Jump to content
British Speedway Forum

Recommended Posts

17 hours 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 ?. 

Don't you just wait till March 1st when any rider not being used is fair game? Seem to recall this precedent being set by some club or other four or five years back.

Edited by Vincent Blachshadow
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Vincent Blachshadow said:

Don't you just wait till March 1st when any rider not being used is fair game? Seem to recall this precedent being set by some club or other four or five years back.

Poole

Share this post


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

Poole

You are rather a bitter bunch on here arnt you. Still keep chomping, only another 5 months til the season starts. :party:

Edited by Starman2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any sign of the big Lego trucks yet ?  Not being sarcy by the way, failing that anyone nearby able to take some pics of the pegged-out new track shape.  When Hull returend in 1995 I bunked off college several times to have a look, watched the marking out of the track shape, removing turf, etc  and <<family forum mode: on>> forgot my flipping, blinking camera each and every blooming time.  Still passed my City & Guilds and enjoyed 11 years of speedway so it was (mostly) ok....

Edited by martinmauger
grammar

Share this post


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

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

So must promoters. It’s a two way street.

Happy to sack a rider and when it suits through bad luck or poor performance, which is why I have no issue with riders doing what they want when they want. 

If that means putting Poland before the UK that’s fair enough.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Starman2006 said:

You are rather a bitter bunch on here arnt you. Still keep chomping, only another 5 months til the season starts. :party:

Always one in every village...

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

So must promoters. It’s a two way street.

Happy to sack a rider and when it suits through bad luck or poor performance, which is why I have no issue with riders doing what they want when they want. 

If that means putting Poland before the UK that’s fair enough.

 

totally. agree quick enough to sack riders so that means contract dont mean much either 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think people are totally missing the point of contracts.

Once a deal is agreed the rider is then deemed a clubs asset for that length of contract. Unless specified in the contract a rider isn't free to do as they please. 

If the rider doesn't meet the standards set or required by the club then said club has a right to terminate that contract. If a rider wants to leave that contract any resignation has to be accepted. 

What I would like to see introduced into rider's contracts, which would be beneficial for and protect them, is a fixed average increase protection policy i.e. 0.5 average increase. 

So a rider starting a season on a 7.00 average which then increases to 7.50 cannot be replaced except for injury or misconduct.

________________________

Anyway, back to Swindon. With the closeness of the newly built housing estate and future extensions to this housing estate, has any sound barriers to be implemented???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No-one is missing how the league currently administers contracts.

What we are disputing is that the way speedway uses them has any legal basis.

Would just take one court case to blow the current mechanism away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Daniel Smith said:

Think people are totally missing the point of contracts.

Once a deal is agreed the rider is then deemed a clubs asset for that length of contract. Unless specified in the contract a rider isn't free to do as they please. 

If the rider doesn't meet the standards set or required by the club then said club has a right to terminate that contract. If a rider wants to leave that contract any resignation has to be accepted. 

What I would like to see introduced into rider's contracts, which would be beneficial for and protect them, is a fixed average increase protection policy i.e. 0.5 average increase. 

So a rider starting a season on a 7.00 average which then increases to 7.50 cannot be replaced except for injury or misconduct.

________________________

Anyway, back to Swindon. With the closeness of the newly built housing estate and future extensions to this housing estate, has any sound barriers to be implemented???

The latest plan shows an acoustic wall around the whole site.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Skidder1 said:

The latest plan shows an acoustic wall around the whole site.

The only trouble there Skidder is that they do not shut out much noise and are virtually useless.  It is just a sop to please the planners and the house purchasers.

The M4 in the south of Swindon has a noise barrier in parts but many areas in Swindon can hear the road noise. The only part you cannot hear is where the M4 is down in a hollow and the noise bund directs the noise upwards.

Edited by A ORLOV

Share this post


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

No-one is missing how the league currently administers contracts.

What we are disputing is that the way speedway uses them has any legal basis.

Would just take one court case to blow the current mechanism away.

There's nothing wrong with the way contracts are done between club and rider. The issues are club to club in the asset system. That's the only thing that would be thrown out in a court case. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Daniel Smith said:

There's nothing wrong with the way contracts are done between club and rider. The issues are club to club in the asset system. That's the only thing that would be thrown out in a court case. 

What a court would throw out is when a rider has finished riding his contracted period and the club will not allow him to ride for another club until that club pays them for the rider or a loan fee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Starman2006 said:

You are rather a bitter bunch on here arnt you. Still keep chomping, only another 5 months til the season starts. :party:

Was it a true statement, or was it false?????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, A ORLOV said:

What a court would throw out is when a rider has finished riding his contracted period and the club will not allow him to ride for another club until that club pays them for the rider or a loan fee.

true - its totally unsustainable in employment law. 

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