Jump to content
British Speedway Forum

Recommended Posts

Alun Rossiter makes slightly unfortunate choice of words. Shock of shocks. Well maybe but that's down to Jason Doyle to call out isn't it? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, orion said:

Quite ..you would think that Phil would have had better things to do than  pick up on a minor choice  of words .

Many on here pick up on less, including you.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what Rosco was getting at was it makes sense to consider  negotiating with a rider you do not have to pay a loan fee out for ....not really seeing the point of a debate over what an asset means other than simply that

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, PHILIPRISING said:

ASSETS have no legal basis. A rider without a contract is a free agent. In Poland if a club wants to sign a rider under contract to another track a transfer fee could be involved. But if he has no contract then he can sign for who he wants. 

So when Somerset wanted Chris Holder for the 2018 season, there where reports that Ford wouldn't loan him, and that he said they would have to buy him, he wanted £ 20k. So in fact Ford couldn't do that. Is that correct ?. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Bald Bloke said:

So when Somerset wanted Chris Holder for the 2018 season, there where reports that Ford wouldn't loan him, and that he said they would have to buy him, he wanted £ 20k. So in fact Ford couldn't do that. Is that correct ?. 

Legally.. but it's all a game of favors.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Bald Bloke said:

So when Somerset wanted Chris Holder for the 2018 season, there where reports that Ford wouldn't loan him, and that he said they would have to buy him, he wanted £ 20k. So in fact Ford couldn't do that. Is that correct ?. 

Exactly but we were going to use him I think but who knows how it works ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, ray c said:

Exactly but we were going to use him I think but who knows how it works ?

I'm thinking Ford thought, I want to use him, but if you have £20k you can have him .. Who knows :P

Share this post


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

I'm thinking Ford thought, I want to use him, but if you have £20k you can have him .. Who knows :P

I just think if your not going to use a rider how can you stop him riding elsewhere and demanding a loan fee ?

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I just think if your not going to use a rider how can you stop him riding elsewhere and demanding a loan fee ?

That's what I thought Ray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a speedway fan who also follows football, I am always amazed that this mysterious 'asset' system remains in speedway. There was a time (not so long ago) when football clubs owned player's registrations, and even at the end of a player's contract could stop a player from playing for someone else, unless a transfer fee was paid between the clubs. This all changed, of course, with what became known as the 'Bosman' ruling by the European court. A Belgian player got his lawyers to argue (successfully) that when his contract with a particular club came to an end he should be free to seek new employment wherever he wished. These days, transfer fees are only paid between football clubs for players who wish to move while they are still under contract. I would suggest it would only take one speedway rider with a decent lawyer to bring this system to an end. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, ray c said:

I just think if your not going to use a rider how can you stop him riding elsewhere and demanding a loan fee ?

you can't. Sooner or later this will be a court case. Assets are a farce, there's no such thing in reality. When a contract runs out a worker can do what he wants and no court would deny this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ch958 said:

you can't. Sooner or later this will be a court case. Assets are a farce, there's no such thing in reality. When a contract runs out a worker can do what he wants and no court would deny this

Probably before it runs out, given there is no minimum salary and seems employer can terminate at any time for any reason, so presume rider can too?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, waiheke1 said:

Probably before it runs out, given there is no minimum salary and seems employer can terminate at any time for any reason, so presume rider can too?

Of course, he is self employed.

I always have a chuckle when people get their knickers in a twist when a rider chooses a Polish League fixture over the Elite League.

Rider is their own boss and can choose whatever pleases them. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, theblueboy said:

Of course, he is self employed.

I always have a chuckle when people get their knickers in a twist when a rider chooses a Polish League fixture over the Elite League.

Rider is their own boss and can choose whatever pleases them. 

 

BUT they must also adhere to the terms of their various contracts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, PHILIPRISING said:

BUT they must also adhere to the terms of their various contracts

Otherwise their contracts could be terminated...oh hang on, they can be anyway. And what happens again if they aren't being paid per the terms of their contract?

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