask their permission if another team was interested And for which you would be allowed to a sum of £50, and obviously must have signed the transfer document as it is a three party transaction. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
