Coventry 99 % Certain To Be In Elite Next Season Acording To Sandu

[ladyluck 1]

Are the Bspa fighting Coventry legal challeage ? of course not as they were advised there rules were not lawful

 

Are they not contesting Coventry's legal challenge? How do you know what, if anything, the BSPA were advised? Do they have the resources to contest Coventry's legal challenge?

My opinion now is that the BSPA should let Coventry do as they please. Let Avtar Sandhu have his way. Let Sandhu have whatever rules he wants for his Elite League, while the remaining clubs form a new division under the BSPA. Coventry and Peterborough can then contest the EL under their own terms; racing each other every single week.

I would rather have no speedway in this country than see it exist under the dictatorship of Coventry and Avtar Sandhu.

Edited December 26, 2010 by ladyluck

[Parsloes 1928 nearly 495]

I would rather have no speedway in this country than see it exist under the dictatorship of Coventry and Avtar Sandhu.

 

Hmm, and that's what I call taking this daft little spat rather too seriously....!!!

[orion 7,631]

 

My opinion now is that the BSPA should let Coventry do as they please. Let Avtar Sandhu have his way. Let Sandhu have whatever rules he wants for his Elite League,

 

 

With you on this one ....Sandhu been pretty good for speedway and under his rules there could be some great times ahead, got to better that what we have now .

[ladyluck 1]

Hmm, and that's what I call taking this daft little spat rather too seriously....!!!

 

Don't make the mistake of dismissing it too lightly.

[Steve0 5,517]

With you on this one ....Sandhu been pretty good for speedway and under his rules there could be some great times ahead, got to better that what we have now .

Did you get another wooden spoon for Christmas? Because you are doing plenty of stirring!! :wink:

[alan_boon 1]

Are they not contesting Coventry's legal challenge? How do you know what, if anything, the BSPA were advised? Do they have the resources to contest Coventry's legal challenge?

My opinion now is that the BSPA should let Coventry do as they please. Let Avtar Sandhu have his way. Let Sandhu have whatever rules he wants for his Elite League, while the remaining clubs form a new division under the BSPA. Coventry and Peterborough can then contest the EL under their own terms; racing each other every single week.

I would rather have no speedway in this country than see it exist under the dictatorship of Coventry and Avtar Sandhu.

Overreact much? There's absolutely no chance of a new division being formed - the likes of Belle Vue, Lakeside, Eastbourne, and Kings Lynn don't care whether they do business with Sandhu or Ford, they just want to promote top level speedway with the Sky Sports contract bringing in cash & publicity. Once everyone's back at the table, Sandhu & Frost are as likely to be heard as Ford, Van Straaten & Patchett, no matter how much you find that distasteful.

[ImpartialOne 160]

Are they not contesting Coventry's legal challenge? How do you know what, if anything, the BSPA were advised? Do they have the resources to contest Coventry's legal challenge?

My opinion now is that the BSPA should let Coventry do as they please. Let Avtar Sandhu have his way. Let Sandhu have whatever rules he wants for his Elite League, while the remaining clubs form a new division under the BSPA. Coventry and Peterborough can then contest the EL under their own terms; racing each other every single week.

I would rather have no speedway in this country than see it exist under the dictatorship of Coventry and Avtar Sandhu.

 

Are Coventry dictating? How do you know what, if anything, Coventry have demanded?

 

You're in a cul-de-sac with this one.

[Aces51 2,778]

Overreact much? There's absolutely no chance of a new division being formed - the likes of Belle Vue, Lakeside, Eastbourne, and Kings Lynn don't care whether they do business with Sandhu or Ford, they just want to promote top level speedway with the Sky Sports contract bringing in cash & publicity. Once everyone's back at the table, Sandhu & Frost are as likely to be heard as Ford, Van Straaten & Patchett, no matter how much you find that distasteful.

Nobody knows is the truth but logic would suggest that it is unlikely that people will to want to deal with, or be sympathetic to, the arguments of people who have threatened their business and the existence of their sport, never mind the additional costs incurred in seeking legal advice. What we do know is that all except Coventry and Peterborough were prepared to work within what was agreed at the AGM, is it really probable that they would now listen with anything more than politeness to whatever such people have to say. Trust is a valuable commodity and once lost it is extremely difficult to get back. Unfortunately, people will always be suspicious of such people's motives, even when they are for the best.

Edited December 26, 2010 by Aces51

[alan_boon 1]

Nobody knows is the truth but logic would suggest that it is unlikely that people will to want to deal with, or be sympathetic to, the arguments of people who have threatened their business and the existence of their sport, never mind the additional costs incurred in seeking legal advice. What we do know is that all except Coventry and Peterborough were prepared to work within what was agreed at the AGM, is it really probable that they would they now listen with anything more than politeness to whatever such people have to say. Trust is a valuable commodity and once lost it is extremely difficult to get back. Unfortunately, people will always be suspicious of such people's motives, even when they are for the best.

I think that's true but you also have to factor in the gamble that these promoters took in backing the Ford/CVS/Patchett side over the Frost/Sandhu side - it appears to have backfired a little, and they may achieve their aims (40 point limit, basically) without having to sell their souls to get it. Although trust is a valuable commodity, as you say, it appears it was broken on both sides, and thus not worth as much as it probably should be.

[colincooke 0]

How do we know what the lawyers have demanded tho Col?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I take it the whole post has been read, the clues are there.

[Aces51 2,778]

I have no idea where you get the notion that it is a Ford,CVS, Patchett side. I can certainly see that much of what we believe was agreed is in the interests of Eastbourne, BV and Lakeside and now B'ham and KL. I cannot see why Poole would want a 40 point limit that would cause them to have to lose more points than anyone and, if Ronnie Russell and Matt Ford are to be believed, they voted against it. The only rule which I see is contrary to the interests of BV etc is the unchanged 4 point foreigner rule. The conspiracy theorists would have us believe that was part of the trade off for those clubs to vote with Ford re. Pawlicki but I think all those clubs will have seen that it was a rule that had to be changed because so many had abused it and would vote for it anyway.

[philfromcov 326]

Don't make the mistake of dismissing it too lightly.

Don't make the mistake of thinking you know whos right and wrong either?

 

Your post clearly implies that it's coventrys fault, it may be but you can't possibly now

[ladyluck 1]

Once everyone's back at the table, Sandhu & Frost are as likely to be heard as Ford, Van Straaten & Patchett, no matter how much you find that distasteful.

 

And the implicit threat will be that if they don't listen to Sandhu and nod when he tells them to nod and vote whichever way he tells them to vote he'll storm off and ask them how much they're willing to thrown away in legal costs. Might is right.

[alan_boon 1]

I have no idea where you get the notion that it is a Ford,CVS, Patchett side. I can certainly see that much of what we believe was agreed is in the interests of Eastbourne, BV and Lakeside and now B'ham and KL. I cannot see why Poole would want a 40 point limit that would cause them to have to lose more points than anyone and, if Ronnie Russell and Matt Ford are to be believed, they voted against it. The only rule which I see is contrary to the interests of BV etc is the unchanged 4 point foreigner rule. The conspiracy theorists would have us believe that was part of the trade off for those clubs to vote with Ford re. Pawlicki but I think all those clubs will have seen that it was a rule that had to be changed because so many had abused it and would vote for it anyway.

See your PMs

 

As for whether what was agreed was in the interests of BV, Eagles & Hammers, let's see:

 

The "Pawlicki" Rule: No direct effect - I suppose you could argue that they'd want him on a truer average, but then you'd have thought they'd have closed the 4.00 loophole altogether.

 

The PL/EL Conversion: A negative effect on all EL clubs, so not in their interest.

 

The 8.01+ Rule: Works for Belle Vue & Eastbourne only if you presume they wouldn't be able to sign one under their own steam. As it is, it's probably backfired, because Zagar (or Zagar, Harris & Andersen if Coventry & Peterborough don't run) can now name his price.

 

The 40-point limit: definitely

 

So it's a mixed bag, really.

[ladyluck 1]

Don't make the mistake of thinking you know whos right and wrong either?

 

Your post clearly implies that it's coventrys fault, it may be but you can't possibly now

 

Well, the post you quoted gives no indication that I know whom is right and whom is wrong, it simply states it is a mistake to take the situation too lightly. If, however, you are referring to my post timed at 4:01pm, you might note the inclusion of the words "my opinion" and I'm entitled to an opinion.