Alex2000 266 Posted May 19, 2017 Expect Eastbourne may ride Championship though aswell possibly next year as they will get decent attendances for both leagues, plus will mean likes of Tom and Georgie will be the Championship reserves. If you were at the pre season forum you will know how much work it took just to get us to ride in the NL this year especially as both Connor and Martin hold down full-time jobs outside speedway.I think they are happy where they are and if they were to try both leagues it would be a disaster as the crowds aren't massive. If they do it, it will be one or the other I think NL is where we will stay and it's the healthiest league out of the 3 atm. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
speedibee 3,091 Posted May 20, 2017 Pretty confident although not certain, that any assets owned by Coventry when they folded will now belong to the bspa. so ,by joining the national league , Horton loses out on all the riders he owns , he would stand to lose quite a bit then Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
00000 1,279 Posted May 20, 2017 Think Eastbourne ceased to have assets the moment they went to the Nl, as did Birmingham so assume the same would happen to Coventry . Didn't think they were frozen just lost them or had to transfer them. Also the likes of Wood and Brennen can't be assets which seems a bit unfair as loan fees in the future could help keep Nl clubs continuing to bring on the like. NL clubs should be allowed loan fees. Big clubs feathering their own nest at the expense of the minnows. Time for NL to declare UDI Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gazzac 1,015 Posted May 20, 2017 so ,by joining the national league , Horton loses out on all the riders he owns , he would stand to lose quite a bit then Believe so all one way traffic, can't retain assets you already have, and can't find new talent and keep them as assets. Typical unfair rule that speedway seems to abound with! 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NeilWatson 1,995 Posted May 20, 2017 (edited) Pretty confident although not certain, that any assets owned by Coventry when they folded will now belong to the bspa. Coventry HAVE NOT folded....., simply taking a break while our stadium is unavailable. We retain our assets and track licence. Edited May 20, 2017 by NeilWatson Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gazzac 1,015 Posted May 20, 2017 (edited) Coventry HAVE NOT folded....., simply taking a break while our stadium is unavailable. We retain our assets and track licence. Same scenario as Eastbourne I think, which appears they were frozen for a year,and unless you go back to one of the two top leagues lose them. Again seems unfair! Edited May 20, 2017 by gazzac Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ProudtobeaBrummie 646 Posted May 20, 2017 Not only unfair but as one poster has commented many a time before highly illegal. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
*JJ 523 Posted May 20, 2017 Birmingham lost all their assets because the previous EL promotion went bust. The present promotion started from scratch and so has no assets. Eastbourne & Coventry (and Cradley) still have assets. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gazzac 1,015 Posted May 20, 2017 (edited) Birmingham lost all their assets because the previous EL promotion went bust. The present promotion started from scratch and so has no assets. Eastbourne & Coventry (and Cradley) still have assets. I think Eastbourne transfered them to Lakeside after a year in the nl. But again it just shows there are never any straight forward rules when it comes to speedway. Edited May 20, 2017 by gazzac Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NeilWatson 1,995 Posted May 20, 2017 The asset situation is not retrospective - NL Clubs that held assets before the rule was introduced keep them but cannot register new ones. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gazzac 1,015 Posted May 20, 2017 I suppose also if you've been in the old elite league for as many years as Coventry, apart from the few you've already mentioned most club assets would never ride in the NL, although you may get loan fees I suppose if you're correct. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Islander15 1,065 Posted May 20, 2017 The asset situation is not retrospective - NL Clubs that held assets before the rule was introduced keep them but cannot register new ones. Can you offer a rationale as to why the rule was brought in? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gazzac 1,015 Posted May 21, 2017 Can you offer a rationale as to why the rule was brought in? Speedway, rationale, rulebook? I don't think so! 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
speedibee 3,091 Posted May 21, 2017 In 1 way it protects the rider , if they are not an asset ,nobody can stand in their way if they want to change from 1 club to another .all well and good for riders who remain in NL , but not so good for NL clubs ,who give kids a chance only to have the skimmed off by higher league clubs for free.and once they have the higher league club can then Sell them . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
East End Fan 426 Posted May 22, 2017 This issue of riders' contract ownership by N.L. clubs is beginning to be noticed and objected to by more and more N.L. fans. I am certainly one of them. Surely this cannot be right or fair ? What can the N.L. clubs do about it ? They don't seem to be very actively objecting unless there is something going on which we do not know about. As I see it the rule is a self destruct button as the N.L. clubs will slow down their efforts to find new young riders and will use older riders on an ever increasing basis...Thin end of the wedge, look at Stoke. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
