Posh Red 14 Posted January 6, 2013 I have to say I struggle to see how the asset system can work. In what other line of work can you have a scenario where your employer doesn't want you, isn't paying you, but can stop you from signing for another employer? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stratton 1,491 Posted January 6, 2013 This is exactly the situation that caused the problem in football. Although the contract of the player had ended, he was not allowed to seek a place elsewhere due to the asset situation in football at the time. His lawyers pleaded that this was restraint of trade & the European court agreed & this is why the transfer market in European Football changed. I am sure in my mind that if the Speedway asset situation was similarly tested in court, that the asset system would cease. Sooner or later, if these problems continue to occur, someone will take it to court. Remember, Bosman was not a star player in a top European league! Agree do speedway make there own rules up? If challenged legally in court there is only one winner surely? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PHILIPRISING 7,298 Posted January 6, 2013 FIND it difficult to believe that it cannot be against the law of the land (if not the BSPA) that a rider (in this case Batchelor) not wanted by the club (in this case Peternorough) claiming to 'own' him cannot be free to earn a living and sign for whoever he pleases given that no valid contract exists between the two. Looks like a clear case of restraint of trade to me. 4 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Steve0 5,517 Posted January 6, 2013 FIND it difficult to believe that it cannot be against the law of the land (if not the BSPA) that a rider (in this case Batchelor) not wanted by the club (in this case Peternorough) claiming to 'own' him cannot be free to earn a living and sign for whoever he pleases given that no valid contract exists between the two. Looks like a clear case of restraint of trade to me. It is - as I've been saying for some time now! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
theblueboy 960 Posted January 6, 2013 I have to say I struggle to see how the asset system can work. In what other line of work can you have a scenario where your employer doesn't want you, isn't paying you, but can stop you from signing for another employer? Speedway riders are not employees. They are self employed, which makes the current situation laughable. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
A ORLOV 8,628 Posted January 6, 2013 (edited) FIND it difficult to believe that it cannot be against the law of the land (if not the BSPA) that a rider (in this case Batchelor) not wanted by the club (in this case Peternorough) claiming to 'own' him cannot be free to earn a living and sign for whoever he pleases given that no valid contract exists between the two. Looks like a clear case of restraint of trade to me. I do not know if I have missed it somewhere but where had it been stated that there is no valid contract between the two?Surely Batch has a contract with Peterborough, not the BSPA, which he would have agreed to when he signed for them. Edited January 6, 2013 by A ORLOV Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Woz01 3,589 Posted January 6, 2013 (edited) Would they class it as restraint of trade if riders are already earning abroad? Edited January 6, 2013 by woz01 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kester 3,027 Posted January 6, 2013 I do not know if I have missed it somewhere but where had it been stated that there is no valid contract between the two? Surely Batch has a contract with Peterborough, not the BSPA, which he would have agreed to when he signed for them. But what is it a contract for and what does it say? Does it say that they can stop him riding for another club if Peterborough don't want to use him? Peterborough's stance is odd as it seems likely they have Bjerre signed up anyway so, as others have pointed out, they wouldn't be able to use Batch and Hans with the 2 rider rule. Presumably though if P/boro wanted to mess everybody about they could spin this out till mid-March by saying 'they're all under consideration you know'. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Steve0 5,517 Posted January 6, 2013 Would they class it as restraint o trade if riders are already earning abroad? It's irrelevant! If they are being prevented from earning a living in this country, it is against the law. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MattK 3,447 Posted January 6, 2013 It's irrelevant! If they are being prevented from earning a living in this country, it is against the law. But has any rider actually ever been prevented from earning a living due to the asset system? All I see here are clubs jockeying for position so they receive the most (in Peterborough's case) or pay the least (in Swindon/King's Lynn's case) for the riders they want. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
A ORLOV 8,628 Posted January 6, 2013 It's irrelevant! If they are being prevented from earning a living in this country, it is against the law. I think you will find that Troy needs a work permit signed by the BSPA to work in the uk, if no work permit he cannot ride here, if he has not been signed by a club it is unlikely he would get such a permit. Hans is a different case as he does not need a work permit. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Steve0 5,517 Posted January 6, 2013 I think you will find that Troy needs a work permit signed by the BSPA to work in the uk, if no work permit he cannot ride here, if he has not been signed by a club it is unlikely he would get such a permit. Hans is a different case as he does not need a work permit. You are right as Troy is not an EU citizen Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WembleyLion 413 Posted January 6, 2013 (edited) Well they didn't try and end EL speedway 2 years ago - like certain promoters!! Good point - wonder whatever happened to Rossiter? Edited January 6, 2013 by WembleyLion Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PHILIPRISING 7,298 Posted January 6, 2013 I do not know if I have missed it somewhere but where had it been stated that there is no valid contract between the two? Surely Batch has a contract with Peterborough, not the BSPA, which he would have agreed to when he signed for them. RIDER contracts with British cubs usually expire on October 31 each year, otherwise tracks would have to provide some renumeration during the close season. Niels-Kristian Iversen, interviewed in Speedway Star this week, called for properly regulated fixed term contracts between riders and clubs in the UK, as is the case in both Poland and Sweden for example. Batchelor would have no trouble attaining a work permit as he has done in the past and the BSPA might be on sticky ground if they refuse to sanction one (if, indeed, they have that right) if one of their member clubs signed him as they are entitled to do. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vincent Blachshadow 2,937 Posted January 6, 2013 (edited) It's irrelevant! If they are being prevented from earning a living in this country, it is against the law. Is the wording 'in this country' actually part of any law? I know 'earning a living' is, in a roundabout fashion, but they are already earning within the EU so would probably be laughed out of an EU court. Those courts are there to look after the jobless not the already earning. Bosman was being stopped from playing football at all, not from one country whilst actively playing and earning a living elsewhere. Edited January 6, 2013 by Vincent Blackshadow Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
