Rathbone/godfrey Allegations

[wealdstone 3,454]

Perhaps they could let us know the identity of those sitting in judgement

[Crump99 4,474]

 

when you read most of the quotes on here now wonder speedway is fecked,we are master at talking down our own sport,utter madness!

 

 

Most of the things I read about the 4TT were how good it was, well organised and big crowd. On any other day that would have been a distant memory and this thread wouldn't exist. Holdergate, the BSPA press release on the day and subsequent trial and continuing mud slinging are the reason for the negativity. If you can see the upside then I'm sure that we'd like to hear it.

[bigcatdiary 3,164]

Since they have told the SCB to hold a judicial review I do hope that the SCB know of a JUDGE they can employ rather than keeping it to friends of the BSPA.

 

Maybe the ACU should investigate both the SCB and BSPA!

My information is the ACU are holding the judicial review.

[leander 495]

This is one problem with doubling-up riders. Holder should have got a 28 day ban from all British Speedway, but why should Poole be punished for an event that had nothing to do with them. Peterborough should have said no, then if Holder still went off to Poland, then he should have been sacked immediately.

Errrr. It was a BSPA "shared " event. Last time I looked Poole were members of the BSPA.

[lucifer sam 3,953]

Montie, who are the 3 signings please- nothing on our website???

 

Nothing will be announced until after the BSPA conference.

 

All the best

Rob

[Fourentee 987]

 

Nothing will be announced until after the BSPA conference.

 

All the best

Rob

 

Ah, poacher turned gamekeeper!

[Baldyman 6,243]

Let's hope all the riders have been paid in full...just in case it does go wrong with this hearing.

[Chris116 755]

My information is the ACU are holding the judicial review.

The statement on the BSPA website reads as follows:-

 

Following the Speedway Control Bureau Court Hearing into Peterborough Promoter Mr Ged Rathbone conduct in relation to releasing a contracted rider against both the SCB and ISLB Regulations and Agreement, Mr Rathbone made a public statement after a meeting at Peterborough, a statement which was repeated in the Speedway Star dated 21st October 2017.

 

Mr Rathbone statement contained serious allegations which were of sufficient importance and concern to warrant further investigation. The SCB Members sought the guidance of the ACU and were advised to set up an independent Judicial review panel to enquire into the allegations.

 

The Members of the panel, none of whom took part in Mr Rathbone SCB Court Hearing have been chosen and it is proposed that the Judicial Inquiry will take place in early November.

 

This ends the SCB Statement

 

This reads to me as if the ACU has told the SCB to put their own house in order. I would be much happier if the ACU were running the review.

[scaramanga 893]

The statement on the BSPA website reads as follows:-

 

Following the Speedway Control Bureau Court Hearing into Peterborough Promoter Mr Ged Rathbone conduct in relation to releasing a contracted rider against both the SCB and ISLB Regulations and Agreement, Mr Rathbone made a public statement after a meeting at Peterborough, a statement which was repeated in the Speedway Star dated 21st October 2017.

 

Mr Rathbone statement contained serious allegations which were of sufficient importance and concern to warrant further investigation. The SCB Members sought the guidance of the ACU and were advised to set up an independent Judicial review panel to enquire into the allegations.

 

The Members of the panel, none of whom took part in Mr Rathbone SCB Court Hearing have been chosen and it is proposed that the Judicial Inquiry will take place in early November.

 

This ends the SCB Statement

 

This reads to me as if the ACU has told the SCB to put their own house in order. I would be much happier if the ACU were running the review.

but can sppedway star be trusted as alegidly the statement that james sarjent made in speedway star that turned the workington fans against him (with all other teams slagging the workington fans off for ) was reprted to have been mis interpruted and james claimed he did not say the things printed

so does the acu and scb/ bspa have a case

Edited October 29, 2017 by scarra

[New era Panthers 2,055]

but can sppedway star be trusted as alegidly the statement that james sarjent made in speedway star that turned the workington fans against him (with all other teams slagging the workington fans off for ) was reprted to have been mis interpruted and james claimed he did not say the things printed

so does the acu and scb/ bspa have a case

Speedway Star magazine is in the pockets of the BSPA and has been for several years now , that's why I cancelled my copy after the winter of discontent , when the authorities went to war on Peterborough and Coventry . It's a spineless magazine without a view of it's own and can only be trusted to put forward views which they know the BSPA will be comfortable with and better to be thought of as a comic IMO

[Blackadder 280]

This is one problem with doubling-up riders. Holder should have got a 28 day ban from all British Speedway, but why should Poole be punished for an event that had nothing to do with them. Peterborough should have said no, then if Holder still went off to Poland, then he should have been sacked immediately.

Were Poole, as visa sponsor, consulted about Holder's intention to ignore the SCB regulation? If not, perhaps a sponsoring club should have to approve where one of their riders works. The Border Agency wouldn't think twice about making things more difficult for future applicants for a visa.

Some people seem to think that Holder's actions weren't serious, but what if every rider took his attitude? Even more chaos, and we have had enough of that this season.

Bans for Jake Knight and Craig Cook, but not for Holder or Sedgemen. Doesn't seem right to me.

[New era Panthers 2,055]

Were Poole, as visa sponsor, consulted about Holder's intention to ignore the SCB regulation? If not, perhaps a sponsoring club should have to approve where one of their riders works. The Border Agency wouldn't think twice about making things more difficult for future applicants for a visa.

Some people seem to think that Holder's actions weren't serious, but what if every rider took his attitude? Even more chaos, and we have had enough of that this season.

Bans for Jake Knight and Craig Cook, but not for Holder or Sedgemen. Doesn't seem right to me.

I believe Jed quoted it was a good deal for all parties involved which leads me to think that Poole speedway was consulted.

[jenga 2,998]

a good deal for all parties. so looks like poole were involved after all . good old maud the fraud and ged the bone . all parties thick as thieves .

Edited October 30, 2017 by jenga

[Lord Skid 425]

Well, at least the bung should mean that no Riders are owed any money, which would be a plus this time of year.

[Baldyman 6,243]

Yes you would think that...but is that actually the case..it was mentioned that one rider wasn't riding until he got paid....and another hadn't been paid for his last 6 meetings....all hear say though..but you all know the saying..no smoke without fire.

Edited October 30, 2017 by baldyman