Najjer 2,890 Posted May 2, 2014 I don't know wether anybody noticed, but Ty Proctor, didn't have any EL commitments, last night. Oops! sorry Somerset sacked him. I look forward to seeing him in the Sheffield team tomorrow night. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
montie 1,273 Posted May 2, 2014 People can be sacked at any point. Not wanting to get into the rights and wrongs of Halls actions at Scunny again but if they wanted to release him from his contract i think they have a damn good reason to! I hope Hall does go back or gets fixed up...he's said sorry,done his ban and I hope is lining up a return somewhere soon Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sidewinder 191 Posted May 2, 2014 I note the "further necessary changes must be notified" but no requirement to seek permission from the officials named. Morris should have been riding last night. Nice try, but the key word is " necessary". Somerset have already applied for and received a facility (guest) for Morris. Ricky Wells (chosen guest) is fit and available to fulfil the booking, so therefore, any further changes are NOT necessary. That clause is to cover for any subsequent withdrawals, after team nomination. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The White Knight 9,039 Posted May 2, 2014 Your point being? Didn't David Moyes have a 6 year contract at Man Utd? Didn't Roynon have a contract at Sheffield? People can be sacked at any point. Not wanting to get into the rights and wrongs of Halls actions at Scunny again but if they wanted to release him from his contract i think they have a damn good reason to! To answer you directly - yes Moyes did have a Contract but it is stated that Man. Utd. had to PAY Moyes £1m to settle it allegedly. Do you see my point - the Contract had to be paid up. Apparently when he signed his Contract there was a Clause stating that if he failed to get the Team in to the Champions League and he was dismissed - the maximum he could get from his Six Year Contract was £1m. We shall see. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bellers101 347 Posted May 2, 2014 (edited) To answer you directly - yes Moyes did have a Contract but it is stated that Man. Utd. had to PAY Moyes £1m to settle it allegedly. Do you see my point - the Contract had to be paid up. Apparently when he signed his Contract there was a Clause stating that if he failed to get the Team in to the Champions League and he was dismissed - the maximum he could get from his Six Year Contract was £1m. We shall see. Did Roynon get a pay off then? Do you see my point? Speedway riders have been getting dropped for years for various reasons after signing a season long contract. Even your TEAMS have done it. Edited May 2, 2014 by Bellers101 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tsunami 10,219 Posted May 2, 2014 Nice try, but the key word is " necessary". Somerset have already applied for and received a facility (guest) for Morris. Ricky Wells (chosen guest) is fit and available to fulfil the booking, so therefore, any further changes are NOT necessary. That clause is to cover for any subsequent withdrawals, after team nomination. Depends on how you interpret the word necessary. It was necessary, due to the sudden availability of the missing rider now being available, so no facility being necessary, thanks. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
northyorksbear 610 Posted May 2, 2014 Regardless of whether it is legitimate or not, does nobody think the honourable action is to keep the guest (who may have turned down other work, spent time getting machinery ready etc.) and abide by the agreement/contract in place for them to ride for your team. In this example speaking hypothetically - if I were Ricky Wells I may be reluctant to help out Somerset in the future if I had been dropped at last minute. No problem replacing r/r with a rider available, but there seems to be too many decisions recently which are just a slap in the face to various riders - I don't agree totally with TWK's contract issue, but I agree loyalty should work both ways!! 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sidewinder 191 Posted May 2, 2014 Depends on how you interpret the word necessary. It was necessary, due to the sudden availability of the missing rider now being available, so no facility being necessary, thanks. Sudden availability not a good enough reason. Are all guests gonna be booked, on the basis that it may be cancelled due to "sudden availability". That is one of the reasons the rule is there in place. Thanks. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tsunami 10,219 Posted May 6, 2014 Lots of speculation about Redcar keeping Konopka tonight in place of Hall. Anyone know if or how that's possible? If he was a permanent signing then obviously there's no problem but the general consensus on the Bears forum is that he was only signed as a temporary replacement. If that is the case can Redcar now switch Konopka for Hall given the team is over the points limit and Konopka has a higher average than Hall? Or does the fact that Konopka was replacing Hall mean that a permanent switch can now be made regardless of theirs or the teams average? Or was he permanent all along? Anyone know for sure? Thanks i would love to think this is true - there seems room for improvement whereas we have some riders who have reached their level and will go no further does anyone know if it is possible and how it could happen? Yeah, don't recall Hall. Simple. I think you will find that if Konopka just knocks in the scores he is doing at the moment, he won't be going anywhere else. I did try to tell you. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
whowasthatberntpersson 108 Posted May 8, 2014 Could anyone explain how Redcar have managed to reintroduce Richard Lawson into their lineup for tonight's meeting v Plymouth, after Swindon v Lakeside was rained off this morning. When under exactly the same circumstances Nick Morris wasn't allowed to be reintroduced last Thursday????? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pirate Nick 1,801 Posted May 8, 2014 Could anyone explain how Redcar have managed to reintroduce Richard Lawson into their lineup for tonight's meeting v Plymouth, after Swindon v Lakeside was rained off this morning. When under exactly the same circumstances Nick Morris wasn't allowed to be reintroduced last Thursday?????That's a question for Havelock, who is lucky that the Plymouth promotion are more flexible than he is. Frankly I think it's taking the pi$$ 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
whowasthatberntpersson 108 Posted May 8, 2014 Complete joke and hypocritical on Redcar's part. 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sidewinder 191 Posted May 9, 2014 Complete joke and hypocritical on Redcar's part. Could not agree more Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
