Jump to content
British Speedway Forum

Recommended Posts

Ricky Wells is self employed - no UK Speedway club owns him or any other rider for that matter, as Tsunami has explained.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

 

 

Exactly the same chance - zero.

 

Do you think perhaps Man Utd and the rest would have tried this if it had any chance of success? Sure you can go and play for Real on a free, but if you ever come back to the premiership you can only play for us? Any 'ownership' of riders with expired contracts is illegal.

Edited by OldRacer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ricky Wells is self employed - no UK Speedway club owns him or any other rider for that matter, as Tsunami has explained.

So if nobody owns him, why do the club obtain a loan fee?

 

Does anybody own your plumber or electrician?

 

An absolute farce of a position. Contract should be for a season only. No entitlement for anyone. That would put a stop to teams building up a lucrative asset base and reaping the benefit.

 

The rider would truly be self-employed and they would be able to negotiate freely on a contract for services basis, without anyones permission.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if nobody owns him, why do the club obtain a loan fee?

 

Does anybody own your plumber or electrician?

 

An absolute farce of a position. Contract should be for a season only. No entitlement for anyone. That would put a stop to teams building up a lucrative asset base and reaping the benefit.

 

The rider would truly be self-employed and they would be able to negotiate freely on a contract for services basis, without anyones permission.

That idea, to me, has a lot to recommend it.

 

Everyone would then know exactly how they stood, including those important folk who don't seem to matter much in Speedway - the Supporters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the are different situations. I think it wrong that teams can own an established foreign rider simply because he rides a requisite number of meetings for them. However, there has to be some benefit to clubs that take the time and trouble to nurture young talent. I think it's wrong that NL clubs can't own rider's registrations and gain some recompense for those that they help develop when they move on to the higher leagues. Likewise, Premiership and Championship clubs would be less likely to help and train novices if they gained nothing for those who become good enough to sign for another club. Similarly, under the present system, clubs own the registrations of riders they have bought from other clubs. It is only right that again they get some recompense, either through transfer or loan fees if those riders move elsewhere.

 

If there is no incentive the likelihood is that even fewer teams would invest their time and effort in helping young riders through training schools, general help and advice, or running NL teams.

Edited by Aces51
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if nobody owns him, why do the club obtain a loan fee?

 

Does anybody own your plumber or electrician?

 

An absolute farce of a position. Contract should be for a season only. No entitlement for anyone. That would put a stop to teams building up a lucrative asset base and reaping the benefit.

 

The rider would truly be self-employed and they would be able to negotiate freely on a contract for services basis, without anyones permission.

I believe all riders have to be registered to clubs, and self owning is not allowed in British Speedway. It was phased out probably over 20 years ago, and I think that Neil Evitts was one of the last to self own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe all riders have to be registered to clubs, and self owning is not allowed in British Speedway. It was phased out probably over 20 years ago, and I think that Neil Evitts was one of the last to self own.

You know as I do Dave, the problem lies with the BSPA being a private club, setting it's own rules, and if you don't follow the private clubs rules you are not allowed to join or are excluded from the club. If you are not in the club you cannot run speedway in the UK, as it as a closed shop.

 

All riders are self employed, so under UK law should be able to ply their trade to whom ever they decide, and not be restricted by the private club rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know as I do Dave, the problem lies with the BSPA being a private club, setting it's own rules, and if you don't follow the private clubs rules you are not allowed to join or are excluded from the club. If you are not in the club you cannot run speedway in the UK, as it as a closed shop.

 

All riders are self employed, so under UK law should be able to ply their trade to whom ever they decide, and not be restricted by the private club rules.

Correct and if the bspa blacklist a rider for not following their "asset" system there is only two things the rider can do. One is just ride abroad and the second is to get clubs to run their own league and who are not members of the bspa.

I do agree though with the fact that the lower leagues should receive something for training up a rider.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me the issue with regard to the training of youngsters nurtured by clubs is a different proposition and would have to be dealt with on an individual by individual basis based on the facts surrounding the arrangements provided by the promoters.

 

Balderdash&piffle is bang on the money with regard to the riders engagement and until the BSPA accept the asset market is fundamentally wrong, with all riders free at the end of a specified contract, this ridiculous position will continue.

 

Time for these dinosaurs to come in to the 21st Century. If not, like their predecessors, they and the sport will become extinct...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe all riders have to be registered to clubs, and self owning is not allowed in British Speedway. It was phased out probably over 20 years ago, and I think that Neil Evitts was one of the last to self own.

 

So if clubs have a list of 'registered' riders (assets by any other name), does that give the club an increased value? If not, then what value does a club actually have - especially if they don't own their stadium or even equipment?

 

In other words if a club owner wanted to sell the club to another owner, would the value of said club (ie the selling/purchase price) be enhanced by having a strong list of 'registered' riders as 'assets' of the club?

Edited by Skidder1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is snippets of this issue on NL threads as most riders start their trade at junior level(NDL) before progressing through NL, CP & PL. Teams should not be able to sign riders as assets just because they have potential, Proven by the ridiculous state of the EDR system when Poole had a large asset base & priority of pick of 2nd rider.

 

I do believe that once a rider has ridden a set number of meetings for a club then this said rider can be signed as an asset of this club. If he then moves on, the said club receives a loan fee.

 

If this said rider does not ride for this club for 3 seasons, they lose this rider as an asset.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So if clubs have a list of 'registered' riders (assets by any other name), does that give the club an increased value? If not, then what value does a club actually have - especially if they don't own their stadium or even equipment?

 

In other words if a club owner wanted to sell the club to another owner, would the value of said club (ie the selling/purchase price) be enhanced by having a strong list of 'registered' riders as 'assets' of the club?

Any prospective purchaser of a club would need to be very suspect about valuing any rider in the purchase price, as any rider may not like the new management and move and ride abroad, or any rider could be involved in a major accident and not able to ride again so becomes worthless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So if clubs have a list of 'registered' riders (assets by any other name), does that give the club an increased value? If not, then what value does a club actually have - especially if they don't own their stadium or even equipment?

 

In other words if a club owner wanted to sell the club to another owner, would the value of said club (ie the selling/purchase price) be enhanced by having a strong list of 'registered' riders as 'assets' of the club?

Probably will. Loan fees would come to the new promotion and by riding your own assets means you aren't paying loan fees, so signing riders has benefits as opposed to loaning other clubs riders. Another aspect is that if a club does not have assets to a certain value say £15k\£20k, they have to lodge the full amount of the bond value.

Edited by Tsunami
  • Like 1

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