erimus11 91 Posted February 9, 2015 Actually, it seems the BSPA do have their house in order, and have clarified the d/u regulations quite clearly before a wheel is turned. Doesn't make it right though Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SCB 0 Posted February 9, 2015 Doesn't make it right though Whats not right about it? EL clubs owns rider, riders number 1 priority is the EL. Seems positively sensible to me, unlike a lot of other decisions in speedway. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
erimus11 91 Posted February 9, 2015 Hardly a stitch up if it was a fair vote! For years the PL have had the upper hand due to numbers. Which is hardly fair as most the riders are owned by EL clubs - as we're not finding out. so much for the EL needing the PL's riders "farcical rules"? You mean the rules in previous seasons that said the PL had priority over the NL and the EL was fair and just? That olnly happened as there were more PL clubs when it come to any vote. The EL have been screwed over for years with this. Maybe if the PL wanted the riders they could splash the cash and buy them?! So its fair that a club signs a rider after another club but happens to be in the same league as the club that owns him, has first call on his services? If that sounds long winded and difficult to understand...that's speedway and typical of how it manages to alienate supporters and potential supporters Whats not right about it? EL clubs owns rider, riders number 1 priority is the EL. Seems positively sensible to me, unlike a lot of other decisions in speedway. Serious question - Why is his priority to the league and not a club? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SCB 0 Posted February 9, 2015 So its fair that a club signs a rider after another club but happens to be in the same league as the club that owns him, has first call on his services? If that sounds long winded and difficult to understand...that's speedway and typical of how it manages to alienate supporters and potential supporters Serious question - Why is his priority to the league and not a club? I get that it's unfair in that respect and have said so on the Redcar thread but how is that any different to what the EL have had to put up with for years? As it is, your suggested rule is not one I disagree with TBF. I didn't hear too many PL fans asking that in the past though. PL fans used to claim that the PL was keeping the EL going by letting the EL use their riders. The PL fans never seemed to grasp that the vast majority of doubling up riders are actually owned by EL clubs - which is staggering when there nearly twice as many PL clubs as EL clubs! Maybe if the PL clubs had played fair for years, the EL clubs would not have got their own back when they could (now). Funny how now the PL will only get priority with a small number of doubling up riders (Cook, Stead, Birks, Auty, Starke, Wright and Howarth out of 22 riders) the rules are crap - the EL have suffered for years and the PL fans just rubbed it in. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bellers101 347 Posted February 9, 2015 (edited) I give up. Goodbye British speedway you steaming pile of turd!!! Edited February 9, 2015 by Bellers101 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The White Knight 9,039 Posted February 10, 2015 Hardly a stitch up if it was a fair vote! For years the PL have had the upper hand due to numbers. Which is hardly fair as most the riders are owned by EL clubs - as we're not finding out. so much for the EL needing the PL's riders "farcical rules"? You mean the rules in previous seasons that said the PL had priority over the NL and the EL was fair and just? That olnly happened as there were more PL clubs when it come to any vote. The EL have been screwed over for years with this. Maybe if the PL wanted the riders they could splash the cash and buy them?! Perhaps the fact that there are more Premier League Clubs, of which none, to my knowledge are clamouring to join the Elite League might just tell you something. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Pogo1 288 Posted February 10, 2015 Why would Glasgow not have a vote? Alan Dick has been a promoter there for 15 years, plus the new owners are not promoters! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dontforgetthefueltapsbruv 10,706 Posted February 10, 2015 I get that it's unfair in that respect and have said so on the Redcar thread but how is that any different to what the EL have had to put up with for years? As it is, your suggested rule is not one I disagree with TBF. I didn't hear too many PL fans asking that in the past though. PL fans used to claim that the PL was keeping the EL going by letting the EL use their riders. The PL fans never seemed to grasp that the vast majority of doubling up riders are actually owned by EL clubs - which is staggering when there nearly twice as many PL clubs as EL clubs! Maybe if the PL clubs had played fair for years, the EL clubs would not have got their own back when they could (now). Funny how now the PL will only get priority with a small number of doubling up riders (Cook, Stead, Birks, Auty, Starke, Wright and Howarth out of 22 riders) the rules are crap - the EL have suffered for years and the PL fans just rubbed it in. Partly agree with the principle of what you say. However the garnering of assets has been skewed in the favour of the EL in the past with them signing riders without usuing them and loaning to PL - something the PL clubs werent able to do. That didnt neccessarily mean any significant investment (financial or otherwise) on the EL side but means they have more assets. Only in the last couple of years has this changed and even then you hear the suggestion that tge likes of Kurtz are actually Poole riders for example even though its not technically possible. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Red Panda 366 Posted February 10, 2015 Partly agree with the principle of what you say. However the garnering of assets has been skewed in the favour of the EL in the past with them signing riders without usuing them and loaning to PL - something the PL clubs werent able to do. That didnt neccessarily mean any significant investment (financial or otherwise) on the EL side but means they have more assets. Only in the last couple of years has this changed and even then you hear the suggestion that tge likes of Kurtz are actually Poole riders for example even though its not technically possible Kurtz to the best of my knowledge is not a Poole asset yet though its not beyond the realms of possibility............... Yes EL clubs have assets they do not use and loan out................some PL clubs do the same...............but at least the clarification of the rule is in everyone's best interests............. It was totally unfair on the EL when they were told that PL took priority...............then when it became the club of which the rider is an asset took priority if they rode for them it made more sense.............the fact that if a rider is loaned out to another club which is in the same league as his own club but doubles up means that the league his parent club is in gets priority makes sense to me................ RP Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Grachan 7,362 Posted February 10, 2015 Funny how, for years, PL clubs (ie the lower league) got priority and the rules were apparently fine. Now the league in which a rider is an asset gets priority and the rules are all wrong just because the lower league can't mess up the EL any more. It was always crazy that the lower league had priority over the higher one. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MANSE 480 Posted February 10, 2015 Glasgow will get priority over Lakeside for Lawson Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fromafar 10,363 Posted February 10, 2015 Glasgow will get priority over Lakeside for LawsonThat's stating the obvious,they own him!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nutz 132 Posted February 10, 2015 (edited) It was always crazy that the lower league had priority over the higher one. Why? A rider should be prioritised for the club he is owned by, irrespective of league. End of. Edited February 10, 2015 by Nutz Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SCB 0 Posted February 10, 2015 Partly agree with the principle of what you say. However the garnering of assets has been skewed in the favour of the EL in the past with them signing riders without usuing them and loaning to PL - something the PL clubs werent able to do. That didnt neccessarily mean any significant investment (financial or otherwise) on the EL side but means they have more assets. Only in the last couple of years has this changed and even then you hear the suggestion that tge likes of Kurtz are actually Poole riders for example even though its not technically possible. The EL and the PL have always worked to the same rules with regards to assets. I'm not sure where this myth comes from that EL clubs have it easier. Poole do seem to have this amazing ability to snap up more riders than any other club but I don't think thats due to them being an EL club. Just due to them being a big club and almost being bale to bully there way around Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CardinalSin 346 Posted February 10, 2015 (edited) The EL and the PL have always worked to the same rules with regards to assets.Have they? Must admit, I always thought that EL clubs could sign "assets" without said rider even turning a wheel for them (albeit a limited number?), while a PL club had to sign a rider, and that rider had to complete 6 home and 6 away fixtures (or simply 12 fixtures?) before the rider became a club asset? I could possibly have completely made that up.. Edited February 10, 2015 by CardinalSin Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
